Ready for Contact Hours? Reviewing a High-Flow Oxygen Education Program Against Nursing Continuing Professional Development Criteria
Student Name
Master of Science in Nursing Program, Aspen University
N584: Curriculum Development, Implementation and Evaluation
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Ready for Contact Hours? Reviewing a High-Flow Oxygen Education Program Against Nursing Continuing Professional Development Criteria
The high-flow nasal oxygen program developed across this course was built from a needs assessment, written to a performance outcome, designed as a blended activity with in situ simulation, implemented across all shifts and given a multi-level evaluation plan. The hospital's nursing professional development department is an accredited provider of nursing continuing professional development, and it wants to award contact hours for the program. Before it can, the program must meet the accreditation criteria that govern the design, delivery and evaluation of every accredited activity. This paper reviews the program against those criteria, identifies gaps and sets out the corrections required.
The Accreditation Framework
The accrediting body for nursing continuing professional development (American Nurses Credentialing Center [ANCC], 2025) accredits organizations that provide nursing continuing professional development and publishes the criteria in its accredited provider policy and operations manual, whose educational design process chapter governs individual activities. The criteria require that activities be designed using evidence-based processes and remain independent of commercial influence. In practice, an accredited activity must be planned by a qualified planning committee including a nurse planner, begin from an identified professional practice gap and its underlying educational need, state the outcome the activity is intended to achieve, use content that is evidence-based and delivered by qualified faculty, engage learners actively, evaluate whether the outcome is achieved, manage relevant financial relationships of everyone who controls content and award contact hours according to the time or outcome criteria the provider uses.
The direction of the criteria has moved steadily toward outcomes. Dickerson et al. (2017) described an ANCC pilot to award credit for achieving outcomes of professional development regardless of time spent, reflecting a shift away from counting minutes toward documenting change in practice. Bodine and Schweitzer (2023) described how accredited providers can align their activities with national priorities for nursing, such as health equity. Both reflect the same principle that guided this course's program: education is judged by what it changes.
Where the Program Meets the Criteria
Most elements are already in place because the program was designed with outcomes in mind. The needs assessment documents a practice gap with data from safety reports, chart review, a knowledge survey and interviews, and states the educational need as a gap in recognizing failing therapy. The program outcome targets what nurses do in practice, and the eight objectives are measurable and linked to the gap. Content is drawn from peer-reviewed evidence and professional guidance, and is delivered by a nursing professional development specialist with respiratory therapist co-facilitators whose qualifications can be documented. The in situ simulation and structured debrief provide active learner engagement. The evaluation plan measures outcomes from participation through performance, using the expanded outcomes framework of Moore et al. (2009), with chart audit data showing whether practice changed.
Gaps Found in the Review
Two gaps require correction before contact hours can be awarded. The first concerns documentation of the planning process. The planning committee has functioned informally, with the specialist, a nurse manager and a respiratory therapist meeting as needed, but there is no written record of a nurse planner's role, the committee's membership or its decisions. The provider's procedures require that planning be documented, so a planning record will be created that names the nurse planner, lists members and records key decisions, including the practice gap statement, which currently exists only within the needs assessment report and must be written as a concise statement of the difference between current and desired practice.
The second gap concerns financial relationships. The program uses a specific manufacturer's high-flow device, and one respiratory therapist co-facilitator has previously been paid by a device manufacturer to lead product training. Under the accreditation criteria, anyone who controls educational content must disclose relevant financial relationships, and the provider must identify and mitigate those that are relevant before the activity. The provider will collect disclosures from all planners and faculty, determine whether the co-facilitator's past relationship is relevant, and if it is, mitigate it, for example by having the nurse planner review the co-facilitator's teaching content for balance and by ensuring that no brand-specific recommendations are made. Learners will be told, before the activity, whether any relevant relationships exist and how they were mitigated.
Awarding Contact Hours
Once the gaps are corrected, the program can award contact hours. Using the time-based method, the 60-minute activity, 15 minutes online and 45 minutes of simulation and debriefing, earns one contact hour, awarded to nurses who complete both parts and the post-activity evaluation. The certificate will state the provider's accreditation statement, the activity title, the date and the contact hours awarded. Records of attendance, evaluation results and the planning documentation will be retained according to the provider's policy so that the activity can be reviewed at reaccreditation.
The review also offers a lesson for future programs. Many of the elements the criteria require, a documented gap, a performance outcome, evidence-based content, active learning and evaluation of practice change, were already present because the program was planned backward from its intended outcome. The gaps concerned administration rather than education, and they are easy to prevent by using the provider's planning template from the start. Programs designed with the criteria in mind from the first planning meeting avoid late corrections and are more likely to produce the change in practice that justifies the contact hours.
Conclusion
Accreditation criteria for nursing continuing professional development describe, in regulatory form, the same logic this course has followed: begin with a documented practice gap, state an outcome, design evidence-based and engaging learning, keep content free of commercial influence and evaluate whether practice changed. Reviewed against those criteria, the high-flow program meets most requirements by design and needs two corrections, a documented planning process with a written gap statement and a formal process for disclosing and mitigating financial relationships. With those in place, the program can award contact hours and, more importantly, stand as an example of continuing education that is accountable for what it changes at the bedside.
References
American Nurses Credentialing Center. (2025). ANCC NCPD accredited provider policy and operations manual: 2025 criteria. https://www.nursingworld.org/organizational-programs/accreditation/ncpd/
Bodine, J., & Schweitzer, K. (2023). ANCC nursing continuing professional development accreditation and the future of nursing. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 54(4), 149-151. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20230310-02
Dickerson, P. S., Shinners, J., & Chappell, K. (2017). Awarding credit for outcomes-based professional development. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 48(3), 97-98. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20170220-02
Moore, D. E., Green, J. S., & Gallis, H. A. (2009). Achieving desired results and improved outcomes: Integrating planning and assessment throughout learning activities. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 29(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/chp.20001
How this N 584 Module 8 example is structured
Aspen does not publish N584 module prompts, so check your classroom for the exact instructions. This example summarizes the program, sets out the accreditation framework and its direction toward outcomes, reviews the program element by element, identifies and corrects two gaps, explains contact hour awards and record keeping, and concludes.
N584 Module 8 questions, answered
What does N584 Module 8 usually ask for?
Aspen's N584 description refers to relevant standards and criteria for evaluation, so a closing review of the program or curriculum against accreditation standards is a typical final assignment. Check your classroom for the standards you must use.
What is a professional practice gap?
The difference between current practice and desired or best practice, identified with data. Accredited continuing education activities must begin from such a gap and state the educational need underlying it.
Why do financial relationships need to be disclosed?
Because continuing education must be independent of commercial influence. Everyone who controls content must disclose relevant financial relationships, and the provider must mitigate relevant ones and inform learners before the activity.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.