About AABoardGovernancePeopleNewsGet InvolvedContact
AI Assessment Board (AABoard)Advancing AI literacy through evidence and standardsSearch registry
Institutional Services

Independent evaluation and recognition

AAB AI Program Assessment & Recognition Package

Turn an implicit request for credibility into a transparent assessment: define the claim, examine the evidence, observe delivery, document limitations, and separate improvement support from the final recognition decision.

Request a scoped proposalView planning ranges

Designed for

Modular scope

Select the support your institution needs

Core items establish the review foundation. Optional modules can be selected according to existing curriculum, policy, staffing, platform, and evidence capacity.

A01

Assessment Scope & Eligibility Screen

Define the program, sites, age groups, delivery period, recognition claim, assessment criteria, required evidence, exclusions, and conflicts before review begins.

Core
A02

Criteria & Standards Crosswalk

Map program claims and evidence to the applicable AAB criteria and any agreed external frameworks without treating framework alignment as automatic approval.

Core
A03

Evidence Package Review

Test whether policies, curriculum, instructor records, implementation data, student work, feedback, and safeguards are authentic, current, complete, and sufficient.

Core
A04

Curriculum & Learning Outcome Assessment

Review age appropriateness, instructional coherence, AI literacy coverage, assessment design, accessibility, and alignment between stated and demonstrated outcomes.

Optional
A05

Instructor Competency Assessment

Evaluate content knowledge, facilitation, classroom management, adaptation, safety practice, and the ability to sustain meaningful student participation.

Optional
A06

Classroom Delivery Observation

Observe live or recorded delivery using a defined rubric, sampling plan, evidence protocol, and documented limitations.

Optional
A07

Student Work & Learning Evidence Review

Sample learner artifacts and assessment evidence to determine whether students demonstrated the intended knowledge, judgment, and applied capabilities.

Optional
A08

Safety, Privacy, Equity & Governance Assessment

Review tool access, data handling, age requirements, incident response, accessibility, bias safeguards, accountability, and parent or participant communication.

Optional
A09

Participant Feedback & Implementation Evidence

Analyze attendance, engagement, student and parent feedback, instructor records, issue logs, and implementation context without overstating small or incentivized samples.

Optional
A10

Findings, Conditions & Corrective Action

Classify strengths, nonconformities, limitations, required corrections, evidence deadlines, and the conditions for reconsideration.

Optional
A11

Independent Review & Recognition Decision

Submit eligible cases to reviewers who did not deliver the assessed consulting work and record the scope, rationale, conditions, and validity of any recognition.

Optional
A12

Surveillance, Renewal or Multi-Site Sampling

Monitor material changes, sample additional sites or instructors, and require renewal evidence before a time-limited recognition is continued.

Optional

Reviewer-ready outputs

What the institution receives

Deliverables are adapted to the institution's setting and prepared for accountable human review, local policy alignment, and implementation.

What pilot experience taught us

A completed pilot is evidence—not proof of program quality

Pilot participation can reveal whether curriculum, instructors, operations, safeguards, and student experience work together in real delivery. It should generate claims to test, limitations to disclose, and conditions to improve—not an automatic badge.

  1. 01
    Evidence

    Program records, delivery observations, learner work, feedback, and safeguards.

  2. 02
    Independent review

    Reviewers without responsibility for the consulting or delivery work being judged.

  3. 03
    Scoped decision

    A recorded result with criteria, limits, conditions, validity, and renewal requirements.

Planning ranges

Engagement options

These ranges support early budgeting. A written scope confirms the exact services, schedule, assumptions, payment milestones, and responsible parties before work begins.

Evidence Review

$4,500–$8,0003–4 weeks

Programs that need an independent evidence and criteria gap review before seeking formal recognition.

  • Eligibility screen
  • Criteria crosswalk
  • Document and evidence review
  • Evidence-sufficiency findings
  • Prioritized gap report
Most complete

Full Program Assessment

$12,000–$25,0006–10 weeks

Established programs with delivery evidence that are ready for classroom, instructor, learner-outcome, and governance assessment.

  • Full evidence review
  • Interviews and classroom observation
  • Instructor and student-work assessment
  • Conditions and corrective-action process
  • Independent decision review when eligible

Multi-Site Assessment & Renewal

From $30,0008–16+ weeks

Networks, districts, franchises, and providers requiring sampling across sites, cohorts, instructors, or renewal periods.

  • Multi-site sampling plan
  • Multiple observations
  • Cross-site evidence analysis
  • Independent panel review
  • Surveillance or renewal plan

Fees pay for assessment labor and do not purchase or guarantee a favorable decision. Recognition, if awarded, is based on defined criteria and independent review. Travel, translation, extensive data collection, legal review, and additional site observations are quoted separately.

Engagement process

A defined path from intake to decision

  1. 01

    Define the claim

    Agree on the exact program, population, sites, delivery model, criteria, evidence period, recognition language, and exclusions before payment or review.

  2. 02

    Screen eligibility and conflicts

    Confirm that the program has assessable delivery evidence and disclose prior AAB, NextEdu, reviewer, curriculum, platform, or instructor relationships.

  3. 03

    Assess the evidence

    Review records, interview stakeholders, observe delivery, sample student work, and document both findings and evidence limitations.

  4. 04

    Correct or respond

    Allow the organization to correct factual errors and, when permitted, submit evidence addressing defined nonconformities or conditions.

  5. 05

    Make and monitor the decision

    An independent reviewer or panel records any recognition decision, scope, conditions, validity period, renewal requirements, and appeal path.

Impartiality and decision integrity

Assessment fees do not buy recognition

AAB consulting, curriculum, training, platform, or implementation personnel may provide evidence to an assessment, but they do not make the final recognition decision for work they delivered. Conflicts and related-provider roles are disclosed and managed in the written scope.

Recognition is considered only against criteria defined before assessment, with documented evidence requirements, independent review, a recorded rationale, a stated scope and validity period, and an appeal or renewal path. A gap review, pilot, registry entry, or completed assessment does not by itself constitute accreditation, certification, endorsement, or guaranteed compliance.

Start with a scoped conversation

Tell us what you already have—and where implementation is getting stuck.

Include your institution type, learner age range, existing policies or curriculum, intended timeline, and the decisions you need to make.

Contact AABoard