The Independent Audit of NAVLE That Was Promised in December 2025 by ICVA— and Has Yet to Begin

The no-appeal policy and the limited public detail surrounding NAVLE scoring would likely be easier for many candidates to accept if there were already a clearly established, independent oversight process in place. At present, there is no publicly identified external auditor, and the timeline for the promised review process remains unclear.

In October 2025, a pre-litigation notice sent by a San Francisco law firm to the American Veterinary Medical Association and the ICVA alleged that the NAVLE may be, in the letter’s language, “potentially anticompetitive, fraudulent, and discriminatory.” The letter further alleged persistent and unexplained disparities in exam outcomes related to race and ethnicity, including among examinees with Hispanic surnames and graduates of Tuskegee University. The document subsequently circulated widely online and contributed to broader discussion within the veterinary profession about exam fairness, transparency, and accountability.

Separately, the Latinx Veterinary Medical Association (LatinxVMA) sent a formal letter to the International Council for Veterinary Assessment (ICVA) requesting an independent psychometric evaluation of the NAVLE. LatinxVMA asked ICVA to commission an external psychometric review of the examination and to release the findings publicly. The organization framed the request not as an attack on ICVA, but as an opportunity to strengthen confidence in the profession’s licensing process through greater transparency and accountability.

LatinxVMA also pointed to comparable licensing systems in human medicine and law, noting that those professions utilize external psychometric review and fairness evaluation processes for major licensing examinations. The National Board of Medical Examiners and organizations involved in bar examination oversight have both publicly documented outside review and validation practices related to exam fairness and validity.

On December 1, 2025, ICVA announced that it had decided to initiate “an audit of the examination performed by an independent third party.” ICVA stated that the process was in its early stages and said it would continue to update the veterinary community as the audit progressed. The organization also stated that the findings would be released publicly upon completion of the audit, along with any responsive actions taken based on the auditors’ recommendations.

That announcement was made more than five months ago. As of May 2026, ICVA’s public-facing materials still describe the audit in forward-looking terms, stating that ICVA “intends to conduct” an independent audit of the NAVLE. No outside auditor has yet been publicly identified, and no methodology, projected timeline, or substantive progress update has been publicly released.

It is also important to distinguish this promised audit from ICVA’s separate 2026 NAVLE Practice Analysis being conducted in partnership with Data Recognition Corporation. That process is intended to update and validate the NAVLE blueprint so that it remains aligned with current veterinary practice, with Phase III expected to conclude in October 2026. While significant, a practice analysis is not the same as an independent psychometric audit examining questions of fairness, validity, reliability, or potential disparate impact across racial, ethnic, or educational groups.

The broader concern raised by some students and advocacy organizations is relatively straightforward. The NAVLE does not provide a traditional score appeal process, and ICVA’s grievance procedures are generally limited to issues involving exam administration rather than psychometric scoring decisions. At the same time, the independent audit publicly announced in December 2025 has not yet been accompanied by publicly available details regarding who will conduct it, how it will be performed, or when it will be completed.

For many students, particularly those from communities specifically referenced in the pre-litigation letter and subsequent advocacy correspondence, those unanswered questions are not merely procedural. They concern whether the licensing examination system that directly affects access to the veterinary profession is subject to sufficient independent review and public accountability.

Vet Candy will continue following developments related to the promised audit process. ICVA publicly announced the review and stated that the findings would be released publicly upon completion. Members of the veterinary community are continuing to look for additional information regarding the audit’s scope, timeline, methodology, and independent oversight.