New accreditation publications about costs and international systems

Two new papers have been published today about key aspects of the accreditation functions under the National Registration and Accreditation Scheme (the National Scheme). The papers provide a new analysis of accreditation costs and an international comparison of accreditation systems for registered health professions in comparable health systems.
The papers were developed by the Accreditation Liaison Group (ALG), a subcommittee of the Forum of NRAS Chairs that provides advice within the National Scheme on common accreditation issues. The ALG involves representatives of National Boards, Accreditation Authorities (through the Health Professions Accreditation Councils’ Forum and Accreditation Committees), and AHPRA.
The ALG Co-Chairs, Dr Joanna Flynn, Chair of the Forum of NRAS Chairs and Chair of the Medical Board of Australia and Professor Michael Morgan, Chair of the Health Professions Accreditation Councils Forum and the Australian Dental Council said that the publication of the reports was an important contribution to information about accreditation in the National Scheme.
“This is the first time that this type of costs information has been compiled within the National Scheme and made publicly available. We hope that the information is useful for stakeholders and plan to build on this initial report by publishing an annual update.” Dr Flynn said.
“The papers reflect the growing collaborative work across Accreditation Authorities and are an important basis for further work.” Professor Morgan said.

Costings paper

Collectively, Accreditation Authorities, National Boards and AHPRA have the best information about the costs of accreditation in NRAS. To prepare for the Accreditation Systems Review, a working group was established by ALG to progress work already started by Accreditation Authorities in identifying the cost of accreditation in the Scheme so that the best available cost data would be available to the review team.
The CWG Paper provides detailed cost information and activity data as well as background information, to give important context. For example, a key difference between the National Scheme and other schemes is that the assessment of overseas trained practitioners seeking registration is Australia is an accreditation function, whereas in other schemes this process is treated separately.  This means that in the National Scheme the costs of these assessments are included in accreditation costs, rather than allocated to other functions such as registration.

International Comparisons paper

The ALG also developed an overview of the similarities and differences in accreditation systems for registered health professions in comparable health systems (the UK, Canada, USA, New Zealand and Ireland).
The International Comparisons Paper provides an overview of each of the international systems as well as diagrams which show the requirements for general registration and, where relevant, specialist registration for each profession under the Scheme.

Read the Costing Paper (CWG) March 2017

Read the International Comparisons Paper March 2017

 


All Members of the Health Professions Accreditation Councils’ Forum (the Forum) aspire to achieve the high level accreditation principles outlined in this position statement. Each Accreditation Authority undertakes its own self-assessment against these principles, and works independently and in collaboration with others to achieve them.

Read the full position statement June 2016

 


The Forum members have agreed to the outcomes of the Interprofessional learning (IPE) workshop, held in June 2015 and have released a position statement. The Forum has also endorsed the World Health Organization’s definition of interprofessional education.

Read the full position statement November 2015

 


The Forum endorsed the principles contained in the guidance document prepared jointly by the Forum and AHPRA Accreditation Liaison Group (ALG) Management of complaints relating to accreditation functions under the National Law – a guidance document

Read the full position statement June 2015

 


This position statement, developed by the Health Professions Accreditation Councils’ Forum (the Forum), provides guiding principles for accreditation authorities to consider when developing and/or reviewing prescribing standards for their profession.

Read the full position statement December 2013

 


This position paper which has been developed by accreditation authorities, national boards and the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA) provided information about accreditation under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law Act as in force in each state and territory (the National Law)

It covers a range of issues associated with the accreditation functions, including:

  • the guiding principles and objectives of the National Law
  • relationships and communication between accreditation authorities, national boards and AHPRA about accreditation
  • the Quality Framework for the Accreditation Function, and
  • the Procedures for the Development of Accreditation Standards.

 

The information in this paper Health Practitioner Regulation National Law (the National Law, including Quality Framework for the Accreditation Function (App C) was agreed by accreditation authorities, national boards and (AHPRA) after a Joint Meeting to consider accreditation issues on 7 June 2011 (the 2011 Joint Meeting)

Read the full position statement February 2012

 


This position papers Standards for Professional Accreditation Processes Professions Australia was prepared by Theanne Walters (Australian Medical Council) and members of the Professions Australis Accreditation Forum

Read the full position paper June 2008

 


In 2008, Professions Australia adopted Standards for Professional Processes as a statement of good practice in the process of assessing and accrediting programs of study that lead to entry to the professions.  The document was endorsed by the Forum of Australian Health Professions Councils – Accreditation of Health Professions Education Programs (Documents 1 and 2)

Read the full position statement March 2011