What institutional accreditation is for
Institutions make important commitments to learners: about teaching, assessment, support, fees and the value of the education they provide. CQASE institutional accreditation examines the systems behind those commitments. It asks whether responsibilities are clear, whether policies are used in practice and whether the institution can show that it identifies and addresses weaknesses.
The review gives institutional leaders a documented assessment against a published framework. It can help them prioritise improvements, clarify responsibilities and explain their quality arrangements to students, employers and partners. An award also gives others a public record they can check, rather than relying on an unsupported claim on a website.
CQASE provides institutional accreditation only. We do not accredit individual courses, programmes or qualifications. Our recognition is voluntary and based on our own standards; it does not replace state accreditation or determine the legal recognition of an academic award.
Institutions and delivery models
The framework is designed for schools, colleges, universities, language schools, online academies, vocational and professional training providers, adult education organisations and identifiable corporate training units. The applicant must identify the legal entity responsible for the education and demonstrate that it is entitled to operate in the countries it serves.
The review scope is agreed before substantive assessment. It records the legal entity, included locations, delivery methods and any clearly defined organisational unit. A multi-campus college, for example, must identify the campuses it wants reviewed. An award for one named training unit does not extend to every service offered by its parent company.
Accreditation applicants need one representative example of education already delivered and some genuine learner feedback. There is no fixed minimum operating history. Institutions that have not yet delivered education can consider membership first. There is no requirement to become a member before applying for accreditation.
What you need to demonstrate
The assessment covers six practical areas: identity and responsibility; teaching and learning; suitable educators; learner terms and support; privacy and data handling; and feedback and improvement.
Each domain states the requirements, the evidence expected and how it will be checked. Use existing web pages and documents, one teaching example, one or two educator profiles, learner feedback and a one-page improvement plan. These can be combined in one shared folder. Full personnel files, financial statements and a formal annual quality report are not routinely requested.
Evidence must be current and verifiable online by the assigned reviewers. Some information, such as legal identity and learner terms, should be public. Confidential records can be shared through controlled access and do not become part of the public register.
Every applicable requirement must be met before an award is made. Strong performance in one area cannot compensate for a serious failure in another. Missing evidence leads to a request for clarification or a recorded gap; it is not treated as proof of compliance.
From application to decision
Begin with a self-assessment and evidence index. Your application identifies the institution, authorised representative and requested scope, and links the evidence to A01–A06. We check completeness and eligibility before confirming the substantive review.
The reviewer examines the documents, checks external sources and requests a short call only when the evidence needs clarification. Findings are recorded against individual requirements. You can correct factual errors and respond to identified gaps with an action plan and further evidence. One corrective follow-up is included in the initial fee.
A separate authorised decision-maker considers the completed review. The outcome is accreditation, deferral for further evidence or a declined application, with reasons and an appeal route.
The initial fee is €490: €190 for eligibility, credited to the total, and €300 after eligibility and scope acceptance. A substantive review normally targets four to six weeks from a complete file; time spent awaiting corrections is additional. Larger or more complex scopes require agreement before work begins.
Follow the detailed process and timetable → · Read the complete fee terms
After accreditation is awarded
The institution receives a reasoned decision and a record of the approved scope. Its published register entry identifies the institution, reference, framework version, status and validity dates. Anyone checking a claim should be directed to that record.
An award lasts three years, subject to annual monitoring and continued compliance. The first year is included in the initial fee; monitoring in years two and three is €190 per year. The institution must report material changes within 30 days and apply for renewal at least 90 days before expiry.
Recognition can be suspended, withdrawn or allowed to expire. Institutions must keep public claims consistent with the current register status. Accreditation does not guarantee enrolments, employment outcomes, credit transfer or acceptance of qualifications by another organisation.
Questions institutions often ask
Does CQASE accredit a degree or a specific programme?
No. The review concerns the named institution and its quality arrangements. Reviewers may sample courses to examine how those arrangements operate; the sample does not receive a separate programme award.
Can an online-only institution apply?
Yes. The agreed scope identifies online delivery. Evidence must cover the learner platform, staff support, assessment integrity, accessibility, data handling and continuity as relevant to that model.
Must every document be visible to the public?
No. Public information and confidential review evidence are treated differently. Reviewers need reliable access to the source, but staffing or feedback records can remain restricted and should be redacted.
What if we do not yet meet a requirement?
Identify the gap in your self-assessment. A reviewer can request corrective evidence before a decision. Accreditation is not awarded while applicable requirements remain unmet; deferral or reapplication may be appropriate.