Editor’s Note: NAACLS is honored to welcome Karen A. Brown, MS, M(ASCP), MLS(ASCP)^CM, as our new Board President. Karen is an ASCP Representative on the NAACLS Board. She previously served as the Chair of the ASCP-BOC Board of Governors. In 2018, she was recognized with the ASCP-BOC Distinguished Service Award. She is currently a faculty member at the University of Utah, where she has been employed since 1988, during which time she has served as both the MLS and MLT program director. NAACLS looks forward to the continued growth and impact of our organization under her guidance.

I am honored to begin my two-year term as president of NAACLS. My volunteer service for NAACLS has spanned many years and numerous roles and positions. These include review committee member, self-study reviewer, site visitor, and as a member, secretary, vice president and president-elect of the board of directors. As a former Medical Laboratory Technician (MLT) and Medical Laboratory Science (MLS) program director I also prepared several self-studies and hosted site visitors for both initial and continuing accreditation reviews.

NAACLS’ approach to accreditation is a voluntary, peer-driven process. In fact, peer-review is one of the six core values that NAACLS espouses. It is this culture of peer review that focuses on creating a positive accreditation experience and helping educational programs achieve the highest quality possible. As a NAACLS volunteer points out (and staff reaffirms), we are not out to “get” you during an accreditation cycle but to get you “through” it, supporting your growth and development along the way.

I experienced this nurturing approach to accreditation as a new MLT program director. I was quite anxious and apprehensive about my initial site visit. My colleagues who site-visited the program were professional and seriously completed their review. Additionally, they shared helpful insights and gave me the opportunity to provide missing documentation to avoid “areas of concern” in their report. This positive experience and encouraging approach, shared years ago by my peers, has influenced my view of and support for the NAACLS accreditation process.

The benefits of the peer-review process in accreditation are numerous for program directors and peer reviewers. Program directors interact with professional colleagues who have similar technical skills, knowledge, and comparable positions in the clinical laboratory sciences. These peer evaluators use their experience to provide objective feedback, to identify programmatic strengths (and weaknesses) and to serve as role models for program directors, especially those who are completing their initial accreditation process. Program directors can learn there is more than one way to satisfy an accreditation standard.

The dialogue shared between program directors and peer reviewers can also build professional networks and provide program directors with a resource of colleagues who can be contacted anytime they have questions, not just during an accreditation cycle. These components of the peer-review process emphasize the value NAACLS places on building relationships and quality programs, not in seeking ways to penalize programs for areas of concern.

Reviewers also benefit from a peer-driven process. Serving as a peer volunteer is a great way to gain a deeper understanding and knowledge of the entire accreditation process. It is also a mechanism to develop critical thinking, organizational, and evaluation skills. Peer reviewers may also learn innovative approaches to teaching, recruitment, and management that may improve their own programs. They may learn, like program directors, that there may be more than one way to meet a standard. I know I have grown professionally every time I have completed a step in the accreditation process, whether through new ways to evaluate students in clinical rotations, through the wonderful program directors and faculty I have encountered, or in the decisions made with my colleagues on the board of directors.

Peers comprise every step of the NAACLS accreditation process and I want to acknowledge and thank all these individuals for their dedication. Even the public (you!) comprise a component of the peer-review process as the board of directors often solicits comments regarding standards and revisions to essential documents. The feedback from public comments is always reviewed and carefully considered, underscoring the inclusive nature of the peer-review process.

The peer volunteers for NAACLS all share a supportive and non-punitive approach to accreditation. They do not focus on faults, but foster personal growth and programmatic excellence. Maintaining this positive culture depends on a team of dedicated and passionate individuals and NAACLS is always looking for more volunteers. Check out the NAACLS website to see how you may participate in the accreditation process and develop professionally as a peer volunteer!

I am proud to lead an organization where a culture of peer support is a priority. NAACLS wants programs to at least meet, but strive to exceed, all the expectations of accreditation. It is vital that we continue to graduate laboratory professionals who constitute a workforce that helps improve healthcare outcomes for all patients.