MCert 2026 Convening · Attendee update · April 2026
You showed up.
Here’s what we built together.
We’ve validated the foundation. Now it’s time to build the movement.
28
Experts in the room
6
Sessions
18
Tensions named
6
Key takeaways
Scroll to explore
We heard you
6 Key Takeaways from the Convening
Here are the through-lines that ran across every table, every session, every post-it.
Equity and Youth Voice at the Core
While equity has been implicit in MCert’s design, it must now be explicitly named and operationalized. Lived experience, specifically for BIPOC, LGBTQ+, and disabled youth, must be baked into the roots of the standards, not treated as a later addition. Intersectionality shapes how we define quality, who we center, and what success looks like.
Organizing + Channeling Demand, Through Centering Evaluation
MCert should position itself as an organizer of existing demand — serving as a cross-ecosystem connector and problem-solving tool rather than just a standalone certification body. MCert wins if it becomes the infrastructure layer for trust and alignment, not just a stamp of approval.
Certification as Movement Signal, Not an End
MCert should function as the visible signal of a broader movement, requiring clear identity, audience, and meaning to drive long-term awareness, trust, and funding. Certification becomes a visible interface of the larger system. It must function as a tool that unlocks outcomes.
Clarity on Audience, Function, and Product Strategy
MCert must prioritize a clear initial audience and role — acting as an intermediary that delivers specific value (trust, compliance, or adoption) through a focused product strategy and defining the role of digital tools in achieving well-being and mental health. Focus and sequencing matter more than completeness.
Defining & Proving “Quality” Across Stakeholders
MCert needs to define and prove “quality” by balancing safety, risk, outcomes, and engagement — grounded in measurable results aligned with how youth actually perceive value. MCert must earn trust through measurable results, not positioning alone. Results also need to be in a concise timeline, no more than a year for payors.
Choosing a Sustainable Role & Business Model
MCert’s long-term impact depends on choosing a focused role, building a sustainable model aligned with high-leverage partners such as payers and states, and advancing equity as an NGO. Balance mission (equity) with mechanisms of scale (funding and policy). MCert’s long-term viability depends on aligning with actors who have money and enforcement power.
The day
How the day unfolded.
Six sessions. One arc — from surfacing tensions to shared vision to standards to what comes next.
1
Morning · Connection activity
Surfacing the Tensions
The room named 18 tensions at the intersection of technology, mental health, and youth well-being — from funding realities to AI literacy gaps to regulatory lag. The honest acknowledgment that none of these are easy set the tone for everything that followed.
AI & Tech
Funding
Regulation
2
Morning · Problem pulse check
Aligning on the Problem
The group grounded MCert’s work in who these tools are for and what barriers exist. Key: centering marginalized voices, accounting for peer-first help-seeking, the scarcity of free accessible tools, and the ethical stakes of AI built on marginalized labor.
Youth voice
Accessibility
Equity
3
Morning · Shared vision activity
Dreaming the Possible
Participants centered a young person in the room and imagined a world where the weight of the mental health crisis has been lifted. The vision: empowered youth with two kinds of literacy, real agency, and safe spaces — online and off — to play and thrive. Youth as solution, not problem.
Vision
Empowerment
Joy
4
Late morning · Quality standards
Testing the Framework
The five-step risk-based evaluation framework was stress-tested. The room pushed on equity gaps, AI checkboxes becoming outdated, the breadth of ages 11–26, measuring unintended outcomes, youth trust in certification seals, and the critical need for future-proof, tech-agnostic standards.
Standards
Risk
Evidence
5
Afternoon · Mini-SWOT
What Would Make This Work
Four groups identified enabling incentives, feasibility risks, and the one unlock that would move the whole system. The convergence: a simple, trusted, widely recognized signal — like a restaurant grade or Common Sense Media rating — that anyone can act on. Plus sustained awareness and funding to make it a movement, not a moment.
Adoption
Business model
Signal
6
Afternoon · Priorities & next steps
From Alignment to Action
The final session moved from vision to roadmap. Schools as sites of service, payers and states as sustainable partners, the colander metaphor for MCert’s filtering role, and a sharp focus on starting risk-first with one tool, one place, one founder — then expanding from proof.
Strategy
Next steps
Funding
Tensions in the room
Nobody said this was simple.
Real trade-offs the field hasn’t resolved — tensions to hold as MCert moves forward.
Reach
Scale & Broad Impact
VS
One Family at a Time
Money
Prevention & Subclinical
VS
Funding & Reimbursement
Literacy
Youth Tech Literacy
VS
Adult & Caregiver Literacy
Technology
AI as a Powerful Tool
VS
AI is Not a Human
Regulation
Fast-Moving Technology
VS
Slow Research & Regulation
Access
Designed Mental Health Apps
VS
Where Youth Actually Are
Safety
Youth Independence Online
VS
Caregiver Involvement
Identity
Hyper-Personalized Experience
VS
Shared Reality & Connection
Governance
Voluntary Certification
VS
Enforced Standards & Policy
Sustainability
Doing the Right Thing
VS
Getting Paid for It
Voices in the room
The words that stayed with us.
Some quotes we captured throughout the day.
“If I could go back in time, I wouldn’t tell my younger self anything. I would listen — because nobody listened to me.”
On youth voice — Shared vision session
“Subclinical is not going to be fundable. And what’s wrong with impacting subclinical populations? It keeps them from being clinical, duh.”
On prevention funding — Tensions session
“MCert is a colander — it strains away what does not work, so stakeholders can understand quality and safety in a neutral way.”
On MCert’s role — Priorities session
“The technology is so far outpacing both the research and the regulatory frameworks. We end up in a situation where there is no regulation — and regulation often spurs the best safety changes.”
On regulation — Tensions session
“It’s not just for the kids, parents, and teachers — hello, legislators. Sometimes they make decisions absent of subject matter experts, absent of young people, absent of lived experience.”
On policy literacy — Tensions session
“We’re not creating demand — we’re organizing existing demand. That’s a good starting place.”
On MCert’s opportunity — Mini-SWOT session
What’s next
Four things we’re working on now.
Based on your feedback, here is how MCert is moving forward.
01
Define North Star
Define a plain-language statement of what the MCert seal means — a simple explanation of the problem MCert solves, what our role is, and who we serve (both short and long term).
02
Business Model Mapping
Study existing standards and business models and survey different stakeholders on what they’d pay for and where they see value.
03
Pick a Starting Point
We cannot serve everyone at once, and we want to know the quickest way we can make impact in the short-term while looking at our long-term goals.
04
Build Partnerships + Knowledge Base
Identify the education, data, and shared understanding that key stakeholders need right now and find the funding and partnership structures that can deliver it.
MCert needs collaborators, not just supporters.
Reach out if you have ideas — we always love to hear from you.