CHI Passing Score 2026: Exactly What You Need to Pass

The Short Answer: No Published Passing Score

Most people searching for the CHI passing score expect a clean number: a scaled score, a percentage, a cut line. For the Certified Heritage Interpreter credential offered by the National Association for Interpretation (NAI), that number is not publicly available. The public sources reviewed for this article (the NAI CHI page, the professional certification eligibility form, the recertification page, and the certification program record) do not state a numerical passing threshold, minimum scores per component, or weights for the individual parts of the assessment.

That is not an oversight on your part. It reflects how this credential is built. The CHI is not a single seat-time exam scored by a testing vendor. It is a professional peer-review process with a multiple-choice literature review and a body of submitted work. Candidates demonstrate competence across several formats, and the detailed instructions arrive in a private application packet after payment.

How the CHI Is Actually Assessed

To understand why a single passing score does not exist in public, you need to see the structure. The current professional CHI route includes four distinct elements:

1. A 50-question multiple-choice literature review. This tests your command of the interpretive field's foundational and current literature.
2. Four of six essays. Each is no more than 500 words, and you choose which four to write.
3. Two examples of self-created, non-personal interpretive media. These are products you designed yourself, not photographs of your own experiences.
4. A 20 to 30 minute thematic presentation video. This shows how you develop and deliver a thematic interpretive program.

Because the assessment mixes objective questions with evaluated professional work, a single percentage would be a poor description of what it takes to earn the credential. The literature review is the closest thing to a conventional test, but how it is scored, and how its result combines with the portfolio elements, has not been verified from public sources. Whether the 50 questions are all scored, or some are unscored, is also undisclosed.

What Is Verified and What Is Not

Honest preparation starts with knowing which facts are solid. The table below separates what public NAI sources support from what remains unknown.

One detail trips up many candidates. The program record lists a one-year completion window. That is the time you have to finish the process, not the seat time for the literature review. Likewise, the 20 to 30 minute figure describes the presentation video, not an exam timer.

Why You Should Not Chase a Percentage

Candidates who come from heavily proctored, vendor-scored credentials often try to reverse-engineer a target, such as "I need to score 75% on practice tests." For the CHI, that mindset can mislead you in two ways.

First, you cannot calibrate against an unknown cut line. A practice-question score tells you how well you know the material, but it cannot tell you where an unpublished standard sits. Second, strong literature-review knowledge does not compensate for a weak submitted portfolio, because the submitted work is part of how competence is judged. Component minimums and weights are unverified, so you should assume every element needs to meet a professional standard.

The Seven Competency Areas You Are Judged On

NAI publishes the advanced knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) for the Certified Heritage Interpreter on its current CHI page. This site organizes them into seven preparation categories. Treat these as unweighted competency areas, not an official weighted blueprint. The largest domain is unknown, and the public KSA list does not establish a complete reading list or verify exhaustive literature-review coverage. For a deeper walk through each one, see our complete guide to all 7 CHI content areas.

Preparing for the 50-Question Literature Review

The literature review is the part most similar to a traditional exam, and it is where a practice question bank is genuinely useful. Domains 1, 2, and 3 (history, principles, and current literature) are the most natural targets for knowledge questions, though the literature review is not confirmed to be limited to those areas. Because the public KSA list does not establish exhaustive coverage, do not assume any one area is safe to skip.

Use practice questions to find gaps in recall and in applying principles. Our CHI practice test is designed for this kind of knowledge preparation. Keep its limits in mind: a question bank supports knowledge preparation only and cannot replace the required essays, media, or presentation. Think of it as sharpening one part of a four-part submission.

Essays, Media and Presentation: Where Quality Decides

The submitted work is where a candidate's professional judgment becomes visible. Since no scoring rubric is public, the safest approach is to let the seven competency areas guide what you demonstrate.

The four essays

You choose four of six, each capped at 500 words. The cap forces precision. Select the prompts where you can tie your answer to concrete practice, and reserve revision time to cut anything that does not serve your central point. This is where Interpretive writing (Domain 7) and Writing measurable objectives (Domain 5) show up in practice.

The two media examples

These must be self-created and non-personal interpretive media. Choose examples that clearly demonstrate Developing and designing engaging interpretive media (Domain 6) and that you can explain in terms of the principles of interpretation (Domain 2).

The thematic presentation video

At 20 to 30 minutes, this is your chance to show Developing and delivering thematic interpretive programs (Domain 4) in action. Stay inside the stated duration, build around a single clear theme, and make the structure obvious to a reviewer. Remember that this duration is not literature-review seat time.

The Eligibility Conflict to Resolve First

Before investing in preparation, confirm that you qualify. The public sources disagree. The current NAI CHI webpage describes four years or 8,000 hours as recommended and accepts an experience or academic resume. A linked, undated eligibility form, however, calls 8,000 hours required.

Both statements exist in NAI's public materials, so the responsible move is to contact NAI and obtain a direct decision on which applies to you. Beyond that, public sources do not verify a mandatory degree, a prior CIG credential, or a required total of in-person training hours, so do not assume any of those are prerequisites. Experience verification or self-employment documentation applies. For a full breakdown, see CHI requirements and eligibility.

Fees, Validity and Recertification

The cost side is better documented than the scoring side. The application fee is USD 200, payable before the packet is delivered, and no separate member versus non-member application fee is published. For the full picture, see the CHI certification cost breakdown.

Passing, in the sense of earning the credential, is only the first step. Keeping it requires 40 continuing-education hours over the four-year cycle. If you let it lapse, the cost and CE burden rise, and waiting more than two years means starting the review process again.

A Domain-Sequenced Preparation Plan

Because the deliverables are submitted work, sequence your effort so that the foundations come first and the creative products follow. Timing depends on your experience and the one-year completion window, so adjust the pacing to fit your situation.

If you want a quick reference while you work, the CHI cheat sheet condenses the must-know facts, and you can keep drilling knowledge areas on the main practice test site.

Frequently Asked Questions