Health equity accreditation is becoming a critical marker of quality and accountability for healthcare organizations. But with multiple accrediting bodies offering different approaches, how do you decide which one aligns best with your organization’s goals?
Two of the most recognized health equity accreditation programs come from NCQA (National Committee for Quality Assurance) and URAC (Utilization Review Accreditation Commission). While both programs aim to improve health equity, they take different approaches, each with its own strengths and limitations.
If your organization is considering accreditation to advance health equity systematically, this guide breaks down the key differences, benefits, challenges, and costs of NCQA vs. URAC.
What’s the Difference Between NCQA and URAC Health Equity Accreditation?
Feature | NCQA | URAC |
Overall Approach | Focuses on systematic data collection, reporting, and reducing disparities through measurable actions. | Emphasizes policy development and implementation to ensure organizations have structures in place to support equity. |
Data Collection & Use | Requires organizations to collect Race, Ethnicity, Language, Sexual Orientation, and Gender Identity (REAL SOGI) data and use it to improve care. | Encourages organizations to address equity in policies but does not mandate structured data collection. |
Cultural & Linguistic Repsonsiveness | Mandates the implementation and evaluation of CLAS (Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services) programs. | Includes language access requirements but does not require structured program evaluations. |
Delegation and Oversight | Requires oversight of delegated health equity activities, including pre-delegation evaluations and performance reviews. | Ensures policies exist for oversight but is less prescriptive about delegation and accountability. |
Scoring & Compliance | Uses a detailed scoring system (Met, Partially Met, Not Met) with specific compliance benchmarks. | Requires policies to be reviewed and updated every 36 months, but lacks a structured scoring system. |
Training Requirements | Annual training required on cultural competence, reducing bias, and promoting inclusion. | Training is encouraged but not a formal requirement. |
Flexibility vs. Standardization | Highly structured and data-driven with clear metrics and benchmarks. | More flexible, allowing organizations to integrate equity into existing policies. |
Time Investment | Typically takes 9-18 months depending on organizational readiness. | Takes 6-12 months due to fewer structured reporting requirements. |
Cost Investment | Fees range from $40,000–$100,000+ depending on organization size and scope. | Generally lower, ranging from $15,000–$50,000, with pricing based on the number of covered lives or organizational complexity. |
Which Accreditation is Right for Your Organization?
Both NCQA and URAC support organizations in embedding health equity into their operations, but the right choice depends on your organization’s needs, resources, and commitment to data-driven change.
NCQA: The Right Choice If You Want…
✅ A structured, data-driven approach to tracking and reducing health disparities.
✅ Clear, measurable expectations for improving equity.
✅ Accountability through annual evaluations and stratified reporting.
✅ A strong compliance framework aligned with national health equity priorities.
💡 Best for: Larger organizations, health plans, and health systems with dedicated resources for data collection and quality improvement.
URAC: The Right Choice If You Want…
✅ A flexible, policy-driven framework that aligns with existing workflows.
✅ Less administrative burden—easier to implement without extensive data requirements.
✅ A focus on foundational equity practices rather than strict compliance measures.
✅ Accreditation that fits within broader operational policies for healthcare organizations.
💡 Best for: Organizations that want to incorporate health equity into policies without major data collection infrastructure or extensive reporting requirements.
Final Verdict: Which One Advances Health Equity Systematically?
If the goal is to systematically reduce health disparities and embed equity at every level, NCQA’s model is more effective due to its structured data collection, evaluation, and accountability mechanisms.
However, URAC provides a more flexible approach, making it a better fit for organizations that want to strengthen health equity policies without the same level of administrative overhead.
Is Your Organization Ready for Health Equity Accreditation?
Before pursuing accreditation, it’s important to assess your organization’s readiness and identify gaps that could delay or complicate the process.
📌 Take our Take our FREE Readiness Quiz Today!!! to see where your organization stands!
✔ Identify strengths and opportunities for improvement.
✔ Get actionable insights to prepare for accreditation.
✔ Understand whether NCQA or URAC is a better fit for your organization.
Need expert guidance? Connected Consultants specializes in helping healthcare organizations navigate the accreditation process, assess readiness, and implement health equity best practices.
Comentarios