In a CEPH-accredited Master of Public Health program, the capstone is often the integrative learning experience (ILE), as it is at UW: the culminating project in which you combine what your courses taught you in one piece of work. It sits next to the applied practice experience (APE), the practicum, and the two are easy to mix up. This page quotes the CEPH accreditation criteria and two schools of public health, and lists what to check in your own capstone paper before your advisor reads it.
Esmond reads your chapters against each other from within your field and points out contradictions, factual errors, and blind spots you can't see in your own draft.
The Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH) accredits schools and programs of public health. Its 2024 criteria describe the practicum under D5: “The applied practice experiences allow each student to demonstrate attainment of at least five competencies, of which at least three must be foundational competencies (as defined in Criterion D2).” Under D7, MPH students complete an integrative learning experience (ILE) that demonstrates synthesis of foundational and concentration competencies.
Schools decide how the two connect. The University of North Dakota's MPH manual for 2025-2026 sets them side by side:
| At UND | Applied practice experience (APEx) | Integrative learning experience (ILE) |
|---|---|---|
| Purpose | Hands-on practice in a public health setting | Synthesis of MPH competencies in a culminating project |
| Timing | Typically mid-program or after core coursework | Typically the final semester |
| Setting | An external organization or community site | Academic, independent work with faculty guidance |
| What you hand in | Two practice-based products for the site | A written report, portfolio, or other scholarly product |
| Who guides you | A site preceptor and an APEx faculty advisor | A faculty advisor |
A hypothetical example of a commentYour capstone names four competencies at the start, but the evaluation report only shows work on two of them. Where in the paper do the other two appear?
A first comment on one part of your own draft, right away and without an account.
Get a free previewAt the two schools quoted here, yes, with conditions. UND allows it: “The ILE can be an expansion of a course project or the Applied Practice Experience (APEx) with the approval of the Faculty Advisor, but in such cases must represent a substantial expansion beyond the original project/APEx.” The University of Washington School of Public Health, in its 2022-2023 capstone guidelines, allows a capstone in the same partner organization as the practicum, with this condition: “However, the capstone should result in a product distinct from the practicum that is substantially greater in scope since the capstone requires more credits and time.”
If you plan to reuse practicum work, say in the capstone what is new: a new question, new data, a new analysis, or a product the site didn't receive during the practicum.
CEPH lists many possible forms and adds: “Regardless of form, the student produces a high-quality written product that is appropriate for the student’s educational and professional objectives.” It gives examples such as a program evaluation report, a training manual, a policy statement, a take-home comprehensive essay exam, and legislative testimony with accompanying supporting research. UW lists, among others, an implementation plan, a program plan, a needs assessment, an evaluation, a policy analysis, and a systematic review.
The form decides what a reader expects to find. For the difference between a capstone and a research thesis in general, see capstone vs. thesis.
| Format | What the paper has to show | A reader's first question |
|---|---|---|
| Program evaluation | Evaluation questions, indicators, data, and findings tied to the program's goals | Do the indicators measure what the program set out to change? |
| Policy analysis | The problem, the options, criteria for comparing them, and a recommendation | Does the recommendation follow from the criteria you set? |
| Program plan or proposal | Need, target population, intervention, and an evaluation plan | Is the need documented with data for this population? |
| Research paper or manuscript | Question, design, data, analysis, and limitations | Can this design answer this question? |
| Practice product for a partner | The product itself, with the evidence behind it | Can the organization use it as delivered? |
The CEPH criteria for the ILE state: “Students in consultation with faculty select foundational and concentration-specific competencies appropriate to the student’s educational and professional goals; demonstrating synthesis and integration requires more than one foundational and one concentration competency.” At UW's School of Public Health, the 2022-2023 guidelines ask students to select at least two competencies for the capstone, at least one of them specific to their department or program, and to track them individually even in a group project.
One gap to look for is a list of competencies in the introduction that the rest of the paper never returns to. Name, for each competency, the section or product where you use it, so that a reader can find the evidence without guessing.
Who reads your capstone depends on the school. At UW, students work with a committee of at least two members: the chair holds a faculty appointment in the School of Public Health, and the second member can be another faculty member or someone with related expertise in public health practice. At UND, the faculty advisor is the primary advisor for the ILE, with the option of a secondary advisor or committee member at the faculty advisor's discretion.
Data can set the timeline. UND warns, for projects with statistical research: “Primary data collection is discouraged because of the length of time required.” If your capstone depends on new data, check with your advisor early whether an IRB review is needed and how long it takes.
UW frames the product: “The MPH capstone project demonstrates students’ ability to produce independent professional-quality work for a public health practice audience.” One of its academic goals asks students to “Evaluate the successes and weaknesses of the project through either formal evaluation or reflection.”
Across the formats above, that translates into a handful of checks:
This example is made up. An MPH student evaluates a county program that sends text reminders for childhood vaccinations. The paper states the evaluation question as "Did the reminders increase on-time vaccination?" and lists three competencies, including one on communicating public health information to different audiences.
The methods compare on-time vaccination rates in the year before and the year after the program started, using county records. The findings report a rise of eight percentage points. The recommendation is to expand the program statewide.
A reader would stop at three points. A before-and-after comparison can't separate the reminders from other changes in that period, such as a school entry requirement, and the limitations section doesn't mention this. The statewide recommendation goes beyond data from one county. And the communication competency isn't visible anywhere in the paper.
| Weak spot | How it shows | What to ask yourself |
|---|---|---|
| Practicum report relabeled | The capstone repeats the practicum product | What does the capstone add in scope or analysis? |
| Competencies only listed | Named in the introduction, absent later | Where does the paper show each one? |
| Question and method don't match | A causal question, a descriptive design | What can this design support? |
| Recommendations beyond the data | "Expand statewide" from one county | For which population do your findings hold? |
| Two audiences, one served | Useful to the partner, thin on methods, or the reverse | Would both your community partner and your advisor accept it? |
Esmond evaluates every assignment before you submit. It never writes it.
Esmond is an AI tool that doesn't write for you. If your course doesn't allow any AI tools, don't use Esmond for that work. If you're unsure, ask your instructor or advisor.
Esmond reads the draft of your capstone paper from within public health and flags factual errors, inconsistencies, and blind spots, for example an evaluation question the methods don't address, a recommendation that reaches beyond your data, or a competency that never appears after the introduction. It adds no text to your paper. See the sample report for what comes back, and how Esmond works for the steps.
Esmond doesn't check your paper against your school's capstone guidelines, rubric, or the CEPH criteria, and it doesn't approve anything. It doesn't judge whether your project needs IRB review or data-use approval, and it doesn't rerun your analysis. What you change is up to you, and your advisor and committee assess the capstone.
The culminating project of a Master of Public Health program. At UW the capstone fills the integrative learning experience, and UND's ILE is part of its MPH culminating experience. In both, the ILE shows synthesis of foundational competencies with concentration or specialization competencies in a written product.
Some schools allow the capstone to build on the practicum, as UND and UW do, but both ask for a product that goes substantially beyond it. Check your school's guidelines and ask your advisor.
It depends on the project and the school. UND recommends that students meet their faculty advisor at the end of the first year to discuss IRB processes for the ILE. If your capstone uses data about people, raise it early.
Your school sets the scope. At UW, the 2022-2023 guidelines require 9 credit hours for the capstone, which they equate to approximately 270 hours of work, and note that a few programs run it through a specific capstone course with a different number of credits.
Not under the CEPH criteria for the ILE, which say that a poster presentation doesn't count as the high-quality written product. A school may ask for a poster or presentation as well.
Read on November 7, 2026.
Get your paper evaluated before you submit