This handbook sets out the seven axes in the form reviewers use. Each axis also has its own page. Use your browser's print function to save this page as a PDF.
01 · Leadership & Governance
How the institution is directed, held to account and kept honest. A programme is only as dependable as the institution behind it. This axis asks who is accountable for the programme, how they are held to account and how the institution keeps itself honest when it is under pressure.
What we ask
- Who governs the institution and the programme, and how are they appointed and held to account?
- Which policies protect integrity, and how are conflicts of interest declared and managed?
- How does the institution report on outcomes to those it serves?
- What happens when something goes wrong, and who decides?
Evidence we look for
- Governing documents, organisation chart and terms of reference
- Integrity, conflict-of-interest and complaints policies, with examples of their use
- Minutes or records showing oversight of the programme
- Published information for learners about the programme and its outcomes
What good looks like. Responsibility is clear and documented. Oversight is real and leaves a record. Policies are used, not merely filed.
02 · Strategy & Planning
Whether purpose, resources and priorities line up behind the programme. Good intentions need resources. This axis looks at whether the programme has a clear purpose and whether planning, staffing and funding line up behind it for the whole period of accreditation.
What we ask
- What is the programme for, and who is it for?
- How are priorities set and resourced, and by whom?
- How does the institution plan for growth, change and risk?
- How often are plans reviewed, and what has changed as a result?
Evidence we look for
- Mission and programme purpose statements
- Strategic or operational plans and budgets relevant to the programme
- Risk register and continuity arrangements
- Records of plan reviews and resulting decisions
What good looks like. Purpose is specific, plans are costed and resourced, and the institution can show a past plan that it reviewed and revised.
03 · Learner & Stakeholder Focus
Who the programme serves, and how it listens to them. A programme exists for its learners and for those who will employ or work with them. This axis examines how well the institution understands them, supports them and listens to them.
What we ask
- Who are the learners, and what do they need to succeed?
- How do employers, professional bodies and other stakeholders shape the programme?
- What support is available, and how is its effect measured?
- How are feedback and complaints collected and resolved?
Evidence we look for
- Admission, induction and support arrangements
- Records of employer or professional input into design and review
- Learner feedback summaries and the actions taken
- Complaints log and examples of resolution
What good looks like. The institution can name the changes it made because of what learners and employers told it.
04 · Programme Design
Whether what is taught is coherent, current and fit for the level awarded. The credential has to mean something at the level it is awarded. This axis tests whether learning outcomes, content and structure are coherent, current and appropriate to that level and to professional practice.
What we ask
- What can a graduate do, stated as outcomes, and at what level?
- How does the curriculum build towards those outcomes?
- How is the content kept current with professional practice?
- How do learners apply what they learn?
Evidence we look for
- Programme specification, learning outcomes and curriculum map
- Syllabi, reading lists and applied or work-based components
- Records of curriculum review and external input
- Comparison of outcomes with the level descriptors the institution uses
What good looks like. Outcomes are measurable, each is taught and assessed somewhere in the curriculum, and the content is visibly revised when practice changes.
05 · Faculty & Delivery
Who teaches, how it is delivered, and how quality stays consistent. A well-designed programme still depends on who teaches it and how. This axis looks at the people, the methods and the resources that deliver it, in every mode and location.
What we ask
- Are teaching staff qualified and experienced for what they teach?
- How are staff supported and developed?
- Are delivery methods and resources suited to the outcomes and to the learners?
- Is quality consistent across modes, locations and cohorts?
Evidence we look for
- Staff profiles, qualifications and development records
- Teaching, learning and resource plans, including online delivery where used
- Observation, moderation or quality-assurance records
- Comparisons of results across modes, sites or cohorts
What good looks like. The institution knows its delivery quality from evidence, not impression, and can show how it acts on weak spots.
06 · Assessment & Results
Whether a credential means what it says. Assessment is where a credential earns its meaning. This axis asks whether assessment is valid, fair and secure, and whether records and certificates can be trusted and verified.
What we ask
- Does assessment test the stated outcomes at the stated level?
- How is marking made consistent, and how are standards moderated?
- How is academic integrity protected, and what happens when it is breached?
- How are results recorded, certificates issued and credentials verified?
Evidence we look for
- Assessment briefs, marking criteria and samples of marked work
- Moderation and external-review records
- Academic integrity policy and case records
- Records management, certificate issuing and verification procedures
What good looks like. Anyone can check a certificate, and the institution can show that two markers would reach the same result.
07 · Continuous Improvement
What the institution does with what it learns. Quality is a habit, not a state. This axis examines what the institution learns from its data and its reviews, what it changes as a result, and how it will report to IFEIA each year.
What we ask
- What data does the institution collect about outcomes and learner progress?
- How are findings from reviews, feedback and results turned into actions?
- Who owns each action and how is completion checked?
- What will be reported in annual monitoring?
Evidence we look for
- Outcome and progression data over time
- Action plans from self-assessment and past reviews, with status
- Examples of changes made and their effect
- A proposed annual monitoring plan
What good looks like. The institution can show a problem it found, what it changed and what happened next.