Are you a member yet? Membership is open to all and is the first step towards accreditation.
The BABCP Minimum Training Standards (MTS) requires details of eight training cases. Four must be formally assessed and passed as case studies.
All graduates of BABCP Level 2 accredited courses will have met this requirement on the training. Courses accredited with us at Level 1 also assess case studies, but this may be less than four.
Graduates of Level 1 or non-accredited courses may need to have further case studies assessed independently.
We ask that case studies assessed on a non-accredited course, or independent of a CBT course, are submitted with your application for accreditation. This is so that we can check they meet our case study criteria and standards for formal assessment – these are laid out below and on our Case Study Criteria and Feedback sheet.
We don’t moderate or dispute marks already awarded however, if the content of your case studies does not meet our Criteria and Standards, this may affect the success of your accreditation application. Please also submit the mark or feedback sheet.
The assessor should be accredited by BABCP or be a CBT therapist who is trained and qualified in CBT to postgraduate diploma level or equivalent (or would meet Minimum Training Standards).
In addition, they should have experience of marking as a lecturer or tutor on an academic post-graduate CBT training course or equivalent. The assessor may, however, currently be independent of an academic institution.
If possible, we recommend that you contact assessors from your course, local courses or through other contacts. Otherwise, you can download a list of independent assessors here. It will be your responsibility to check that they still meet the criteria for a suitable assessor and to negotiate fees, timescale and, if appropriate, reasonable adjustments with them.
The MTS sets out requirements for all 8 of your training cases, including your case studies - at least two different anxiety disorder presentations or one anxiety disorder and either trauma and stressor related disorder as well as a mood disorder presentation.
The interventions used for the eight training cases must be based on core CBT evidence-based protocols or formulation driven CBT treatment.
The case studies can cover the same cases that are closely supervised or they can be different.
Assessors are asked to confirm that the case study has passed using the form here. They must confirm that the case study is of an acceptable standard for a competent CBT therapist. Feedback should be given to the candidate and expectations of quality, content, layout, writing style and structure should be of a similar standard as case studies marked in a post-graduate programme.
Reasonable adjustments should be made where appropriate where the applicant can provide evidence of relevant additional needs.
The case study should demonstrate theoretical understanding and a research-based rationale for choosing a specific approach and knowledge of alternative options, which is consistent with evidence-based CBT practice. There should be a reflective element which identifies new learning.
All the areas described below should be covered where relevant.
Evidence of structured assessment, must include the following areas -
The report should outline a coherent, concise formulation developed collaboratively over treatment with explicit input from client and include-
Identification of theoretical aims of treatment according to the model used, and in relation to client’s presenting difficulties and goals for treatment
treatment plan explicitly linked to formulation
The overall presentation should include -
The criteria for written case reports above should be applied to marking verbally presented case studies and accepted on BABCP accredited courses only. They should include the assessor criteria and the requirement for the report to pass. In addition -
As with written reports, the presentation should meet the standards expected of a healthcare profession with a post-graduate level qualification e.g. accurate and detailed slides, clarity of expression, logical sequence covering the areas outlined above, clarity and coherence of the content, respect for client confidentiality, effective use of tables and figures, lack of grammatical and spelling errors, appropriate links to evidence base and referencing.