Writing the Self-Study Report Under the ARC-PA Sixth Edition

The Self-Study Report (SSR) is the written record of a PA program's ongoing self-assessment — and under the ARC-PA Standards, Sixth Edition, how you write it changed. The structured Appendix 14 template is gone, the data now lives in aggregated templates, and the narrative lives in the application of record. This article walks through what the SSR is now and how to write one that holds up.

Written to the ARC-PA Standards, Sixth Edition (effective September 1, 2025). Last reviewed July 2026.

What is the Self-Study Report (SSR)?

The Self-Study Report is a program's written account of its own ongoing self-assessment. It presents samples of multi-year data on the program's overall effectiveness and the sufficiency of its personnel, the program's critical analysis of that data, and the action plans that follow. A site visit team later verifies, validates, and clarifies what the program reported — so the SSR is strongest when a visitor can confirm it rather than question it. The work is won in the years of documentation before the visit, not the week before.

What replaced Appendix 14 in the Sixth Edition?

Under the Fifth Edition, a structured Appendix 14 template organized the SSR's evaluation tables — and those narratives often ran to hundreds of pages. The Sixth Edition retires Appendix 14. Two things replace it:

• Data is aggregated into the C1.01 and C1.02 templates — charts, benchmarks, and response rates live there.
• The narrative goes into the application of record, organized around the Section C program-evaluation standards rather than a single fixed template.

The net effect: less writing, not less data work. Programs still collect and aggregate the same evidence — the reduction is in the length and repetition of the prose, not in the analysis behind it.

How is the SSR narrative organized now?

Each C1.01 and C1.02 question follows the same predetermined structure inside the application: data-set placeholders (some required, others chosen by the program), followed by the program's analysis and conclusion. For each question you select at least three data sets — up to three additional ones are allowed to strengthen the case — set a benchmark for every data set, and follow the standard's step sequence through to an action plan where one is warranted.

What is a repeatable structure for each question's narrative?

A skeleton that reliably comes in under 1,500 words per question:

1. Overview of the process — how the program approached the question and which data sets it chose, and why (their conceptual alignment with the question).
2. Data-point synopses — one short paragraph per chosen data set, surfacing only what matters ("below benchmark for two consecutive years," "above benchmark the following two years"). Do not reproduce the raw data; it already lives in the templates.
3. Comparisons, trends, and triangulation — the summation that connects the data, states the conclusion (compliant or an area needing improvement), and, if an ANI, attaches the action plan.

Prioritize analysis over raw data. If the narrative is filling up with data points already in your templates, you are going in the wrong direction. Write it, count it, compress it.

How long should the SSR narrative be?

There is no universal page count, but the per-question narratives are dramatically shorter than the Fifth Edition's. Using the process above — and using the template's summary boxes to carry detail — a focused, defensible narrative for a question comes in under 1,500 words. Programs that used to write 200- to 300-page self-studies are the ones who feel this change most.

How does the site visit use the SSR?

The site visit follows the SSR. The team's job is to verify, validate, and clarify what the program reported in its application materials, typically across two days. That framing should shape how you write: every claim in the SSR is something a visitor will test against evidence, so build the documentation to be confirmable. A self-assessment process that is real but not fully documented — or documented but not linked to action — is the single most common way programs get cited.

Frequently asked questions

What is the ARC-PA Self-Study Report (SSR)?
The SSR is a PA program's written record of its ongoing self-assessment. It presents samples of multi-year data on program effectiveness and personnel sufficiency, the program's critical analysis of that data, and the resulting action plans. A site visit team later verifies, validates, and clarifies what the program reported.

What happened to Appendix 14 in the Sixth Edition?
The Sixth Edition retires the structured Appendix 14 template. Data is now aggregated into the C1.01 and C1.02 templates, and the narrative goes into the application of record, organized around the Section C standards rather than a single fixed template. It means less writing, not less data collection.

How long should the SSR narrative be?
Much shorter than under the Fifth Edition. Using a process-overview, data-point-synopsis, and triangulated-conclusion structure — and the template's summary boxes — a focused per-question narrative comes in under 1,500 words, versus the 200- to 300-page Fifth Edition self-studies.

How many data sets does each question need?
At least three per question, with up to three additional data sets allowed to strengthen the case. Every data set needs a program-set benchmark, and the analysis triangulates them toward a defensible conclusion.

How does the site visit relate to the SSR?
The site visit follows the SSR and exists to verify, validate, and clarify what the program reported, typically over two days. A strong SSR is one a visitor can confirm rather than question, which is why the documentation behind every claim matters more than the prose.

Prefer to see the narrative built on screen? Our free replays walk the C1.01 and C1.02 questions end to end — the five questions of C1.01 and the two questions of C1.02.