Accreditation and Registration Appeals Policy

The Accreditation and Registration Appeals Policy is intended to allow applicants and registrants to appeal an accreditation outcome if they do not agree with our decision. For example, that they believe that the decision was not accurate, equitable and fair, or believe that we did not follow our own procedures.
 
If there is disagreement before the outcome is sent to the applicant, the expectation is that the applicant and accreditor will discuss the decision, and ask for review by an Accreditation Liaison Officer before the outcome of the application is sent to the applicant.
 
We will ensure that this is clearly explained in our guidance to applicants.
 
Once the applicant has been sent the outcome, they are then able to use this policy if they wish to appeal the decision.

Grounds for appeal

  1. The applicant is asked to explain why they believe the decision made is wrong, briefly stating the grounds for the appeal, and giving any additional evidence which is relevant. The appeal does not have to be in formal or legal language.
  2. Grounds for appeal would usually be that the applicant believes that our decision on the outcome was not fair/just/equitable or that they believe that we did not follow our own processes accurately.

Stages in the Process

  1. If we decide that an application does not meet our expectations, we will provide a link to our appeals process – including the policy – in our email to the member.
  2. We will also include a statement on how we support people with diverse needs if they wish to make an appeal*

Making an appeal

  1. Accreditation applicant sends an email to accreditation@babcp.com. Wellbeing Registration applicants need to send an email to wellbeing@babcp.com. Guidance notes will ask them to do this within 28 days of us sending the outcome email to them – and to specify grounds for appeal, and preferred outcome. 
  2. On receipt of email, the members’ record is noted that they have launched an appeal.

Investigation stage

  1. The Chief Accreditation Officer & Registrar or their nominated deputy (referred to in the rest of the document as ‘Registrar’) reviews what happened against the grounds for appeal, and gathers more information where needed.
  2. We will provide the option to have meeting with the member and/or accreditor/ALO as part of the process:
  3. Possible outcomes at this stage:
    • Investigation shows that the grounds for appeal are valid
    • Investigation shows that grounds for appeal not accurate or valid
 

Decision-making stage

  1. Decision made by Registrar – appeal upheld. Any learning opportunity identified and taken to relevant meeting/update to guidance or processes. The member is informed.
  2. Decision made by Registrar – appeal not upheld. The member is informed – along with information on how to make a further appeal which will be referred to the Practitioner Accreditation Committee; and information on how to complain about a team member (including about Registrar).
  3. Decision made by Registrar – uncertain outcome/need committee guidance. Refer to the Practitioner Accreditation Committee for decision. The member is informed of the date of the next Practitioner Accreditation Committee meeting.

Final stage: Appeal referred to the Practitioner Accreditation & Registration Committee

  1. At least three members of the Practitioner Accreditation & Registration Committee review the application, appeal and Registrar’s review – and make a decision. There will be an option to have a meeting with the member and/or accreditor/ALO as part of the process.
  2. Chair of the Practitioner Accreditation & Registration Committee or their deputy informs the member of outcome, and that there is no further option to appeal the accreditation outcome.