Preparing for AICE Endorsed Membership: Questions to Ask Before Applying

Before applying for AICE Endorsed Membership, our team conducted a deliberate internal review of readiness, methodology, and documentation. The questions below reflect the framework that guided our preparation.

Alianza Academic Evaluations (formerly Arizona International Credential Evaluators, AZICE) is marking one year as an Endorsed Member of the Association of International Credential Evaluators (AICE).

While the formal application process is detailed, there was a critical step we took before submitting our materials: a deliberate internal assessment of our readiness.

This early reflection strengthened our internal practices and helped ensure alignment with the professional expectations of the AICE community.

Is Your Organization Ready for AICE Endorsed Membership?

For organizations considering AICE membership, we strongly encourage beginning with a thoughtful internal review. The questions below helped guide our preparation and may serve as a useful starting point for others.

Q1: Have we completed a quiet “pre–self-study” of AICE’s requirements and standards?
        • Have we carefully and methodically reviewed the membership criteria, taking stock of where we stand? If not, should we pause and create space for a more reflective internal review before applying?
Q2. Are we ready to engage in a formal self-study?
        • Are we equipped (in terms of leadership attention and internal bandwidth) to undertake a rigorous self-assessment?
        • If not, when and how can we build the capacity to prioritize this work?

How will we demonstrate this?

Examples may include project timelines, dedicated team roles, meeting schedules, and board or staff commitments.

Q3. Are we prepared to fully disclose information about our ownership, affiliations, staffing, and policies?
        • Can we demonstrate transparency and completeness in sharing our operational structure and affiliations?
        • If not, what information needs to be clarified internally first?

How will we demonstrate this?

Examples may include ownership documentation, organizational charts, evaluator bios, and signed disclosures.

Q4. Have we already gathered (or planned to collect) the necessary documentation?
        • Do we have, or can we easily obtain, key documents such as evaluator résumés, reference letters, training protocols, and evaluation samples?
        • If not, what are our gaps, and how soon can we fill them?

How will we document this?

Examples may include a documentation inventory, a timeline for collection, and examples of internal records.

Q5. Do we employ qualified senior evaluators with regional expertise and a history of professional development?
        • Does our staff include experienced professionals who meet AICE’s criteria for training and specialization?
        • If not, can we invest in additional training or mentoring—and what is our plan to do so?

How will we document this?

Examples may include résumés, professional development logs, letters of reference, and evaluator output samples.

Q6. Is our evaluation methodology well defined and aligned with AICE standards?
        • Do we consistently document how we determine U.S. equivalencies based on credential evidence and published sources?
        • If not, what revisions are needed in our methodology? Who will lead that effort?

How will we demonstrate this?

Examples may include internal evaluation manuals, sample reports with citations, and staff training guides.

Q7. Do we maintain a robust, current, and historical reference library that supports global credential evaluation?
        • Does our library include authoritative sources from multiple decades and across the regions we evaluate?
        • If not, can we invest in obtaining additional resources, and when will we make that investment?

How will we demonstrate this?

Examples may include library inventories, acquisition records, subscription logs, and documentation of reference materials.

Q8. Are we willing and able to share key elements of our process publicly?
        • Are our policies, service scope, fees, and evaluator qualifications available (or ready to be made available) to the public?
        • If not, what changes would we need to make to improve our transparency?

How will we demonstrate this?

Examples may include public website pages, informational brochures, and internal drafts of public-facing documents.

Q9. Have we realistically planned for the time and resources required for each phase of the application?
        • Are we ready to commit sustained attention to the application, sample evaluations, and interviews or site visits?
        • If not, can we reallocate resources to ensure consistent follow-through?

How will we demonstrate this?

Examples may include project plans, phase-by-phase timelines, staff assignments, and budget projections.

Q10. Are we open to feedback and willing to improve based on it?
        • Are we prepared to receive recommendations from AICE as part of the process and to act on them in good faith?
        • If not, are we truly ready to join a professional community grounded in accountability and shared learning?

How will we demonstrate this?

Examples may include records of implemented feedback, internal improvement memos, and post-application updates.

A Thoughtful Starting Point

These questions helped our team prepare thoroughly, approach the process with clarity, and engage the AICE community with humility and purpose. As Alianza Academic Evaluations, we continue building on the standards that shaped our journey toward endorsement and guide our work today.

For organizations considering AICE membership, we hope this framework provides a useful starting point for reflection and preparation.

Learn more:

Scroll to Top