What is the difference between ACTP and ACSTH?

There is no denying from the fact that a majority of aspirants who aren’t aware of the ICF certification requirements, often get confused between coach-specific training and training that isn’t regarded as coach-specific. The International Coaching Federation (ICF) is the world’s largest organization of professionally trained coaches who are dedicated to advancing coaching as a profession.

ICF accreditation significantly enhances the reputation and reach of coach-training programs. It provides unquestionable credibility and expands exposure to a wider network of coaches. ICF currently offers three accreditation levels for coach-training programs: Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3. These replaced the previous options: Accredited Coach Specific Training Hours (ACSTH) and Accredited Coach Training Program (ACTP). It's important to note that although ACSTH and ACTP differed in scope and depth, both were valuable for aspiring coaches. This reassures you that the transition to the new accreditation levels is built on a solid foundation. We can provide more details about the unique characteristics of each program.

ACSTH

ACSTH accreditation was designed for individuals embarking on their coaching journey or seeking to enhance existing skills with coaching competencies. These programs aligned with ICF core competencies and catered to those aspiring to become coaches or integrate coaching into their careers. ACSTH provided a pathway to obtain the ICF credential.

ACTP

ACTP was the highest level of ICF accreditation for coach training programs. ACTP providers offered comprehensive training, including CCE, ACSTH, and portfolio programs. To maintain quality, programs required at least one Master Certified Coach (MCC) and underwent rigorous ICF evaluation. ACTP curriculum covered ICF core competencies, various coaching models, and practical tools. Upon completion, graduates were qualified to coach at the Professional Certified Coach (PCC) level. ACTP providers were authorized by the ICF to assess coach performance.

Join the Program

Experience Team Transformation Coaching

ACTP vs ACSTH

Both ACSTH and ACTP programs were grounded in the ICF's ethical guidelines and core competencies, ensuring a standardized approach to coach training.

The fundamental difference between the two pathways was that ACTP was a coach training program with more than 125 hours of training, whereas ACSTH was less than 125 hours.

ACTP-accredited programs were considered "all-inclusive," offering comprehensive coach training from start to finish. In contrast, ACSTH programs often focus on specific coaching skills or modules.

ACTP accreditation required a minimum of 125 student contact hours, mandatory mentor coaching, and a performance evaluation. In contrast, ACSTH programs only mandated 30 student contact hours, with mentor coaching and performance evaluation being optional.

ACSTH vs. ACTP argument - Which one was better?

ICF offered ACTP and ACSTH programs, but these have been replaced by Level 1 and Level 2, respectively. While ACTP was more comprehensive than ACSTH regarding professional development and individual growth, both programs excelled in preparing aspiring coaches. The optimal choice depended on specific needs. A key distinction was that ACSTH allowed for the self-selection of a mentor, while ACTP included performance evaluation. Both programs were designed to equip individuals with the skills and knowledge necessary for a successful coaching career.