Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
How do CIP codes distinguish between medicine (allopathic/osteopathic) and other health professions like nursing, pharmacy, and physician assistant?
Executive summary
CIP (Classification of Instructional Programs) is a federal taxonomy that groups instructional programs by six‑digit codes: the first two digits name a broad subject area (e.g., 51 = “Health Professions and Related Programs”), the first four digits provide an intermediate aggregation (e.g., 51.38 = nursing cluster), and the full six digits identify a specific program (e.g., 51.3801 = Registered Nursing) [1]. CIP itself is a descriptive statistical classification meant to map curricula and reporting; it does not by itself grant regulatory status, licensure, or the label “professional degree” — although federal rulemaking and agencies sometimes use chosen CIP code lists to define which fields qualify for policy categories [2] [3].
1. CIP’s design: a hierarchical taxonomy, not a credential arbiter
The CIP system is built as a three‑level taxonomy: two digits = broad subject area, four digits = intermediate group, six digits = specific program — a structure used by colleges to report programs and by federal datasets to compare fields across institutions [1]. The CIP titles and descriptions are intended as generic categories to capture what programs teach and how they are grouped; they are not intended to serve as regulatory determinations about licensure, accreditation or “professional” status [2].
2. How medicine vs. other health professions appear in the structure
Within the 51 series (“Health Professions and Related Programs”), medicine (allopathic and osteopathic), nursing, pharmacy, physician assistant and other health occupations occupy distinct CIP clusters and individual six‑digit codes. For example, nursing is concentrated in intermediate groups like 51.38 with 6‑digit entries such as Registered Nursing/Registered Nurse [1] [4]. The National Center for Education Statistics’ online CIP browse and detail pages list the specific six‑digit codes that map to medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, nursing, physician assistant and many allied health fields [5] [6].
3. Distinguishing “medicine” (MD/DO) in practice
Federal and institutional use of CIP can single out “medicine” via particular codes and by grouping those codes together for policy. For example, the Department of Education’s regulatory lists that identify “qualifying graduate programs” for some financial regulations explicitly name medicine and osteopathy among the qualifying fields and rely on CIP codes to identify those programs [3]. That demonstrates CIP’s practical role: it is the classification tool used to say “these program codes represent medicine” for a given policy — but the designation comes from the policy or agency choosing those CIP entries, not from CIP itself [3].
4. Nursing, pharmacy, PA and allied health: separate clusters and policy implications
Nursing programs are explicitly grouped and titled within CIP (e.g., Registered Nursing, Nursing Administration) and occupy their own sets of six‑digit codes; pharmacy, physician assistant, and many allied health professions similarly have distinct codes under the 51 series [1] [7]. Because institutions assign CIP codes based on curriculum, a clinical doctorate like Pharm.D. or a DNP will still be reported under those profession‑specific CIP codes; agencies or statutes can then elect to treat those CIP groups differently for funding, reporting, or regulatory purposes [2] [3].
5. Where disagreement and confusion arise: labels and policy choices
Confusion appears when policymakers or media conflate CIP’s neutral taxonomy with policy definitions such as “professional degree.” CIP categorizes programs; it does not define which degrees count as “professional” for financial aid or regulatory rules. Recent federal actions and debates — for example lists used in gainful employment or other Department of Education rulemaking that single out certain fields like medicine or pharmacy — show that agencies use CIP codes to operationalize a policy choice, and that decision can be controversial among professional groups who argue for inclusive or exclusive definitions [3] [8]. Advocacy letters from health coalitions highlight worries that excluding entire CIP clusters (e.g., all programs within CIP Code 51) from a “professional degree” definition would fragment eligibility and affect the workforce [8].
6. Practical takeaway for researchers and program managers
If you want to know whether a program is “medicine” or “nursing” in data or in a regulation, check the six‑digit CIP code assigned by the institution and then see whether the agency or rule you’re following has included that specific code[9] in its list — CIP supplies the mapping; policy supplies the consequence [5] [3]. Institutional program lists and the NCES CIP browse page are the authoritative places to look up the exact code and title for a given program [5] [6] [1].
Limitations and sources: This analysis is based on federal CIP documentation, university CIP guides and Department of Education regulatory notices in the provided materials; available sources do not mention granular examples of every medicine/osteopathy six‑digit CIP code or a definitive master list of codes used in every federal policy beyond the cited rulemaking [5] [3] [1].