With increasing canonicity, particularly within higher education assessment, the demonstrable achievement of goals, or the delivery of a program, or as one scholar wryly deemed it, the "manipulation of the independent variable" (Moncher and Prinz 1991, p. 247), are commonly referred to as implementation fidelity or fidelity of implementation (FOI). FOI research examines what the influential study by Carroll et al. (2007) summarizes as any impactful "variation[s] affecting the credibility and utility of research" (p. 1). Assessment scholars emphasize that quality data should lead inexplicably to better plans, with the ultimate hope for consequence of enhancing learning. Some universities' assessment processes involve peer-to-peer coaching. Essentially, they ensure assigned departments' end-of-cycle compliance with meta-assessment protocols typically reified within universities' formal internal processes. Institutionalization of FOI practices would require those coaches to provide more formative coaching, specifically in the form of implementational intervention auditors for the value-added five FOI protocols (i.e., 1. Program differentiation; 2. Adherence; 3. Quality; 4. Exposure; and 5. Responsiveness). Contrary to some current inferences, some bureaucracy and standardization of assessment processes are needed. However, since the standardized algorithm is intentionally designed to demonstrate continuous improvement success or lack of success, the proposed model places the emphasis where it should be in modeling an enlarged process for demonstrating assessment of improvement.