New Accreditation Standards: What has changed
What has changed overall
The purpose of accreditation has not changed. Training posts must continue to meet RANZCO standards and provide safe, supervised, high-quality training environments. Trainee safety, supervision and training quality remain central.
The revised framework changes how accreditation is organised and applied.
| STANDARDS | PROCEDURES | POLICY |
|---|---|---|
| organised into four domains with criteria and evidence sources | moves from an inspection guide to an end-to-end accreditation framework | now a governance document rather than an operational manual |
| stronger focus on trainee wellbeing | clarifies roles, responsibilities and decision points | aligns decisions with the Standards and AMC risk matrix |
| clearer expectations for governance, accountability and evidenc | places site visits within a broader accreditation process | strengthens monitoring, reporting and complaints processes |
| greater focus on how settings support trainees in practice | makes ongoing monitoring a formal part of the framework | commits RANZCO to publishing accredited posts, outcomes, timelines and guidance resources |
What has changed for you
Training Sites and Hospital Executives
The revised framework makes accreditation a clearer ongoing governance and risk matter, not only an inspection event.
What should you expect:
- stronger focus on trainee welfare, governance, evidence and monitoring
- greater need to show that local systems work in practice, not only that policies exist
- clearer expectations around organisational response to risks, concerns and material changes
- stronger visibility of accreditation status and monitoring between cycles.
What is not changing:
- training sites still need to provide safe, supervised, high quality training
- hospitals still need to support accredited training environments and respond where risks are identified.
Heads of Department and Term Supervisors
For Heads of Department and Term Supervisors, the revised framework places stronger emphasis on local governance, evidence, supervision, orientation, trainee welfare and ongoing readiness.
What should you expect:
- more structured evidence collection
- stronger focus on local processes and how they work in practice
- greater need to respond to concerns, conditions and monitoring over the full accreditation cycle
- less reliance on policy documents for inspection logistics, with operational detail now in the Procedures Manual.
What is not changing: Their central role in supporting safe, supervised and curriculum-aligned training remains the same.
Networks and Directors of Training
For Directors of Training, the revised framework places stronger emphasis on network-level coordination, consistency, oversight and response across posts.
What should you expect:
- greater focus on overall training outcomes across settings
- stronger involvement in monitoring findings, conditions and emerging risks
- a clearer connection between network structures, governance and training outcomes
- procedural detail to sit in the Procedures Manual rather than the policy itself.
What is not changing: The role remains important in supporting compliance, consistency and training quality across the network.
Trainees
For trainees, the revised framework gives greater clarity around training quality, wellbeing, concerns pathways and ongoing monitoring.
What should you expect:
- stronger emphasis on workplace culture, fatigue and workload management, leave and flexible work, and access to wellbeing resources
- clearer information about how concerns are raised and handled
- stronger links between trainee feedback, monitoring and accreditation follow-up
- continued importance of trainee surveys, records and other feedback in accreditation and quality improvement.
What is not changing:
- the core expectations of training remain the same
- trainees remain a key source of evidence during accreditation processes.