Review - Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research

Zealand, Australia and public colleges in Ontario. A key strategy for managing providers is the
disclosure of information on the website, however information is only published after all appeal
proceedings have concluded.
In Germany, providers can make public their compliance reports from their quality assurance agency
if they wish, especially if it promotes their products and services.
In Singapore, the audit reports of providers are not made public, however 52 there has been some
discussion in regard to making the point rating (determined as a risk rating) public.
The independent auditor body Ofsted undertakes inspections of providers in England, and equivalent
inspection bodies operate in Wales and Northern Ireland. Ofsted publishes its reports for all
monitoring and site visits. Reports are text based and can be accessed at
www.ofsted.gov.uk/oxcare_providers/list.
In England, Ofqual monitors awarding organisations bodies and:
• focuses on systems and procedures against the regulatory criteria
• carryies out a risk-based program to monitor qualifications across organisations/awarding
bodies to ensure that standards are maintained and qualifications are fit for purpose.
The website includes qualification reports and reports of awarding bodies, as well as the awarding
body response, at www.ofqual.gov.uk/649.aspx. Reports address the key areas of corporate
governance, resources and expertise, quality assurance and control of independent assessment,
determination and reporting of results, and registration.
The SQA in Scotland undertakes audits of awarding bodies and centres which have been made public
since July 2008. The SQA makes public:
• individual awarding body reports and their performance in meeting the requirements of SQA
Accreditation's awarding body criteria (2007)
• centre monitoring visit reports which are undertaken as part of the review into awarding
bodies' performance against the requirements of SQA Accreditation's awarding body criteria
(2007). 53
These reports are text based and note non-compliances and observations. The website also includes
the awarding body’s response to the audit.
The AQTF 2007 does not promulgate whether regulators can or should provide consumer protection
information to clients. At this stage there is no strategy in place at a national level to inform clients as
to a provider’s level of compliance to the standards, or whether sanctions (if they are possible under
each state/territory legislation) are or have been in place. A search of the National Training
Information Service (NTIS) website can inform clients of the status of provider, but only if the
training organisation’s name is known. This information can be found in the archive section in
relation to providers that have discontinued but also include when a suspension is in place.
A function of notifications against providers does exist with providers registered with the
Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (CRICOS). The
Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations has the capacity to note conditions
placed on the provider on the provider information pages within the CRICOS register. Suspended or
cancelled providers cannot be accessed by the public on the CRICOS website. In the case of CRICOS
providers, compliance is against the Education Services for Overseas Students Act or its National
Code of Practice for Registration Authorities and Providers of Education and Training to Overseas
Students 2007, and therefore the legislative status is similar to that of Ontario’s private providers.
52 Discussions with Tracy Lee, WDA.
53 Scottish Qualifications Authority at www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/16767.84.1403.html
Comparisons of international quality assurance in vocational education and training Page 46 of 115