Diverse by design: Reframing the narrative around accreditation for PA doctorate programs
- ADPA
- Oct 28
- 7 min read
Bernard, Kari S. PhD, PA-C; Hussein, Aisha N. DMS, PA-C
JAAPA ():10.1097/01.JAA.0000000000000279, October 28, 2025. | DOI: 10.1097/01.JAA.0000000000000279
Abstract
Postprofessional doctoral programs for physician associates (PAs) have expanded rapidly, offering diverse and specialized tracks that reflect the evolving roles of PAs in health care, education, and leadership. Institutional accreditation provides rigorous oversight of these programs and ensures academic quality across them without necessitating uniformity. In early 2025, the Accreditation Review Commission on Education for the Physician Assistant (ARC-PA) proposed a centralized accreditation model for these programs that would impose prescriptive requirements pertaining to their curricula, faculty qualifications, and student outcomes. A centralized accreditation model, however, would serve to hamper these programs' innovation and diversity by enforcing uniform standards that conflict with the flexible, career-focused nature of postprofessional education. This article advocates for the current decentralized approach—continued use of which is being championed by the Consortium of DMS/DMSc Programs—as essential to supporting the continued growth and specialization of the PA profession.
As the demands on the American health care system have grown, so too have the roles and responsibilities of physician associates (PAs). PAs are increasingly pursuing opportunities in academia, health care administration, and research.1 In response to increasing demand for PA professional development, the nation's first postprofessional doctoral programs for PAs have been established.2 What began as a niche offering has evolved into a burgeoning educational field. Program offerings have expanded from traditional tracks such as clinical practice and leadership to specialized options in clinical medicine, education, global health, and informatics, to name a few.3,4
Recently, the question of whether these programs should be accredited by a single, centralized accreditor has emerged. The purpose of this article is to describe the growth of postprofessional doctorate programs in the United States and explain why imposing a single, centralized accreditation process could inhibit the innovation, adaptiveness, and diversity within these programs that are essential to the continued advancement of the PA profession.
The first PA-specific doctorate was conferred to active-duty military PAs who completed the Baylor College of Medicine's Doctor of Science in PA Science program in 2007.5 For nearly a decade afterward, civilian PAs looking to earn a doctorate pursued research degrees, such as the Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), or doctorates open to members of other professions, including the Doctor of Health Science (DHSc), Doctor of Education (EdD), Doctor of Public Health (DrPH), or Doctor of Psychology (PsyD).5,6 Though valuable, these programs were not designed specifically for the practicing PA and often focused on theoretical research or nonclinical fields. In 2016, the first PA-specific Doctor of Medical Science (DMS/DMSc) program was opened at Lincoln Memorial University.4 This milestone marked the beginning of what is now a growing and innovative community of doctoral programs designed to equip PAs for the future.
DMS/DMSc programs vary in length and content. This diversity in design is intentional, allowing these programs to meet a wide range of career objectives. Most are delivered in an asynchronous online format, reflecting this curricular flexibility and a responsiveness to the professional development needs of working PAs. Further, these programs are integrated into the rigorous framework of their degree-granting institution's accreditation. This accreditation is granted by one of more than a dozen federally recognized bodies, such as the Higher Learning Commission (HLC), the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC), and the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE).7
Institutional accreditation, a comprehensive process that ensures quality across curricula, faculty, student outcomes, and institutional stability, is the gold standard of university accreditation in the United States.7 The rigorous oversight provided by institutional accreditors ensures that programs operate at the highest level of academic integrity, protecting the students and communities they serve.4 This existing robust framework ensures that postprofessional PA doctorate programs are vetted, credible, and held to exacting standards of quality.
The Consortium of DMS/DMSc Programs (the Consortium), a special interest group of the Physician Assistant Education Association (PAEA), was formed soon after the inception of PA-specific DMS/DMSc programs. The Consortium's purpose is multidimensional: it advocates for the recognition and advancement of the DMS/DMSc degree, shares resources and expertise among member institutions, promotes collaborative research on postprofessional doctorate programs and outcomes, and facilitates the development and delivery of high-quality postprofessional education. The commitment to quality is the core value uniting Consortium members.
The Consortium represents a diverse set of postprofessional doctorate programs. Member programs range in length from less than 1 year to 3 years, in credit hours from 9 to 50, and in academic term length from 6 to 15 weeks.3 Some programs require National Commission on Certification of Physician Assistants (NCCPA) certification and a prior master's degree, whereas others matriculate noncertified PAs and those whose highest previously earned degree is a bachelor's. Concentrations span education, leadership, and health care administration, alongside additional fields like emergency management, public health, and clinical specialties (including behavioral health and lifestyle medicine). This variability is a key characteristic of postprofessional doctoral education in the United States. Much like PhD or EdD programs, which vary widely in focus and length, these PA doctoral programs are designed for specialization and innovation, not for the standardized competencies of an entry-level degree.8 Therefore, the DMS/DMSc programs leverage the rigor of their existing institutional accrediting bodies to ensure academic excellence across a diverse and responsive educational landscape.3
The Consortium is confident in the rigor of the institutional accreditation process, proud of the diverse opportunities member DMS/DMSc programs create, and unwavering in its commitment to advancing the PA profession and care of the community through continued innovation. It is for this reason that the Consortium has taken a stance, supported by Physician Assistant Education Association (PAEA), against the single, centralized programmatic accreditation model recently proposed by the Accreditation Review Commission on Education for the Physician Assistant (ARC-PA).9 The proposed standards impose prescriptive requirements for curricular content, institutional location, faculty qualifications, and student outcomes, which create a framework that is fundamentally misaligned with the realities of the advanced, specialized nature of postprofessional doctorates. This framework forces diverse doctoral programs into a simplified model that undermines their unique value and limits their potential for innovative growth.
ARC-PA provides important oversight of entry-level PA programs, accomplishing its purpose of protecting the interests of the public and the profession by ensuring high-quality education.10 By necessity, entry-level PA programs deliver a largely standardized curriculum with the explicit purpose of establishing a uniform baseline of clinical competency for safe public practice, which enables the expedited medical training characteristic of the PA profession.
The accreditation of postprofessional doctorates warrants a more nuanced and flexible strategy than the rigid entry-level standardized approach. Postprofessional doctorate education does not expand PA clinical scope of practice and thereby does not fall under the ARC-PA's primary public protection purview.10 Further, according to the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, which determines accreditation authority, the ARC-PA is only permitted to accredit entry-level PA programs.11 This suggests that ARC-PA's proposed expansion into postprofessional accreditation may be an overreach of its recognized authority.
In summary, the lack of uniformity among DMS/DMSc programs is by design, not by accident. To impose a universal, one-size-fits-all accreditation model is counterproductive to both the needs of PAs pursuing career development and to the core vision of the PA postprofessional doctorate. The strength of these programs lies in their diversity, which allows for PAs to develop specialized expertise to meet specific health care needs, from advanced clinical skills and medical education to executive leadership, health policy, advocacy, and beyond. Standardizing this dynamic field would stifle the very innovation the profession needs to advance and thrive, acting as a ceiling for progress, not a floor for quality.
The Consortium holds that rigorous institutional accreditation is the definitive measure of academic quality for postprofessional programs. The PA profession is not alone in maintaining noncentralized doctorate degree accreditation. Doctorate programs for physical therapists and occupational therapists who previously completed entry-level training are also regionally accredited.12,13 This follows the established model for advanced academic degrees where institutional accreditation is the benchmark of quality, as programmatic accreditation is primarily designed for entry-level programs leading to professional licensure.14 Although individual DMS/DMSc programs may find value in pursuing supplemental, specialized accreditations, the Consortium rejects the premise that any single, centralized programmatic accreditor is a necessary or superior benchmark for the diverse field that doctoral programs offer.
The goal of postprofessional education is not to re-affirm or restructure entry-level standards. Rather, it is to equip PAs with the knowledge and skills to lead teams, manage departments, conduct research, shape policy, and ultimately expand their influence on the development of the PA workforce and the delivery of health care in the United States. To do this effectively, the educational landscape must remain as diverse and dynamic as the challenges it seeks to address. The future of the PA profession depends not on prescription, but on progress.
REFERENCES
1. Louwagie V, Ness B, O'Laughlin D, Fisher K, Halasy M. Understanding attributes and characteristics of the PA leader-physician relationship. JAAPA. 2022;35(7):52–56. doi:10.1097/01.JAA.0000832608.87699.1e
2. Hussein AN, Sasek CA, Danielsen RD, et al. Exploring the landscape of physician assistant/associate-specific doctoral education in the United States: a national program survey. J Physician Assist Educ. Published online May 9, 2025. doi:10.1097/JPA.0000000000000675
3. DMS/DMSc Consortium. 2024 Annual Report: 2023-2024 PA Doctoral Program Survey. Physician Assistant Education Association Member Community website. 2024:1–29. Accessed July 18, 2025. https://members.paeaonline.org/s/
4. McKenna RE, Hooker RS. The PA postprofessional doctorate. JAAPA. 2025;38(5):35–41. doi:10.1097/01.JAA.0000000000000201
5. Kibe LW, Kayingo G, Cawley JF. Postprofessional PA doctorates: a new era. JAAPA. 2018;31(11):46–51. doi:10.1097/01.JAA.0000545078.39838.78
6. 2017 Statistical Profile of Certified Physician Assistants. National Commission on Certification of Physician Assistants; 2018. Accessed August 8, 2025. https://www.nccpa.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/2017StatisticalProfileofCertifiedPhysicianAssistants-6.27.pdf
7. Treder E, Webb H. What is regional accreditation? Accredited Schools Online. July 9, 2025. Accessed July 18, 2025. https://www.accreditedschoolsonline.org/accreditation/regional/%20/
8. National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. Doctorate Recipients from U.S. Universities: 2022. National Science Foundation; 2023. Accessed August 11, 2025. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf24300
9. PAEA stands with doctoral programs on accreditation standards. PAEA Leadership Blog. April 8, 2025. Accessed July 18, 2025. https://paeaonline.org/resources/public-resources/paea-news/paea-stands-with-doctoral-programs-on-accreditation-standards
10. Accreditation Review Commission on Education for the Physician Assistant. Mission, philosophy, & goals – ARC-PA. Accessed July 18, 2025. https://www.arc-pa.org/mission-philosophy-goals/
11. Council for Higher Education Accreditation. Accreditation Review Commission on Education for the Physician Assistant, Inc. October 2024. Accessed July 18, 2025. https://www.chea.org/accreditation-review-commission-education-physician-assistant-inc
12. American Physical Therapy Association. Transition DPT FAQs. APTA. December 1, 2019. Accessed August 11, 2025. https://www.apta.org/your-career/career-advancement/postprofessional-degree/transition-dpt-faqs
13. Accreditation Council for Occupational Therapy Accreditation. 2023 ACOTE Accreditation Standards. ACOTE. April 7, 2025. Accessed August 11, 2025. https://acoteonline.org/accreditation-explained/standards/
14. Council for Higher Education Accreditation. Programmatic Accrediting Organizations. CHEA. Accessed August 10, 2025. https://almanac.chea.org/programmatic-accrediting-organizations
Comments