New Accreditation Standards: Frequently Asked Questions

The revised framework includes: 

• Standards: stronger focus on trainee welfare, cultural safety, governance and evidence 
• Procedures: fuller end-to-end accreditation framework 
• Policy: now focused on governance, monitoring, transparency and risk-based decision-making. 

Yes. Site visits remain important, but they now sit within a broader accreditation framework. The procedures also state that site visits may be physical, virtual or hybrid, and may not always be required. 

The policy adopts nationally consistent terms: Provisionally Accredited, Accredited, Conditionally Accredited, Not Accredited (Refused), Not Accredited (Revoked) and Temporary Accreditation. 

Accreditation will ordinarily be granted for up to five years, subject to interim monitoring requirements. 

Monitoring is ongoing oversight of accredited training posts between inspection cycles. It is risk-based and proportionate. 

A Training Post Alert is a notification of a potential issue at a training setting. Alerts may be raised by any individual. Examples include supervision gaps, workload concerns or trainee safety breaches. 

The policy states that alerts are acknowledged within 10 business days and escalated to the Chief Inspector within 5 business days where risks to trainee safety or supervision are identified. If a concern does not meet the threshold, it may be redirected to another College process. 

Yes. Decisions such as refusal, revocation, suspension, length of accreditation, and accreditation conditions may be reconsidered, reviewed or appealed under the Reconsideration, Review and Appeals Policy. 

The revised policy makes concerns, alerts, complaints, review and appeal pathways clearer. It also commits RANZCO to publishing information about concerns and complaints as part of its public accreditation information. 

The current documents and plain language resources will be available on this revised accreditation page and through the links available there.