What does NIST SP 800-50 say about security awareness and training programs?

NIST SP 800-50 Rev. 1 is the current NIST guidance on security and privacy awareness and training programs, published in final form in September 2024. NIST, part of the US Department of Commerce, writes technical standards and guidelines that federal agencies must follow for information security. Its Special Publications (SPs) are widely used outside government as good practice.

Rev. 1 supersedes the original SP 800-50 of October 2003 and SP 800-16, the 1998 role and performance based training model. NIST's page for SP 800-16 records that it was withdrawn on September 12, 2024 and superseded by SP 800-50 Rev. 1; its useful content was moved into SP 800-50 Rev. 1 or into SP 800-181 Rev. 1, the Workforce Framework for Cybersecurity (NICE Framework). The authors come from NIST, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), NASA, the Department of Transportation, the Internal Revenue Service and MITRE.

The publication says it meets NIST's statutory responsibilities under FISMA and responds to section 9402 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, which directed NIST to publish standards and guidelines for improving cybersecurity awareness of federal employees and contractors. This page describes the position as at September 2026.

The biggest change is that awareness, training and education are no longer treated as separate stages; they are all elements of one learning program that includes privacy as well as security. NIST explains that its research with federal training managers found those terms were applied inconsistently and caused confusion.

• One program, two disciplines. The Cybersecurity and Privacy Learning Program (CPLP) covers security and privacy, reflecting the 2016 update to OMB Circular A-130.
• Learner language. Participants are "learners" and the program is a "learning program", aligned with the NICE Framework.
• Metrics. The change log says the revision addresses issues from NIST research, including guidance for designing impactful metrics and measurements.
• Culture. Section 1.4 covers building a cybersecurity and privacy culture, treating human risk alongside technical risk.
• Alignment. It draws on the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, Risk Management Framework and Privacy Framework published since 2003.

NIST notes that organizations do not need to rename their programs as CPLPs. The term is used generically for awareness campaigns, awareness training, practical exercises, topic-based training, role-based training and educational programs.

SP 800-50 Rev. 1 organizes the program into four phases that can run in sequence or at the same time, and says a CPLP must have an actively managed plan throughout its life cycle.

The structure mirrors familiar instructional design models such as the ADDIE model. The first step in practice is a training needs analysis against cybersecurity and privacy risks.

SP 800-50 Rev. 1 places every person in one or more of three audience segments, and the depth of training rises with risk. Everyone is in the all users group; the other two groups receive additional training.

1. All users. Every person who uses the organization's systems, including employees, contractors, interns, guest researchers and others with access. They complete recurring training, agree to the acceptable use policy or rules of behavior, and receive ongoing awareness.
2. Privileged access account holders. People with approved access to restricted systems or data that requires special care. They receive additional cybersecurity and privacy training.
3. People with significant cybersecurity or privacy responsibilities. Staff who need an individualized program of role-based training, such as the CISO, privacy officers, analysts and incident responders. The publication notes that FISMA requires these personnel to receive role-based training, and it points to the NICE Framework to define work roles.

For all users, the publication refers to SP 800-53 Rev. 5 control AT-2, which calls this security and privacy "literacy" training, and notes that federal agencies should check current FISMA requirements for how often it must be repeated. A training matrix is a practical way to record which segment each role belongs to and what it must complete.

SP 800-50 Rev. 1 describes three types of program element: awareness activities, experiential learning and practical exercises, and training. A single annual course is only one part of the program.

• Awareness activities run throughout the year, for example logon messages, newsletters, posters, and events in Cybersecurity Awareness Month (October) or Data Privacy Awareness Week (January).
• Experiential learning simulates real events: phishing, smishing and vishing simulations, tabletop exercises, virtual labs, contingency scenarios and cyber ranges. NIST points to its Phish Scale for rating the difficulty of simulated phishing emails.
• Training increases job-related knowledge and skills through synchronous, asynchronous, instructor-led, virtual, cyber range and scenario-based methods, often blended.

The publication also recommends involving the legal team in designing phishing exercises and telling employees that simulations are run on a random basis and used to guide future learning.

Measurement must show changes in capability and behavior, not just completion. Section 2.4 states that while laws and policies often set measurable requirements, CPLP measurements "must go beyond simply achieving compliance" and must also measure the program's impact on workforce capabilities, attitude and behavioral change.

The publication distinguishes quantitative measures (numbers or rating scales) from qualitative ones (observations, interviews, focus groups, open-text survey answers), ties metrics to learning goals, objectives and outcomes, and recommends SMART measures. Among its key considerations, adapted from OMB Circular A-130 and presented as applicable to any organization, are to ensure measures are in place to assess participants' knowledge and skill, and to measure attitudes, behaviors and workforce sentiment to track culture.

In the Assessment and Improvement phase, program managers prepare a CPLP assessment report analyzing attendance, feedback and metrics, review it with senior leadership, agree changes and budget, and update the plan. For methods, see how to measure training effectiveness and how to report training compliance to the board.

SP 800-50 Rev. 1 is guidance on how to build the program; the auditable requirements sit in controls and regulations that it supports. For federal agencies and systems, the main ones are listed below.

Defense contractors meet these requirements through the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification program; see CMMC security awareness training. Outside the US, a comparable management system requirement is ISO/IEC 27001 awareness and training.

Private and non-US organizations can use SP 800-50 Rev. 1 as a free, detailed program design method, even though it is only binding on US federal agencies. NIST states that its key considerations are adapted to accommodate the needs of any organization, not just federal agencies.

This table is illustrative and is not a NIST template. For turning requirements like these into a curriculum, see how to map training to compliance obligations.

Knowledge Foundry models controls such as AT-2 and AT-3, audience segments and work roles as a knowledge framework, then links each to learning outcomes and assessment points. When a control, policy or threat changes, the affected content is identified from those links. This supports standards and accreditation work across security frameworks.