| (a) | The accreditation visit can be conducted either completely on-site or via hybrid method. The same process is followed for both, except that for the hybrid visit only three (3) Accreditation Board members (the Chairperson, and 2 AB members) together with the SACAP secretary visits the ALS for the first day. The first day is only to complete a physical review of the ALS accommodation and to interview management, staff and students. The other meetings can be conducted online. In the instance of a hybrid visit, an open day may be inserted between Day one and Day two to allow for travel for the visiting Accreditation Board members. |
Continued accreditation
| (a) | Accreditation Board visits an ALS to review existing qualifications for continued accreditation. Accreditation visits are conducted every four years, follow-up visits may be conducted every 12 months. The intention is that each ALS must be visited once during a Council’s four-year term of office. The date for accreditation visit will be confirmed by the Registrar of the SACAP, a full calendar year in advance. |
| (b) | Section 13 of the Act states that if “the Council does not conduct accreditation visit within that term of the Council; it must notify the Minister accordingly and provide him or her with reasons for the failure to do so”. Therefore, in cases where the Council does not undertake accreditation visit. The Minister shall be notified accordingly and be provided with sufficient reasons. |
There are three main accreditation outcomes:
| (1) | Unconditional accreditation |
Where there has been a previous accreditation visit and the accreditation of the ALS qualifications and the evidence presented demonstrates that the ALS has maintained the necessary standards, accreditation is continued for a period four years.
| (2) | Conditional accreditation |
| (i) | Where aspects of the ALS or its qualifications require improvement, Conditional accreditation may be granted. Remedial action must be undertaken and shall be monitored over a period of 12-months. After 12 months of receiving the accreditation report, the ALS must submit to the Education Manager of SACAP an annual report detailing actions taken to implement the decision of the Council. |
| (ii) | The Education Manager together with an appointed Accreditation Board member, preferably the member who was part of the visiting Accrediting Board, shall visit the ALS to verify the evidence presented by the ALS in the report. |
| (iii) | Remedial actions shall be taken where deviations occur and further directives shall be issued to the ALS. |
| (iv) | The ALS must submit a remedial report to the SACAP Education Manager each academic year and request a revisit by a full Accreditation Board within two (2) years. Evidence should be submitted showing that the necessary improvements have been made. |
| (v) | The ALS may request guidance and feedback from the SACAP on the areas of improvements through: |
| • | Submission of external examiner and HoS reports on the remedial actions taken annually until the next visit; |
| • | Requesting an interim informal visit by the Accreditation Board. |
| (3) | Withdrawal of accreditation |
| (i) | Withdrawal of accreditation shall only be implemented by Council as a last resort and it shall be applied only where the exit level qualification outcomes have fallen below minimum standards or where conditional accreditation will not be an effective solution. |
| (ii) | Students already registered in a qualification at the time of the accreditation visit shall be allowed to complete the qualification and such qualification must be recognised by the SACAP for registration as candidates from an accredited ALS. |
| (iii) | New registering students shall be made aware that the ALS is not accredited until further notice |
