Fifteen sessions. Thirteen governance modules. Seven CE types. One framework.

The foundational session. Introduces the four-tier governance framework (PIONEERING through EARLY STAGE), the six-dimension scoring model, and the core claim: every institution is already shaping how people think, feel, and participate — whether or not it governs those effects intentionally.

Apply the four-tier governance framework to an institutional context, distinguishing PIONEERING from EARLY STAGE using observable, documentable criteria across six dimensions

Explain the governance gap using the NSAG framework and a profession-relevant example

Apply the NSAG tier definitions to at least one governance module and judge, from documentary evidence, which tier an institution currently sits at

Legal institutions structurally activate threat responses. Up to 90% of justice-involved individuals have experienced at least one traumatic event. This session applies the SAMHSA Four R's framework and the NSAG M1 six governance dimensions.

Identify trauma-activating features of a legal or institutional environment using the SAMHSA Four R's framework (Realize, Recognize, Respond, Resist re-traumatization)

Assess a described legal institution across all six NSAG M1 governance dimensions and assign a tier classification with documented justification

Draft one governance recommendation for the highest-priority trauma-informed design deficit in a described legal setting

Algorithmic risk assessment tools influence bail, sentencing, and parole for approximately two-thirds of the US population. Dressel and Farid (2018): COMPAS performs at 65.2% accuracy while producing documented racial disparities in false-positive rates.

Explain the Dressel and Farid (2018) COMPAS accuracy findings and the bias-in-bias-out problem from Berk et al. (2024)

Evaluate a described algorithmic risk assessment tool's governance using the six NSAG M2 dimensions

Identify at least two professional responsibility obligations arising from use of or encounter with algorithmic risk tools

Psychedelic-assisted therapy is entering practice faster than governance frameworks are being built. Johnson, Richards and Griffiths (2008): adverse events are primarily determined by set, setting, and supervision quality — not pharmacological properties.

Apply the Johnson et al. (2008) safety guideline framework to evaluate a described psychedelic facilitation program's session protocol governance

Assess a described psychedelic therapy program across six NSAG M3 governance dimensions

Identify one safety governance gap in a described program scenario and draft a specific governance recommendation

Cannabis is pharmacologically active in approximately 35% of your patient population. It is documented in approximately 5% of their medical records. Lapham et al. (2022): verified 7:1 gap in 1,688 patients measured simultaneously.

Explain the six structural barriers to cannabis documentation identified by Sajdeya et al. (2021) as institutional design failures

Identify the CYP450 drug interaction pathways implicated by cannabis use and explain clinical significance for at least two high-risk medication categories

Apply NSAG M4 governance dimensions to assess a described healthcare organization's cannabis documentation infrastructure

Ulrich's 1984 nine-year matched cohort: natural window view — identical treatment — produced measurable differences in hospitalization days, analgesic doses, and complications. Al Khatib et al. (2024) confirmed across a 2010–2023 systematic review.

Apply Ulrich (1984, 1991) Stress Recovery Theory to justify biophilic design as a governance investment in a described civic or healthcare institution

Evaluate a described civic institution's biophilic infrastructure across six NSAG M5 governance dimensions and identify equity access gaps using Sarkar et al. (2018)

Draft one governance recommendation for a described biophilic design deficit that would constitute movement toward EMERGING tier governance

Corporate sponsorship carries ethical weight. Fooks et al. (2013) documented using internal tobacco industry records how corporations use CSR frameworks to neutralize regulatory threats — making civic institutions participants regardless of intent.

Apply the Fooks et al. (2013) CSR neutralization model to evaluate a described sponsorship relationship for institutional risk

Assess a described organization's sponsorship governance across six NSAG M6 dimensions

Identify one conflict-of-interest governance gap and draft the exclusion criteria element that would address it

Urban planning is health governance. Evans (2003): neighborhood disorder, housing quality, noise, and green space are independent mental health determinants. Sarkar et al. (2018): confirmed the equity dimension in 94,879 participants.

Apply Evans (2003) built environment evidence to identify at least two independent mental health determinants in a described planning scenario

Use Sarkar et al. (2018) equity findings to identify the population bearing disproportionate burden from green space deprivation in a described community

Evaluate a described urban planning decision against NSAG M7 governance dimensions and draft one governance recommendation

Burnout stems from organizational conditions. Maslach et al. (2001): six person-job mismatch domains are the structural cause. Kiratipaisarl et al. (2024): organizational interventions produce significantly greater and more durable reductions than individual interventions.

Apply Maslach's six person-job mismatch domains to identify organizational burnout governance gaps in a described institutional context

Distinguish organizational from individual burnout interventions using Kiratipaisarl et al. (2024) meta-analysis findings and evaluate a described burnout response program

Draft two governance recommendations — one for workload and one for values alignment — that would constitute movement toward EMERGING tier governance

The documentation gap between cannabis use prevalence and EHR documentation is 7:1. Lapham et al. (2022): 35.1% use vs. 4.8% documented, same population, simultaneously measured. Tavabi et al. (2023): 370,087 patients — disparities track racial and socioeconomic lines.

Explain the Lapham et al. (2022) verified 7:1 documentation gap and Tavabi et al. (2023) disparity findings in QI advocacy terms

Apply NSAG M9 governance dimensions to assess a healthcare organization's cannabis documentation infrastructure

Draft one element of a cannabis disclosure safety policy addressing Beiler et al. (2024): structured EHR fields produce 93.6% completion vs. 30.8% without

The physical design of a healthcare facility is a clinical governance decision. Ulrich et al. (2008): approximately 600 studies synthesized — single-patient rooms reduce HCAI 10–50%, noise above 45 dBA produces measurable physiological stress.

Apply Ulrich et al. (2008) acoustic governance standards to assess physiological consequences of a healthcare facility's noise environment using Münzel et al. (2014)

Evaluate a described healthcare facility across six NSAG M10 governance dimensions

Draft one governance recommendation for a described healthcare facility's highest-priority built environment deficit with a measurable improvement target

An algorithm used for 200 million patients was producing systematic racial bias. The governance infrastructure to detect it did not exist. Six years later: Chang et al. (2025) — 71% of hospitals use EHR-integrated predictive AI; only 57% evaluate all or most models for demographic bias.

Explain the Obermeyer et al. (2019) proxy problem — why using healthcare cost as a proxy for health need produces systematic racial bias — for a clinical AI governance review

Evaluate a described clinical AI tool's governance against NSAG M11 dimensions

Draft a post-adoption monitoring suspension threshold that would have triggered earlier governance response in the Obermeyer et al. (2019) case study

Barrett et al. (2015) HEAD Project: seven built environment parameters explain 16% of the variation in pupils' academic progress after controlling for teacher quality. Immordino-Yang and Damasio (2007): physiological threat states suppress prefrontal cortical access required for learning.

Apply Immordino-Yang and Damasio (2007) to explain why physiological threat states suppress the neural prerequisites for learning in educational environments

Identify Barrett et al. (2015) HEAD Project parameters relevant to a described environment and assess two parameters against evidence-based governance standards

Evaluate a described educational institution across NSAG M12 governance dimensions and draft one evidence-based recommendation

Institutions are adopting traditional and complementary medicine without evidence integration frameworks, cultural sovereignty agreements, or credentialing standards. Steel et al. (2025) at WHO Bangkok 2024: governance infrastructure is the primary barrier.

Apply the Steel et al. (2025) WHO TCIM evidence integration framework to assess whether a described CAM modality has adequate evidence for institutional adoption

Identify the cultural sovereignty governance requirements that apply when an institution incorporates Indigenous healing practices including lāʻau lapaʻau

Evaluate a described integrative medicine program across NSAG M13 governance dimensions and identify deficits in evidence integration, cultural sovereignty, and credentialing

The synthesis session. Apply all fifteen module frameworks to produce a governance profile, prioritize gaps using the NSAG module dependency map, and produce a written governance action plan with one measurable outcome per recommendation.

Synthesize assessment scores across all completed NSAG modules into a governance profile representing an institution's current tier across multiple governance domains

Apply the NSAG module dependency map to prioritize governance gaps, beginning with M8 and sequencing by institutional risk and sector

Produce a written governance action plan with at least three specific recommendations, named accountable parties, and one measurable 12-month outcome metric per recommendation