Section 11: Working with Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies (PSRBs)

Contents

• 11.1 Introduction
• 11.2 Governance and Management Framework

11.1 Introduction 

1. UCL works with a wide range of PSRBs, from those that have a prescribed statutory or regulatory responsibility to accredit courses, to others that offer eligibility for professional registration to graduates of recognised courses. Departments are encouraged to secure and retain appropriate PSRB accreditation for courses to effectively meet the needs of employers and the professions, and to improve students’ employability prospects.
2. While the University maintains responsibility for the standards and quality of the academic award, PSRBs set and regulate the standards for entry into particular professions and are responsible for the standards of the professional award. Course approval and amendment processes take account of PSRB requirements where appropriate, which may require additional documentation requirements such as mapping to demonstrate how course(s) meet PSRB requirements or participation by PSRB representatives.
3. The requirements of the PSRB may necessitate a course-level variation to the Academic Regulations which must be approved through UCLs’ governance arrangements.

11.2 Governance and Management Framework 

1. The following postholders, or their nominated governance body, have identified responsibilities for the governance and management of activities associated with PSRBS and for reporting any concerns to the appropriate authority. This model benefits from its alignment with existing practice in terms of the delegation for quality management of programmes, of which alignment with PSRB requirements is a core element.
2. The Head of Department, through their nominee (usually the Department Education Committee) is responsible for:
   • Ensuring that programmes within their department are appropriately resourced and managed to meet the requirements of relevant accrediting bodies, including the process of applying for initial accreditation and for reaccreditation
   • Raising additional resource or space requests that are required by the accrediting body with the Dean of Faculty or other relevant university department.
   • Reporting the outcomes of any accreditation decision to their Dean of Faculty or nominee.
3. The Department Education Committee will:
   • Review and approve cases for new programmes where accreditation will be sought, ensuring the requirements of the accreditation process are understood and followed
   • Through the approval or amendment processes, ensure that the correct accreditation details are included in course and module documents so that the information generated for the prospectus accurately reflects the status of the course.
   • Monitor the progress of any accreditation or reaccreditation process, and review and approve any conditions and documentation as required.
   • Receive the outcome report and discuss and agree to any response document/action plan as required.
   • Communicate with, and secure permission from, relevant university bodies, on recommendations that would require approval beyond the department such as additional staffing or space requirements, before agreeing actions with the accrediting body.
   • Report the outcome and action plan to the Faculty Education Committee.
   • Be responsible for monitoring the ongoing implementation of any ongoing actions.
   • Raising any areas of concern, or issues that exceed the remit of the Department Education Committee to the Faculty Education Committee or directly to the Collaborative and Accredited Provision Committee, depending on the issue or its associated risk.
4. The Dean of Faculty, through their nominee (usually the Faculty Education Committee) is responsible for:
   • Assuring themselves that programmes within their faculties meet the requirements of relevant accrediting bodies
   • Considering additional requirements to meet the accrediting body’s needs that sit outside of the responsibility of the Department
   • Taking action to support compliance with ongoing conditions of accreditation
   • Reporting risks to accreditation to the Vice Provost (Education and Student Experience) or their nominee.
5. The Faculty Education Committee will:
   • Seek assurance from the Department Education Committee that appropriate preparations and progress are being made for any new accreditation or continuing reaccreditation applications.
   • Through the approval or amendment processes, verify the accuracy of accreditation details within course and module documents.
   • Discuss and approve where necessary any responses to recommendations that require changes to or exceptions from faculty policy and feed forward any responses that require changes to or exceptions from institutional policy.
   • Receive the outcome report and ongoing action plans and, where necessary, report any risks, such as conditional reaccreditation decisions or decisions not to reaccredit, to the Collaborative and Accredited Provision Committee.
   • Raising any areas of concern, or issues that exceed the remit of the Faculty Education Committee to the Collaborative and Accredited Provision Committee.
6. The Vice Provost (Education and Student Experience) through their nominee (usually the Education Committee) is ultimately accountable for ensuring that there is an institutional framework in place to enable and monitor compliance with the requirements of relevant accrediting bodies, and for ensuring there are appropriate mechanisms in place to highlight and communicate risks to accreditation to students and regulators. This will in practice be managed through the Collaborative and Accredited Provision Committee on behalf of the Education Committee.
7. The Collaborative and Accredited Provision Committee will:
   • Maintain and keep under review the record of accredited programmes and the schedule of revalidation/reaccreditation visits.
   • Receive, as necessary, reports from Faculty Education Committees on the status of their accredited programmes, and the outcomes of any reaccreditation/revalidation processes.
   • Submit, as necessary, reports to the Quality and Standards Committee or the Education Committee on programmes at risk of or confirmed as having a negative or conditional reaccreditation decision.
   • Report annually to the Quality and Standards Committee on its operation. 

Recent Changes

A guide to changes to the regulations are available from the Recent Changes page.