We build the internal quality assurance, external quality assurance, assessment verification, standardisation and self-evaluation that keep recognition in place after it is granted. Accreditation is a decision taken once. Quality assurance is what makes that decision survive the next review, and it is the part providers most often leave until a regulator asks for it.
Why recognition is lost after it is won
Getting accredited and staying accredited are different problems. The first is a submission. The second is a system that keeps producing evidence long after the person who wrote the submission has moved on.
Providers lose recognition, or come close to it, for predictable reasons: assessment decisions that drift apart between assessors, no record of standardisation ever happening, internal verification that exists on paper but produces no sampling evidence, and self-evaluation written the week before a review rather than maintained through the year. None of those are hard problems. They are just problems nobody owns until someone asks.
What we build
- An internal quality assurance policy that names who does what, how often, and what evidence it generates.
- Sampling plans and verification records that stand up to inspection rather than describing an intention.
- Standardisation arrangements so assessors reach the same decision on the same evidence.
- Assessment verification, including how a disputed decision is escalated and resolved.
- Self-evaluation maintained through the year, with an improvement log that shows what changed as a result.
The test we apply is simple. If a regulator, an awarding body or a client asked tomorrow for evidence that your assessment is consistent, could you produce it without writing anything new? If not, the system is not finished.
Readiness review before someone else reviews you
We run institutional readiness reviews and self-assessment reports against the standards that apply to you, before a regulator does it. The point is to find the gaps while they are still cheap to close.
For a Maltese provider that means the internal quality assurance policy and the eleven national standards MFHEA expects it to address. For a UK provider it means the conditions of recognition your awarding organisation is bound by, which flow down to you.
Common questions
What is quality assurance in learning and development?
It is the set of checks that make sure a programme is designed, delivered and assessed to a consistent standard. It covers internal quality assurance, external quality assurance, assessment verification, standardisation and self-evaluation.
What is the difference between internal and external quality assurance?
Internal quality assurance is the sampling and verification you carry out yourself to confirm assessment decisions are consistent. External quality assurance is the same scrutiny applied from outside, usually by an awarding organisation or a regulator.
We are already accredited. Why would we need this?
Because accreditation is a decision taken once and reviewed repeatedly. Most providers who get into difficulty were accredited correctly and then could not evidence consistency at the next review.
Can you review our arrangements before a regulator does?
Yes. We run readiness reviews and self-assessment reports against the standards that apply to you, so the gaps are found while they are still cheap to close.
Not sure which route fits?
Book a 30 minute scoping call. We will map the route, the standards that apply and a realistic timeline. No preparation needed.
Book a 30 minute scoping call