Keep the determination register a chief executive certifies from — which programmes lead to licensure in which states, the evidence under each row, the disclosure clocks — and never determine, disclose or certify.
A programme is offered into a state, and the register opens a row keyed on programme, credential level and CIP.
02
A determination changes, and the row keeps the old one, its date and the officer who made it.
Reason
03
A programme rests on institutional interpretation alone, and the row is flagged as such for the certifying officer.
04
A determination turns adverse, and a 14-calendar-day clock starts under 34 CFR 668.43.
05
A student moves state, and the row keyed on location at initial enrolment is re-opened rather than left.
Decide
06
A programme needs programmatic accreditation in a state, and that evidence is held apart from the licensure row.
07
A published state list omits the does-not-meet half, and the gap is raised in the pack.
Out
08
A certification year opens, and the pack is assembled clause by clause for the chief executive to read.
09
Execute write actions only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation.
→Product statement
The agent maintains the register and the clocks; the chief executive personally certifies, and is the only person authorised to sign the funding application.
Example workflow
One programme, evidence to certification
AgentHuman
1Programme in a stateCatalogue entry, enrolment location record, state board rule or a curriculum change
2Evidence gatheredEach state rule read, the source it came from, its date and the person who recorded it
3Register row assembledDetermination status per state, its provenance, staleness, open clocks and confidence
4Controls appliedProvenance checks, staleness checks, does-not-meet completeness and confidence threshold
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run unaided, and none of them determines that a programme meets a state requirement — the agent is assembling, and the officer lane opens at the confidence gate.
5DecisionBranches at the confidence threshold
High confidence
Goes to the compliance officer.
Low confidence
Adds a counsel read first.
Officer review
The row is held with its evidence, the provenance of each rule and the confidence.
Review · Correct · Send to counsel
Reviewed — the pack goes to the chief executive▼
6Catalogue and disclosure pages updatedOnly where write access and approval policy allow it
7Outcome evaluatedProvenance completeness, row corrections, notice timeliness and findings at recertification
Corrections
Every officer correction is counted in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Determining that a programme satisfies a state requirement for licensure.
Making any disclosure to a student, prospective or enrolled.
Certifying, or signing the participation agreement or the funding application.
Deciding the state a student is located in under the institution policy.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Hold a row per state per programme with its rule cited.
✓Run the clocks from the determination and show the days left.
✓Flag which rows rest on institutional interpretation alone.
✓Show what the pack is missing, and hold it for the named officer.
Wrong after signing surfaces in a graduate who cannot sit the exam.
Publishing the state list, or changing what the catalogue says.
Records requests and registrar certifications.
Accreditor notification and approval — our substantive change agent.
Changes to clock, provenance or certification-control configuration.
Example output
One state row, annotated
Everything the agent assembles is attached to the source it came from.
Determination-register output · single programmeIllustrative example
Programme
Evidence line
Days to notice
Rule applied
Confidence
Determination status
Nursing, pre-licensure
Clinical hours in the state board rule sit above the hours the current curriculum awards
Day 3 of 14
34 CFR 668.43
86%
Adverse — notice not yet sent
As receivedTaken from the state board rule and the catalogue as published — nothing on this side is the agent's.
Source usedState board rule textCatalogue curriculumEnrolment location record
Why this flagThe rule and the curriculum disagree on hours; the officer decides what that means.
ActionReviewCorrectSend to counsel
What the score decidesBelow the configured threshold the row picks up a counsel read before the officer sees it.
Value
Where AI adds value
The same four claims, placed at the point in the workflow where each one applies.
Where the value landsValue 01 – 04
Every programme rowFrom the catalogue and the state rules
03Assembly
Assemble against the rule
Draw on the catalogue, the state board rules on file and the enrolment location records. Under 34 CFR 668.14 the institution must determine, state by state and programme by programme, that a programme satisfies that state's educational requirements for licensure.
01Approved path
The chief executive signs it
Routine row assembly and clock arithmetic arrive already done.
02Human review
Point people at unvouched rows
Most determinations in this sector rest on institutional interpretation and few are board-confirmed — yet the signature block names the chief executive under a criminal-penalty acknowledgement, and only that officer may sign the funding application. The agent flags those rows; it never fills one in.
04Build an evidence trail
The programme, the state rule it was read against and the officer who certified stay on the file.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
One programme type can carry most of the stale rows
A catalogue-level determination-currency figure can read sound while a few states and a few programme types hold most of the stale rows. Nestack reports the staleness rate by slice, not only in total.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Pre-licensure nursing states
7.3%
3.6×
Review
Teacher preparation states
5.1%
2.5×
Review
Behavioural health states
3.6%
1.8×
Watch
Home-state non-licensure
2.4%
1.2×
Normal
Bar: staleness-rate lift vs. the home-state non-licensure baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
A missed notice ends as a test
A cycle is done when the missed disclosure has become a case the next release must pass. That suite is what the next determination made is measured against.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Staleness rate rises in one programme type.
02Diagnose
The programme that qualified a graduate in thirty states and not the one she lived in is read back through the register until the cause narrows to one.
03Improve
Stamp the change; the programmes behind it are filed against that number.
04Verify
Each touched programme case is run again, and one red stops the release.
05Learn
It stays a standing test, and the state rules move with it.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. The next determination is checked against a suite one case longer.
Typical build scope
Twelve workstreams across six weeks
The build scope read against the delivery timeline. Week structure follows the six-week plan — discovery, sources, determination workflow, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Certification workflow discovery and the boundary.
02Catalogue and student-system assessment.
03Clock, provenance and state-rule mapping per state.
04Catalogue and location-record ingestion.
05Register assembly and rule binding.
06Confidence scoring and flag routing.
07Officer review workflow.
08Catalogue and disclosure-page integration.
09Determination and disclosure cases.
10Guardrails and signing controls.
11Programme-trail instrumentation.
12Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover.
12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallelFinal scope and sequence confirmed in discovery
Engagement tiers
What each tier includes
Rows are the capabilities named in each tier's scope. Higher tiers include everything below them.
Capability✓ in scope · — not at this tierPilotOne catalogue, one state setProductionProduction catalogue and student systemsAdvancedMultiple campuses / catalogues
Introduced at Pilot
Rows and clocks against your rules✓✓✓
Officer review✓✓✓
Determination-currency baseline✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Reporting by state—✓✓
Review workflow in your systems—✓✓
Approved page write-back—✓✓
Catalogue-and-programme integration—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Complex multi-state rule sets——✓
Multi-stage officer review——✓
High programme count——✓
Multi-state disclosure controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, programme count, review controls and deployment requirements.
Separate from buildBuild pricing is separate from recurring Agent Care, which covers managed monitoring, evaluations, incidents and verified improvements after launch.
What we need from you
What you bring, and what we build with it
Each input maps to a piece of build scope and a week in the delivery timeline.
You bringWe build with it
01Your programme inventory and catalogue structure→Catalogue and location-record ingestion, and rule bindingWeek 1
02Representative determinations from a past year→Determination-currency baseline, provenance capture and row keyingWeek 2
03Your state rule files and where they are kept→Clock, provenance and state-rule mapping per stateWeek 1
04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports→Catalogue, student-system and web review, then integration setupWeek 2
05Determinations you would not want tested→Notice cases and the standing evaluation suiteWeek 4
06What no certification may take on trust→Confidence scoring, flag routing, guardrails and signing controlsWeek 3
07The named officer, and the chief executive who signs→Officer review workflow, then pilot and production validationWeeks 5–6
Nothing else is requiredDeployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.
Delivery timeline
Four phases across six weeks
Weeks genuinely spent set each one of these widths, so the fifth week legitimately holds a pair.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Certification workflow discovery, rule mapping and the boundaryW2Catalogue integration and the determination-currency baselineW3Register assembly, clock arithmetic and review controlsW4Evaluation suite, notice cases and failure-mode testingW5Disclosure-page integration, a pilot state set and targeted correctionsW6One certification year run under the chief executive, then Agent Care handover
Reading the bandA bar covers only the weeks its own work is named in. The fifth-week doubling is real, not padding.
At the end of W6When the certification pack validates, Agent Care takes the agent on.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Education AI agent
Build a licensure certification agent around the chief executive who signs.
One signature covers the whole instrument, and the hardest clause on it is that a programme meets the licensure requirements of each state your online students live in. Show us your programme inventory, your state rule files and who certifies.
