A History of BAC's first 25 years

British Accreditation Council
// A History
BAC

British Accreditation Council
for independent further and higher education
British Accreditation Council // A History
Celebrating 25 years of higher standards for education
© British Accreditation Council
7th Floor
76 Shoe Lane
London EC4A 3JB
United Kingdom
Telephone: +44 (0)20 7832 3520
Fax: +44 (0)20 7832 3521
Email:
info@the-bac.org
Website:
www.the-bac.org
The British Accreditation Council for Independent Further and Higher Education
is registered as a charity (Charities Registration No. 326652)
and is a private company limited by guarantee (Registered in England No. 1828990)
This work is copyright © 2010 by the British Accreditation Council for Independent Further and
Higher Education. Permission granted to reproduce the entirety of this work or extracts from it for
personal and educational use only. Extracts from this work must be acknowledged.
All other rights reserved.
This work is registered with the UK Copyright Service.
Research by Graham Middleton, Caroline Greves, Jane Marsh,& Steve Bristow.
Design by Erin Sanna
BAC

Contents
Foreword........................................................................pg 1
What is the British Accreditation Council.......................pg 3
The Origins of BAC.....................................................pg 4
How BAC works ........................................................pg 8
Inspections & Accreditation..........................................pg 12
From 35 to 450 plus:
growing numbers in accreditation..................................pg 16
Policy Issues.....................................................................pg 21
Accrediting institutions or their awards.........................pg 21
Accreditation of overseas institutions and awards..............pg 22
Tricky terminology.........................................................pg 24
Accreditation of new institutions...................................pg 25
Other core policy decisions.............................................pg 26
The drive for official recognition.......................................pg 29
Office for Standards in Education,
Children’s Services and Science (Ofsted)............................pg 29
The Department for Education and Skills (DES)...............pg 31
The Home Office...........................................................pg 35
Fostering links within the independent education sector....pg 39
The Open and Distance Learning Quality
Council (ODLQC)...........................................................pg 39
Accreditation UK..............................................................pg 40
Study UK...................................................................pg 42
BAC overseas..................................................................pg 45
Principal Officers and administrative staff at BAC...........pg 47
Appendices......................................................................pg 54

Foreword
It may seem premature to write a history of an
organisation only 25 years old, but the story of the
British Accreditation Council is indispensable in
understanding the development of the independent
education sector over these years. Currently
accrediting over 450 institutions offering a wide
range of educational programmes from architecture
to accountancy, the British Accreditation Council
today touches the lives of tens of thousands of
students by rigorously inspecting the premises,
management, staffing, administration, student
welfare and teaching quality at the institutions where
they study.
I hope that this history will help to qualify the role
of the independent sector and the evolution of
standards.
- Lord Watson of Richmond CBE, President of BAC
1

2
What is the British Accreditation Council

What is the
British Accreditation Council
This short history details how the British Accreditation Council (BAC) has become the internationally
regarded accrediting body that it is today.
BAC was established in 1984 to provide a comprehensive quality assurance scheme for independent
further and higher education in the UK. Our accreditation is recognised the world over by students,
agents and government officials as the clearest mark of educational quality in the private sector.
Alongside the British Council, whose Accreditation UK scheme serves as the definitive guide to the
country’s English language centres, we have overseen the inspection of private post-16 education
for 25 years.
We are committed to both encouraging the highest standards of education offered by independent
colleges and providing prospective students with an invaluable guide to quality in an often complex
sector. Our charitable status informs our efforts not merely to pass judgement on institutions, but
also to nurture their attempts to raise standards and the quality of education for all.
“I hope that you enjoy reading this brief account of
the first 25 years of the British Accreditation Council.
It has been an exciting time to be working with the
independent further and higher education sector,
which continues to go from strength to strength. I
would like to take this opportunity to thank Graham
Middleton for his many hours of research which
made this document possible, and also all the staff,
inspectors and volunteers who have given so much
of their time and their effort to BAC over the years.
Here’s to the next 25!”
-Dr Gina Hobson, Chief Executive.
3

What is the British Accreditation Council
The Origins of BAC
In November 1980, the then Department of Education and Science (DES) announced its
withdrawal from the inspection and accreditation of independent colleges of further and
higher education as of 1 April 1982. This meant that institutions in this sector were no longer
inspected by, or even required to be registered with, the DES.
At about the same time, the Government significantly increased the fees for overseas students
attending publicly funded colleges and universities. The independent sector now found itself
able to compete with the public sector on price, offering higher education courses especially
at a much lower cost and providing an attractive alternative to the overseas student. These
two decisions provided an added impetus to the unchecked development of the already
burgeoning independent further and higher education sector.
Furthermore, withdrawal of the DES from inspection meant that there was no longer any
centrally collected information about the scale and nature of independent further and higher
education in the UK. While precise information was lacking, it was clear that independent
colleges were making a significant contribution to the overall provision of further and higher
education and, given that many of their students came from overseas, were also making a
significant contribution to the UK’s invisible exports. Research undertaken in 1992-93 found
that in May 1992 there were around 3,000 independent colleges of various kinds in the UK,
with just over 500,000 students, of whom over half (295,000) were studying full time.
In any boom industry, however, the potential for profit can draw in some sharp operators, and
both the British Council and UKCOSA (now UKCISA, the UK Council for International Student
Affairs) grew concerned that some overseas students were being ‘ripped off’ by unscrupulous
institutions, thereby damaging the reputation of UK education as a whole. Reputable private
institutions moreover were keen that there should be a way in which they could continue to
obtain some formal recognition. The British Council itself was deemed the appropriate body
to administer a new voluntary accreditation scheme for the independent English language
teaching sector and the British Council English Language Schools Recognition Scheme
came into operation on 1 April 1982. In the case of the correspondence (or distance learning)
4

What is the British Accreditation Council
colleges, there was already a voluntary
accreditation scheme run by the Council
for the Accreditation of Correspondence
Colleges. However, there remained a large
number of other independent institutions
for which there was no established system
of accreditation. These institutions fell
broadly into the following categories:
* Sixth-form and tutorial colleges
* Providers of business and professional
education and training
* Higher education in fields such as law
and management
*
Colleges for students with special
educational needs
Although the majority of the institutions in
these categories aimed to provide genuinely
high quality education at an affordable
cost, there were some institutions that
were thought to be primarily interested in
making profits with little regard for students’
educational needs. Numerous institutions
catered in particular for students from overseas and many did this well. However, there were
also some institutions that were suspected of having been set up solely for the purpose
of helping foreign nationals into the UK, abusing the student visa system for economic
migration.
In March 1981, the British Council held several meetings to discuss what might be done,
inviting the principal bodies concerned with standards in further and higher education in the
UK. These meetings led to the establishment of a working party under the chairmanship of a
senior British Council officer (Brian Vale) which recommended that a national body be set up
to run a voluntary system of accreditation for independent institutions of further and higher
education.
5

What is the British Accreditation Council
To take the next steps in assembling such a body, a Formation Committee was appointed
under the chairmanship of Gail Taylor, the then Executive Secretary of UKCOSA, to draw up
a constitution and an initial set of accreditation criteria and procedures. Both the Working
Party and the Formation Committee particularly benefited from the advice of Fred Parrott, an
HMI (Her Majesty’s Inspector) who had previously inspected independent colleges on behalf
of the DES. He acted as the principal draftsman for the Working Party and the Formation
Committee and subsequently became the new British Accreditation Council’s first Chief
Inspector.
The British Accreditation Council for Independent Further and Higher Education (BAC) was formally
established on 29 June 1984. The first college to be accredited was King’s School Oxford (then
known as St Joseph’s Hall) which was inspected on 25 February 1985, and awarded accreditation
following a meeting of the Accreditation and Recognition Committee (subsequently renamed the
Accreditation Committee) on 18 April 1985. Happily, King’s School Oxford is still accredited by BAC
to this day, some 25 years later, as are 12 other colleges accredited in that first year, including
Bellerbys College in Brighton (known back in 1985 as Davies’s College, Hove), an institution with
over 50 years of experience in preparing international students for higher education.
6

What is the British Accreditation Council
“Originally founded in 1959, Bellerbys College has been accredited by BAC for 25 years
and understands the value that BAC provided to the Independent Sector when, in the
early 80s, the UK Government stopped inspecting private institutions which provided
only post-16 education. BAC filled this role decisively and to the great relief of those
private institutions who were understandably concerned about not having an accrediting
body to inspect them and approve their provision.
BAC also very sensibly set out an inspectorate facility that took into account that
these institutions were primarily post-16 and therefore had their own particular areas
of expertise. This enabled institutions, in expanding their roles as post-16 providers,
to deliver programmes such as Foundation and Degree courses, thereby offering
students and their parents additional options to consider. BAC provided inspectors
who particularly understood post-16 provision and this led to a much more appropriate
form of inspection and accreditation. BAC built on this expertise and today provides an
excellent inspectorate for post-16 education.”
-Bellerbys College, Brighton.
7

What is the British Accreditation Council
How BAC works.
BAC is constituted as a private company limited by guarantee and is also a registered charity. Its
Memorandum and Articles of Association state that its principal object is “to improve and enhance
the standards of independent further and higher educational institutions” and this remains its primary
goal today.
BAC is governed by its Council which comprises individuals and nominees of stakeholder
organisations who are closely involved in setting and maintaining education standards. Members
are required not to have any direct involvement or financial interest in the independent sector of
education which could lead to a conflict of interest. The Council meets twice each year, usually in
April and November.
At the time of BAC’s establishment, the key bodies to nominate members to the Council were:
the British Council; UKCOSA; the Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals (now Universities
UK); the Council for National Academic Awards (some of whose remit is now covered by the Open
University); several examining and awarding bodies; organisations representing the principals of
publicly funded colleges; and persons representing local education authorities. Over the years a
number of these groups have gone out of existence or been replaced by successor organisations.
Also, some new bodies have been invited to nominate members. Between them, the present
members of the Council continue to represent the principal organisations involved in maintaining
educational standards in the UK.
8

What is the British Accreditation Council
“When BAC’s Accreditation and Recognition
Committee met for the first time on 15 January
1985 to consider its first two applications for
accreditation, the four members present can
scarcely have imagined what the next 25 years
would hold for the UK’s nascent independent
further and higher education sector. Nor could
they have predicted that BAC would remain at
its centre throughout, continuing the drive for
higher educational standards and greater public
recognition of a sector which had much to offer
a growing domestic and international student
population.
Although my tenure as Chairman of the Council
began in May 2002, I have been a member of what
is now the Accreditation Committee since June
1991, and while the same rigour was applied to
the reports we received back then, in other ways BAC has been transformed over
the past two decades. I am continually impressed by its steady development into
the leading accrediting body in the independent further and higher education sector.
While its numbers of staff, inspectors and accredited colleges have swelled, as an
organisation it has become progressively more streamlined, efficient and effective.
It has shown an especially notable organisational maturity as an independent body
operating constructively within an increasingly regulatory framework. This is in
no small measure due to the committed hard work of its current team of staff and
inspectors and their predecessors.
BAC continues to be well served by its governing Council and two committees (AC
and the Executive Committee). Retired senior personnel from education and allied
professions give freely of their time and their input is augmented by the contribution
of members still in post.
From its beginnings as a small group of concerned educationalists doing the good
work which no one else wanted to do, to an internationally recognised body whose
assistance is sought by institutions and agencies across the globe, BAC has come
a long way. While no one can foresee what the next 25 years will hold, I believe that
its work is far from done.”
-Tim Cox, Chairman
9

What is the British Accreditation Council
Who’s who on the Council
BAC’s governing Council and committees include nominees and observers from all the main stakeholder
bodies concerned with educational standards in the UK.
* Accreditation UK – the quality assurance scheme for the UK English Language Teaching sector, run
by the British Council and English UK.
www.britishcouncil.org/accreditation.htm
* Association of Colleges (AoC) – the representative body for publicly funded colleges in England,
Wales and Northern Ireland.
www.aoc.co.uk
* Council of Validating Universities (CVU) – the only body in the UK specialising exclusively in good
practice and standards for that aspect of higher education which concerns the validation of
programmes of study by universities and colleges ('awarding institutions') for delivery by other
colleges or organisations ('partner institutions').
www.cvu.ac.uk
* Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) – the UK government department with
responsibility for children's services, families, schools, 14-19 education, and the Register of
Independent Schools.
www.dcsf.gov.uk
* Federation of Awarding Bodies – the representative body for organisations small and large that
award vocational and academic qualifications in the UK.
www.awarding.org.uk
* GuildHE – the representative body for higher education colleges in England and Northern Ireland.
www.guildhe.ac.uk
* Independent Schools Inspectorate – the inspection arm of the Independent Schools Council,
approved by the Government for the purpose of inspecting independent schools under Section 162A of
the Education Act 2002.
www.isi.net
* Joint Council for Qualifications – representative body for the seven largest providers of qualifications
in the UK, offering GCSE, GCE, Scottish Highers, Entry Level, Vocational and vocationally related
qualifications.
www.jcq.org.uk
Open and Distance Learning Quality Council (ODLQC)
* – the UK’s guardian of quality in the open
and distance learning sector.
www.odlqc.org.uk
10

What is the British Accreditation Council
* Open University Validation Services – an institutional approval and programme validation service for
providers of higher education worldwide.
www.open.ac.uk/validate
* Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) – the body responsible for safeguarding the
quality and standards of higher education in UK universities and public colleges.
www.qaa.ac.uk
* Study UK – the representative body for the UK’s accredited independent colleges of further and higher
education.
www.study-uk.org
* UK Border Agency (UKBA) - the agency of the Home Office responsible for securing UK borders and
controlling migration.
www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk
* UK Council for International Student Affairs (UKCISA) – the UK’s national advisory body serving the
interests of international students and those who work with them.
www.ukcisa.org.uk
* UK National Recognition Information Centre (UK NARIC) – the official source of information on the
equivalency of international qualifications to the UK framework, for organisations recruiting from
overseas and individuals wishing to work or study in the UK.
www.naric.org.uk
* Universities UK (UUK) – the representative body for the executive heads of universities.
www.universitiesuk.ac.uk
For practical purposes, the Council gives delegated authority to two Committees which monitor and
implement BAC’s work:
* The Executive Committee, which has the same responsibilities as the Board of Directors in a
commercial company, providing strategic direction and exercising oversight. The Executive Committee
serves as both the Board of Directors of BAC as a company and the Board of Trustees of BAC as a
charity. The Committee usually meets five times a year.
* The Accreditation Committee (AC), which receives the reports of inspections and takes decisions on
the award or withdrawal of accreditation, making recommendations to the institutions based on BAC
accreditation policy and procedures. It also regularly reviews the criteria used by inspectors in making
judgements and recommendations. The AC is appointed by the Executive Committee and consists
partly of members drawn from the Council itself and partly of other persons appointed by virtue of their
experience and expertise. The current Chairman of the Committee is Mrs Diane Billam. The Committee
usually meets six times a year.
11

What is the British Accreditation Council
Inspections and Accreditation
BAC’s inspectorate comprises around 85 experienced and professional inspectors who carry
out inspections on BAC’s behalf on a contract basis. They include a number of Reporting
Inspectors who lead the inspection teams and write the detailed inspection reports for the AC.
Many BAC inspectors are former HMIs, some are long-standing Accreditation UK inspectors
or QAA auditors, while others are serving or retired senior academics who have experience as
practitioners in the professional and vocational fields covered by the institutions being inspected.
Each year BAC organises inspector training days designed to ensure that its inspectors are
fully cognisant of BAC requirements and procedures and apply a common, fair and transparent
approach to the inspection process. The inspectorate is led by the Chief Inspector, with the
assistance currently of four Senior Inspectors. The Chief Inspector is, in turn, supported by the
Head of Inspection Services whose remit extends beyond operational oversight to strategic
advice for the Chief Executive and the Committees.
Our Committees and Inspectors are supported by the core team of administrative staff at our
Head Office in London. Led by the Chief Executive, the staff are responsible for the day-to-day
business of BAC, including management of inspections, oversight of our accredited colleges
and communications with the public and the sector.
Institutions seeking BAC accreditation begin by submitting an application form with various
supporting documents, such as a health and safety policy, staff and student handbooks, and
personal references for the Principal. Once the application form has been checked by staff at
BAC’s Head Office and signed off by the Chief Inspector, an inspection of the institution will be
arranged. The inspection focuses on five areas in which the institution must satisfy threshold
standards:
*
*
*
*
*
Premises and Health & Safety
Management, Staffing and Administration
Student Welfare
Teaching, Learning and Assessment
Management of Quality
12

What is the British Accreditation Council
If the institution has not been operating long and has no students at the time of application,
it may apply for the status of ‘Approved Candidate for BAC Accreditation’ and be inspected
initially on the first three areas listed above. A further inspection will be arranged within six
months of the institution being awarded approved candidate status in order to assess provision
in all five areas.
Once the inspection has taken place, the Reporting Inspector will write a detailed report, which
will then be reviewed by Accreditation Department staff in the Head Office. The report will then
be submitted to the Accreditation Committee (AC), who are given time to review it, before a
decision on accreditation is made at a meeting of the AC. There are three possible outcomes:
* Accreditation awarded – some recommendations may be made for improvement but
the institution will have met minimum standards in all of the five areas listed above.
* Accreditation deferred – conditions are set that must be met before accreditation
can be awarded. This may entail a further supplementary inspection or the submission of
documentation to prove that conditions have been satisfied.
* Accreditation refused – the standard of provision at the institution is of such a poor
standard that a new application must be made. The institution must demonstrate that the
identified weaknesses have been addressed in full before applying for a second time.
13

What is the British Accreditation Council
The Accreditation Process
Pre-Application
Advice
Accreditation
Handbook
Online Information
Institution
Submits
Application
Intelligence
Received
BAC will investigate any
evidence of wrongdoing by its
accredited institutions
Student Complaints
BAC will mediate between
student and institution and try
to resolve the issue where
possible
Receipt
Recorded
Stage 1 Processing
- Check documentary evidence
- Check statutory compliance
- Take up references
A report will be
made to the Accreditation
Committee, who may order
an inspection if concerns
remain
Unannounced
Spot-Check
Inspection
Stage 1 signed off by
Chief Inspector
who decides on type of inspection
and inspection team required
Stage 2 Inspection
Checking compliance with statutory
requirements and BAC’s minimum
standards in:
- Health and Safety
- Management, Staffing and administration
- Student welfare (inc. academic
resources)
N
Accreditation
Sub-Committee
BAC standards
met
Inspection date
arranged
New Institutions
Y
Established Institutions
Institution becomes
an “approved candidate for
BAC accreditation” for a period of
up to 6 months.
A Stage 3 Inspection will be required
before the end of this period for
accreditation to be confirmed.
Follow route for established
institutions
Stage 3 Inspection
(Stages 2 & 3 are combined
for established institutions)
Focusing on educational
provision and the institution’s
procedures to monitor and
enhance the quality of its
provision
Release
inspection report
to institution detailing
requirements that still need
to be met in order to be
approved as a candidate
for BAC accreditation
Institution to supply documentary
evidence that all requirements
have been met or to submit to a
“Supplementary Inspection” to check
implementation before “approved
candidate” status can be awarded
Accreditation
Committee
BAC standards met in all
areas
14

What is the British Accreditation Council
The process of inspection and accreditation is shown in greater detail in
the adjacent flowchart.
In awarding accreditation, BAC has three main purposes:
* To provide guidance to students seeking to undertake education
in an institution outside the state sector.
Reaccreditation
Inspection
All institutions require a
reinspection every 4 years
* To enable an institution to state publicly that it has voluntarily
accepted independent inspection and has satisfied BAC that all
relevant aspects of its operation are maintained at a satisfactory
level.
* To support and advise institutions in maintaining and enhancing
the quality of their provision.
Interim Inspection
Checking that required
standards have been
maintained and satisfactory
progress has been made
towards recommendations
Institutions are reinspected every four years and receive an interim
inspection during the intervening period. BAC has an Appeals
Procedure through which institutions can appeal against the refusal
or withdrawal of accreditation. It also has a Complaints Procedure
for students at BAC-accredited institutions to report any alleged
failures by their institution in the delivery of courses, the treatment of
individuals or compliance with legal requirements.
Annual Return
Every year institutions must
submit:
- declaration of financial viability
- most recent audited accounts
- details of significant changes
- list of academic programmes
- student progression data
BAC’s Memorandum and Articles give it the power not only to inspect
and accredit institutions directly, but also to award accreditation on the
basis of inspections carried out by other bodies recognised by BAC as
‘sectoral accrediting bodies’. In its early years, BAC recognised the
Conference for Independent Further Education (CIFE) as a sectoral
accrediting body that carried out inspections covering BAC’s own
accreditation criteria. Initially, BAC worked with predominantly sixthform
or tutorial colleges, the majority of whom were already members
of CIFE. Indeed, in 1990 CIFE itself decided to discontinue its own
inspection arrangements in favour of having its institutions inspected
and accredited directly by BAC.
Y
Accreditation
awarded for the full
4 year duration
15

What is the British Accreditation Council
From 35 to 450 plus: growing numbers in
accreditation
2010: number of accredited institutions by course type
Vocational/Industry
related
Accountancy/
Business/Finance/
Computing
Theological
Study Abroad/
Summer School
Languages
Other
Law/Politics
Foundation Courses
A Levels/GCSE/
Baccalaureate
Degree Programmes
- Various
Alternative
Therapies
Art/Design/Dramatics/
Film/Music
165 47 7 29 43 12
8 12 14 10 34 86
16

What is the British Accreditation Council
At the end of BAC’s first year of operation a total of 35 institutions had been awarded accreditation.
This included 26 CIFE colleges and a further nine institutions offering business and professional
education and training at further and higher education levels. Over the next nine years the number of
accredited institutions grew slowly, reaching 82 by the end of 1993. Sixth form and tutorial colleges
continued to form the bulk of these. However, there had been a significant increase in accredited
institutions offering business and professional studies and higher education courses. There was
also a sizeable group of colleges catering for students with special educational needs.
In 1993-1994 BAC sought to encourage more institutions to apply for accreditation, whilst
cutting unnecessary costs, by reviewing and then streamlining its inspection and accreditation
procedures. As part of this process, BAC’s fees structure was also overhauled. The reductions
in the charges for inspections and accreditation initially had a significantly adverse effect on the
company’s finances. This difficult financial position was compounded when most of the colleges
for students with special educational needs withdrew from accreditation, as new rules saw them
become subject to inspection by the Further Education Funding Council.
David Parry, BAC’s Chief Executive until 1993, conducted many of the preliminary visits to
prospective new institutions himself. It was his view that full inspections should only be undertaken
by members of BAC’s inspectorate, in order to preserve the distinction between inspections and the
management and decision-making processes. However, aware of the need to reduce costs further
and also to foster closer relations with accredited institutions, Robin Laidlaw (who succeeded
David as Chief Executive in 1993) undertook not only to conduct most of the preliminary visits but
also to lead many full inspections himself. Robin continued to do this throughout his tenure, despite
the considerable pressures which these tasks imposed on him. Looking back, the willingness of
the Chief Executive to bear the brunt of leading inspections and writing inspection reports was
probably the key factor which ensured BAC’s survival during the financially challenging period of
the mid-1990s and established it on a sound footing for the years to come.
17

What is the British Accreditation Council
From 1993-2005 the number of institutions accredited by BAC grew from 82 to 200. The biggest
increases came in the years 2003-2005, when accreditation activity reached unprecedented levels.
Most of the new institutions were colleges offering courses in business studies and computer
studies, primarily for the benefit of overseas students. This new area of growth was stimulated by
three factors:
* The decision by the British Council that such colleges could only become members of its
Educational Counselling Service (a service which provides valuable support to institutions in
recruiting overseas students) if they were accredited by the relevant accrediting body.
* The further decision by the British Council in 2001 that only accredited independent
institutions could apply to use the newly developed ‘Education UK’ branding.
* Also in 2001, the publication of guidelines for immigration officers by the Home Office
indicating that institutions accredited by BAC, the British Council or the Association of
British Language Schools could be regarded as ‘bona fide private educational institutions’.
On this last point, it appears that many immigration officers in effect interpreted the guidelines as
meaning that student visas should not be issued for attendance at independent institutions unless
they were accredited by one of the above named bodies. This last factor was probably the main
impetus for the steady increase in applications for BAC accreditation which would continue over
the next decade through successive changes to the UK’s immigration system.
18

What is the British Accreditation Council
“BAC accreditation has given us international gravitas. We are now moving
into Hong Kong and China in partnership relationships and I believe this would
not be happening without BAC accreditation. I feel honoured to have been
accepted into such a prestigious and high level association which only accepts
the best.”
-Judith Blacklock Flower School
19

20
Policy issues

Policy Issues
Accrediting institutions or their awards
One of the main questions that BAC had to confront during its early years was whether or not to
accredit courses and awards as well as the institutions which offered them. Most institutions seeking
BAC accreditation were preparing students for awards already recognised by external examining
bodies; these bodies set the standards, determined the syllabuses and ran the examinations.
However, a number of institutions decided instead to devise their own courses and grant their
own awards, a necessary step in certain fields where no appropriate external examining body
existed.
After some debate, BAC determined that it was simply not in a position to take on the validation
or accreditation of courses and awards as well as the accreditation of institutions; it did not have
the necessary authority or resources, nor did it have the power legitimately to grant awards itself.
BAC recognised however that in deciding whether or not to accredit institutions that offered their
own awards, it needed at least to form an opinion as to whether the courses and awards were of
the level and status which the institutions claimed.
More recently, UKBA (the UK Border Agency) has introduced a requirement that in order for an
individual from outside the European Economic Area to be issued with a student visa they must be
studying on a course leading to an approved qualification. This will be implemented in full from 31
March 2010 and means that colleges will no longer be able to offer internal awards to international
students. There has already been a dramatic reduction in the number of internal awards on offer
at BAC-accredited institutions and this is likely to continue to fall once the new regulations come
into force.
21

Policy issues
Accreditation of overseas institutions
and awards
Another early policy issue for BAC was the accreditation of UK institutions offering courses
leading to degrees awarded by universities and colleges based overseas. In some cases,
the overseas universities and colleges were legitimate institutions accredited by the relevant
authorities in their home countries. In other cases the universities and colleges, while legally
constituted under the laws of the country in question, were little more than a legal device for
the award of what were in reality bogus degrees and were not themselves subject to any form
of recognised accreditation. In its early years, BAC took the view that all that it could do in
such cases, provided that the UK institution satisfied BAC’s published criteria, was to insist that
the name, location, and status of the degree awarding body should be clearly stated in all its
publicity material so that a prospective student could make an informed decision.
BAC had particular problems with institutions that offered courses leading to American degrees
where the USA awarding bodies were accredited by agencies other than the well-known USA
regional accrediting agencies. In one particular case, the BAC refused accreditation primarily
on the grounds that the institution did not use external examiners, even though BAC recognised
that the use of external examiners was not at the time standard practice within the USA higher
education system.
22

Policy issues
Since the start of the 2006 academic session, BAC has only accredited those institutions offering
overseas degrees when these degrees are recognised by the relevant authority in the country
of origin, and will refer to UK NARIC should there be any question over the equivalency of the
degree programme to a UK qualification.
In 2000, BAC received an approach from a group of colleges in Greece which all offered higher
education courses in partnership with a UK university (or other recognised higher education
institution), leading either to a British degree or to a Higher National Diploma. In response,
BAC agreed to amend its Memorandum of Association to allow the accreditation of institutions
based overseas. This extension of BAC’s remit was undertaken only after consultation with
UK bodies with an interest in the matter, principally QAA, Universities UK and CVU, who all
gave their backing to this move. The Greek Ministry of Education was also kept informed of
developments.
Initially, BAC agreed that the accreditation of overseas institutions should be limited to institutions
which, like the Greek colleges, had formal partnership arrangements with an awarding body in
the field of higher education in the UK. BAC subsequently agreed for this definition of eligibility to
be widened to include institutions which were within common ownership with an existing, BACaccredited
institution in the UK, and which offered accredited higher education programmes.
Following the inspection and accreditation of the colleges in Greece, BAC proceeded to inspect
and accredit a number of institutions in other countries around the world. Today around 25
overseas institutions are accredited by BAC including most of the Greek colleges involved in the
initial approach.
23

Policy issues
Tricky terminology
In BAC’s early years a case arose where an institution was offering programmes leading to what
it called ‘degrees of membership’ at Bachelor’s, Master’s and Doctoral levels. This caused BAC
particular difficulties as it was of the opinion that this terminology could give a false impression even
though it may be within the letter of the law. On the other hand, the institution’s programmes were
being effectively delivered at the levels claimed. Given that BAC accreditation primarily addressed
quality of delivery, BAC felt that it had no grounds for withholding accreditation. However, it insisted
that the institution make it clear to all that its so-called ‘degrees of membership’ were not academic
degrees.
Another problem that BAC faced virtually from the start was what to do about independent institutions
in the UK that openly claimed to offer degrees, in some cases calling themselves universities.
Fortunately, in 1988, after lobbying from a number of bodies including BAC, the UK Government
finally enacted legislation which made it illegal for an institution based in the UK to award degrees
unless it had been officially empowered to do so. For the first time the Government also published
a list of recognised UK degree-awarding bodies, and subsequently enacted further legislation
restricting the use of the word ‘university’ by companies.
24

Policy issues
Accreditation of new institutions
Over the years, BAC grappled with the question of how best to deal with newly established institutions
or those which had only been in operation for a short time. Traditionally BAC only considered
institutions for full accreditation once they had been in operation for more than two years and hence
there was firm evidence as to whether they had reached the appropriate standard. Institutions that
had been in operation for less than two years were granted ‘applicant status’, if it appeared that
they were likely to satisfy the requirements for full accreditation in due course. However, ‘applicant
status’ was often misunderstood by the wider world and was sometimes misrepresented and abused
by the institutions themselves, some even using it as a pretext for postponing the rigours of a full
inspection.
The matter soon came to a head once institutions found that they needed BAC accreditation before
their international students would be able to obtain visas. This risked a Catch-22 situation where
it would be virtually impossible for a new institution to get up and running, since for many their
financial viability rested upon their revenue from this group. BAC decided to address this problem by
introducing a three-stage accreditation process for all new institutions:
Stage 1: where an application form and its supporting documentation are scrutinised by BAC’s staff
reviewers.
Stage 2: where the new institution, which may not yet have begun classes, undergoes a short onsite
inspection focusing on its policies, management systems, premises and compliance with basic
statutory and regulatory requirements. If an institution successfully meets the threshold standards, it
will be awarded the status of ‘approved candidate for BAC accreditation’, for a limited period only (to
be not usually more than six months).
Stage 3: a further inspection once the first students have arrived and teaching has begun, focusing on
academic matters and the institution’s approach to quality management. If an institution successfully
meets the expected standards in the areas assessed at stage 3, and continues also to uphold those
standards assessed at stage 2, it will be awarded accreditation for the full four-year period, subject
to an interim inspection after 12 months.
Only new institutions can be awarded ‘approved candidate’ status; those who have been in operation
for longer than a year must instead submit to a combined Stage 2 and 3 inspection, which will cover
all the inspection criteria in each of the five areas assessed.
25

Policy issues
Other core policy decisions
In the course of its accreditation work during the period 1993 to 2005, BAC has had to grapple
with a number of tricky policy issues:
* Whether or not to accredit institutions which delivered courses through remote centres, in some
cases in centres overseas.
BAC decided only to accredit institutions if there was an accountable management based in the UK;
furthermore, some of the remote centres in the group would have to be visited by BAC inspectors
or, for example, by British Council officers acting on BAC’s behalf.
* Whether or not to accredit institutions where the courses were delivered in a language other
than English.
BAC decided that it would accredit such institutions provided that it could secure appropriate
inspectors who were fluent in the language or languages concerned.
* Whether or not to accredit institutions which offered courses in non-conventional disciplines,
courses which were based on distinctive and sometimes controversial approaches or courses which
were essentially teaching particular sets of religious or other beliefs.
BAC decided that it would accredit such institutions provided that the institutions made clear
exactly what they were offering. In the case of courses in alternative and complementary medicine
for example, BAC accreditation did not confer any BAC endorsement of the disciplines, approaches
or beliefs in question.
26

28
What is the British Accreditation Council

The drive for official recognition
Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and
Skills (Ofsted)
From its early days, BAC has worked closely with Ofsted. A number of the first tutorial colleges
accredited by BAC were also subject to inspection by Ofsted because they had five or more pupils
of compulsory school age. Such colleges were treated under the law as independent schools and
the whole range of their provision was therefore inspected by Ofsted, including their provision for
students aged 16 and over.
At an early stage BAC began holding regular meetings with Her Majesty’s Inspectorate to discuss
the inspection of independent tutorial colleges. These meetings were usually attended by the
Education Department’s Deputy Registrar of Independent Schools, with the aim being to exchange
information, compare notes on findings and coordinate inspection schedules where possible. The
idea of arranging some joint inspections was also raised, but this remained an unfulfilled aspiration.
One of the key differences between Ofsted and BAC procedures lay in the publication of Ofsted
reports. While BAC does publish certain basic data about accredited institutions, its inspection reports
were, and currently still are, confidential to BAC and the institution, although the institution can itself
publish the report in full if it so wishes. In planning and arranging its inspections, BAC found it very
useful to take the report of the last Ofsted inspection into account. Quite often, however, the BAC
inspection had to be carried out before the report of the last Ofsted inspection became available. In
these cases it was reassuring to find that the conclusions reached by Ofsted and BAC inspectors
were, in the main, very similar.
In 2002, the Government introduced new Regulatory Standards for Independent Schools, coming
into force on 1 September 2003. BAC-accredited tutorial colleges with five or more pupils of
compulsory school age were assessed against these standards, either by Ofsted or by another
approved inspecting body, such as the Schools Inspection Service established by the Independent
Schools Council. The regulatory standards included a number of matters which were not covered
by BAC’s own criteria and which, in BAC’s view, were not appropriate for tutorial colleges primarily
teaching A level courses and catering predominantly for overseas students.
29

The drive for official recognition
The other significant change was that from 2003 onwards colleges would have to pay to be inspected
by Ofsted or another approved inspecting body. These changes together presented BAC with a
dilemma: some of the BAC-accredited tutorial colleges felt they could not afford to be inspected both
by Ofsted (or another approved inspecting body) and by BAC. BAC therefore faced three options:
1. Do nothing and face the possibility of a withdrawal of tutorial colleges en masse from BAC
accreditation
2. Seek to become an approved body to assess schools against the regulatory standards
(which would necessitate substantial additions and changes to BAC criteria and procedures),
or
3. Award accreditation on the basis of the report of the inspection by Ofsted (or another approved
inspecting body) plus a small supplementary inspection covering matters of interest to BAC
but not covered in the Regulatory Standards.
BAC opted for number three, and today operates a top-up scheme for institutions which are already
accredited by a recognised body (such as Ofsted) whereby a reduced inspection can take place to
assess only the BAC inspection criteria not already covered.
30

The drive for official recognition
The Department for Education and
Science (DES)
During its first nine years, BAC had various meetings and exchanged correspondence with
Department for Education and Science (DES) officials and ministers in an attempt to obtain
official recognition for its work. It argued that independent institutions of further and higher
education should be required at the very least to be registered with the DES and, preferably,
also be inspected by a Government-approved accrediting body.
BAC’s President at the time (Lady Plowden) even asked a question in the House of Lords, in
the hope of eliciting positive action. These efforts drew some generally supportive words from
ministers in debates in the House of Commons and House of Lords, but otherwise met with
little success. The apparent disinterest of the DES persisted, in spite of parallel pressure from
the Home Office, which was becoming increasingly concerned about the growing number of
independent educational institutions which seemed to be nothing more than student visa mills.
In 1989, the Secretary of State for Education and Science (the Rt. Hon. Kenneth Baker M.P.)
was persuaded to provide the foreword to a pamphlet produced jointly by BAC, the British
Council’s English Language Schools Recognition Scheme and the Council for the Accreditation
of Correspondence Colleges. In his foreword he welcomed the work of the three bodies and
affirmed that their accreditation schemes represented “the best – indeed the only public –
guarantee of standards” in the independent sector of further and higher education. This pamphlet
was republished in 1990 with a complete list of the institutions accredited by the three bodies
and with a similar foreword signed by the then Secretary of State for Education, the Rt. Hon.
John MacGregor M.P.
The British Council lent key support to BAC during its first nine years when it decided not to
recognise unaccredited independent institutions in its promotional activities. This decision put
considerable pressure on institutions to apply for BAC accreditation in order to gain a competitive
advantage in the recruitment of overseas students. BAC’s first Chief Executive, David Parry,
attended a number of British Council organised recruitment fairs in the Asia in order to increase
awareness of BAC and its work in assuring the quality of colleges in the independent sector. He
also sought to persuade UK universities to form partnerships with independent institutions in the
UK only if they were first accredited by BAC. However, these efforts did not result in any formal
agreement at this stage.
31

The drive for official recognition
In 1992, despite its reluctance to regulate
the post-16 independent sector, the
Department for Education (previously DES,
and soon to be DfEE and then DfES) had
been persuaded to commission a survey of
the extent and nature of independent further
and higher education in the UK. A summary
of the findings was issued as a Department
for Education Statistical Bulletin in December
1993. The findings indicated that “there were
a total of some 3955 providers of further and
higher education in the independent sector,
of which some 3000 were college-type
institutions”. The full results of the survey
were never published and no apparent
action was ever taken by the Department for
Education despite the revelation of the scale
of this unregulated sector and in the face of
representations made by BAC to Ministers
at a meeting shortly after the Bulletin was
issued.
In 1999 the Department for Education and Employment (DfEE), as it had become by then,
published a White Paper proposing a new framework for post-16 learning. BAC took this
opportunity to make a submission stressing once again the desirability of requiring independent
institutions to be registered with the DfEE and to undergo regular inspection by a recognised
accrediting body. BAC highlighted its own role in the maintenance and enhancement of standards
in the independent further and higher education sector and indicated its willingness to play its
part in providing quality assurance for this sector within the proposed new arrangements.
BAC sent copies of its submission to members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords
known to have a special interest in educational matters. As a result, BAC’s then Chief Executive,
Robin Laidlaw, was invited to meet the Chairman of the Education Select Committee (Barry
Sheerman M.P.) and to brief him about BAC and its work. Moreover the opposition spokesman on
higher education (Tim Boswell M.P.) put down a question in the House of Commons asking about
32

The drive for official recognition
the size and composition of the independent
further and higher education sector and
what steps were being taken to assure the
quality thereof. In its answer to Tim Boswell’s
parliamentary question, the Government
simply stated that there was no centrally held
information about the size and composition of
the sector (this was not entirely true given the
survey which the Department for Education
had itself commissioned in 1992). The
Government also stated that independent
providers would be subject to inspection and
quality assurance if they received any public
funding from the proposed Learning and
Skills Council. Subsequently, Tim Boswell
proposed that the Bill implementing the
White Paper be amended to include a clause
providing for the independent inspection and
accreditation of privately funded provision
for post-16 education and training.
In the event, this amendment was not
accepted, primarily on the grounds that the
Bill gave the new Adult Learning Inspectorate (ALI) the power to inspect any independent further
and higher education institutions which requested and were willing pay for the inspection. As far
as is known, no independent further or higher education institution ever made such a request and,
from its inception until its merger with Ofsted, ALI was in any case fully occupied in inspecting
publicly funded provision of various kinds.
In the spring of 2003 BAC’s President (Baroness Brigstocke) put down a question in the House
of Lords asking how many privately funded institutions of further and higher education there
were in the United Kingdom; how many students were enrolled in these institutions (and how
many of these students were from overseas); and what arrangements there were for ensuring
that these institutions were bona fide educational establishments and were of good quality. In its
reply the Government said that information about privately funded further and higher education
institutions was not collected by the Department for Education and Skills (DfES, previously the
33

The drive for official recognition
DfEE) unless the institution was in receipt of some public funding, in which case it had to meet
the requirements of the relevant funding body. The Government added that, where privately
funded colleges offered courses leading to formal qualifications, they had of course to meet the
standards and other requirements of the bodies issuing those qualifications.
However, in the autumn of 2003, following press stories about ‘visa factories’ and ‘bogus
colleges’ the DfES decided at least to establish a voluntary register of education and training
providers. BAC participated in the discussions about the implementation of the proposal and it
was agreed that BAC-accredited institutions would be included on the register automatically.
However, unaccredited institutions would also be allowed on the register, purely on the basis of
a paper-based application that did not involve any serious form of quality check. Furthermore,
there was to be no legal requirement for institutions to be registered before they could begin,
or continue, operations.
The implications for BAC were uncertain. There was the possibility that institutions might
decide not to apply for BAC accreditation or renew their existing BAC accreditation if they
could be included on the DfES Register without having to undergo inspection or meet even the
most limited quality criteria. However, by the end of 2005 there was no sign of a decrease in
applications for accreditation.
The DfES split into the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS) and the Department
for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) in 2007, before DIUS, the FE and HE sides of the operation
were subsumed into the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) in 2009.
34

The drive for official recognition
The Home Office
During the period 1993-2005 BAC’s relations with the Home Office (Immigration and Nationality
Directorate) were generally closer and more productive than relations with the DfES and its
predecessors. In 2005 the Home Office published a consultative document ‘Selective Admission:
Making Migration Work for Britain’. As far as international students were concerned, the document
proposed that visa applications should be accompanied by a certificate of sponsorship from
an educational institution at which the student had been offered – and accepted – a place.
Furthermore, only educational institutions on a list of approved sponsors should be entitled to
issue such certificates. In order to be included on the list of approved sponsors, institutions would
need to demonstrate that they were bona fide learning providers accredited by a recognised
body.
BAC strongly supported this approach, arguing that this would help to ensure not only that poor
provision would be eradicated but that the poaching of visa students which was commonplace
(especially in London) and which adversely affected genuine institutions would be prevented.
In the course of 2005 BAC, along with other interested bodies, had discussions with the Home
Office about the finalisation of these proposals and the role of the existing accrediting bodies in
their implementation.
The summer of 2007 saw BAC approved by the Home Office as an accrediting body for the new
system under development, and set off a period of sustained and unprecedented growth in the
volume of applications for accreditation, as previously unaccredited independent institutions
learned of the new requirements. Under what was to be known as Tier 4 of the wider Points Based
System for Managed Migration, all institutions would need to secure a licence in order to act as
a sponsor for international students, and independent institutions would first need accreditation
by an approved body. Sponsorship would of course entail a range of new responsibilities for
institutions towards their students while in the UK
The public Register of Sponsors was launched and accepted its first applications at the end of
July 2008. All independent institutions then had until March 2009 to secure both accreditation
and their Tier 4 licence, in order to ensure that international students would continue to be
able to apply for their courses. Unfortunately, it became apparent that not every element of the
new system could be implemented according to its design in time for the March 2009 launch.
Features which BAC and other stakeholders considered vital to the ultimate effectiveness of the
35

The drive for official recognition
PBS experienced significant delays, including the replacement of the ‘visa offer letter’, such an
inviting target to a skilled and determined forger, with an electronic ‘Confirmation of Acceptance
for Studies’ (CAS). The CAS and its accompanying IT framework, the Sponsorship Management
System (SMS), would be crucial tools both in an institution’s efforts to effectively carry out
its sponsorship duties and in UKBA’s drive to more closely manage and control the flow of
immigration through the Tier 4 student route.
It would be fair to say that the Points Based System garnered some quite difficult coverage in the
press during its first year of operation. Much of this was undeserved, especially given its tendency
to focus on issues and problems which existed to a greater degree prior to the implementation
of PBS and for which PBS represented a step in the right direction. It is true however that any
attempted defence of the new system was not aided by the somewhat piecemeal approach to the
deployment of key features and safeguards, which may have left Tier 4 in particular vulnerable to
certain abuses in its transitional phase.
In late 2009, the Prime Minister commissioned a review of Tier 4 of the PBS, doubtless in response
to perceived weaknesses as highlighted by press reports. BAC’s view was that this was premature,
given the recent implementation of most aspects of the scheme and the fact that one key element
- the electronic Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies – would not go live until February 2010.
Nonetheless, BAC made a full submission to the review setting out its cautious support of certain
proposed changes and its firm opposition to others.
36

The drive for official recognition
The Home Secretary announced the outcome of the review in February 2010, outlining major
changes which were to be made. Those which BAC expects to cause the most difficulties for the
education sector if implemented include the raising of the level of English Language proficiency
which students must already have before applying to study in the UK, the introduction of a new
scheme for designating certain institutions as Highly Trusted Sponsors, and the restriction of courses
with a work-based placement to those institutions offering their own degree-level programmes.
At the time of writing, dialogue between the Home Office and representatives from all sections of
the education sector is ongoing, so the exact shape of the changes mentioned above is yet to be
confirmed. In general, the introduction of the Points Based System has seen ever closer working
between BAC and the successors to the Home Office’s Immigration and Nationality Directorate -
first the Borders and Immigration Agency (from April 2007) and later the UK Border Agency (since
April 2008). Both through the Joint Education Taskforce (JET) and the Accreditation Standards
and Consistency Group (ASCG), BAC has made its voice known on the way in which the PBS has
been rolled out. For the most part, BAC’s advice has been listened to carefully. In some cases,
other voices have been louder and decisions have been taken which BAC had advised against.
Moving forward, it is BAC’s hope that once the current system had bedded in, regular, evidencebased
review of its strengths and weaknesses will lead to further, incremental improvements to
the system, based on expert advice from both the public and private sectors of post-compulsory
education. Such improvements can continue to bolster the public’s confidence in the security of
the country’s borders while protecting the UK’s ability to compete internationally for the valuable
and growing global student market. This ability not only pays important economic dividends but
also maintains a long and generally honourable tradition of welcoming students from overseas to
British educational institutions and seeing them return to their own countries with a real attachment
to British culture and an understanding of academic standards and values.
37

38
What is the British Accreditation Council

Fostering links within the
independent education sector
The Open and Distance Learning Quality Council (ODLQC)
In 1994 a study was made to determine the possibility of merging BAC and ODLQC (formerly
the Council for the Accreditation of Correspondence Colleges) into a single accrediting body
covering both conventional and distance learning forms of provision. BAC and ODLQC were
already in adjacent offices in 27 Marylebone Road and had some council members in common.
Moreover, some BAC institutions were beginning to develop distance learning courses alongside
their conventional programmes and BAC had found itself receiving accreditation applications
from distance learning providers.
There were inevitably significant differences between the two councils in terms of criteria,
inspection procedures and schedules, and overall philosophy and approach. However, the main
stumbling block proved to be the constitutional differences. The Council of ODLQC included
representatives of the colleges accredited by ODLQC whereas the BAC constitution specifically
required the members of its Council not to have any “direct involvement or financial interest in
the independent sector of education”. BAC took the view that this requirement was extremely
important in ensuring and demonstrating that BAC was genuinely independent of the institutions
that it accredited.
Although no merger between BAC and ODLQC went ahead, a number of steps were taken with
a view to ensuring closer collaboration between the two bodies. For a while ODLQC’s Chief
Executive sat on BAC’s Accreditation Committee and BAC’s Chief Executive sat on ODLQC’s
equivalent body. Furthermore, ODLQC’s Chief Inspector was also appointed as BAC’s Chief
Inspector. It was agreed that there was scope for achieving savings by sharing accommodation,
office services and staff. In 1996, BAC moved into shared offices with ODLQC at 27 Marylebone
Road and, while each body still had its own Chief Executive, the two bodies were serviced by a
joint secretariat. In 1999 the Methodist Church indicated that it now needed all the office space
at 27 Marylebone Road for its own purposes and arranged for BAC and ODLQC to be relocated
together at Westminster Central Hall (the Methodist Headquarters) on a temporary basis, while
the search was made for other more permanent offices.
In the meantime, however, it was becoming clear that sharing accommodation, office services
and staff was unlikely to be workable in the longer term. In particular, in addition to the pressures
resulting from differing procedures and the overall volume of work, the support staff were having to
wrestle continuously with the conflicting priorities arising from the requirement to simultaneously
service two separate bodies.
39

Fostering links within the independent education sector
One joint accreditation exercise was organised as an experiment, and there were discussions
about possible further joint accreditations, but by 2005 none had actually been arranged.
In the summer of 2001, ODLQC was offered office space at the Institute of Chartered Secretaries
and Administrators (the Chief Executive of ICSA being ODLQC’s Chairman at the time) and
after due debate ODLQC decided to part company with BAC and go its own way. BAC moved
temporarily to smaller offices within Westminster Central Hall and then, when the entire building
was effectively requisitioned by the Government for the final stage of the ‘Bloody Sunday’ public
enquiry, moved to a small suite of basement offices at 42 Manchester Street.
The final move to BAC’s current premises at 44 Bedford Row took place in August 2005. While
the operations of ODLQC and BAC have remained very much separate since this time, close
relations continue to be enjoyed: ODLQC now nominate a member (currently the Chief Executive
Dr David Morley) to BAC’s Council, and in September 2009 followed BAC in moving their offices
to 44 Bedford Row.
Accreditation UK
Throughout the period 1993-2009, BAC has enjoyed good working relations with the British
Council unit responsible for the inspection and accreditation of English Language Schools. BAC
agreed that it would not consider institutions that were solely or predominantly providers of
courses of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) for accreditation, even though its constitution
would have allowed it to do so.
However, tensions continued over the inspection and accreditation of institutions which offered
English language courses alongside or as an adjunct to courses in other subjects. Similarly,
there were problems in cases where existing English Language Schools sought to diversify into
other subject areas. After discussion with the British Council, BAC further agreed that it would
not accredit any EFL provider which, while legally a division of a BAC-accredited institution, was
essentially a separate organisation and was being promoted separately and under a different
name. It was also agreed that where a college’s EFL provision had been accredited by the British
Council, a top-up scheme could operate where BAC inspection would be largely restricted to
matters relevant to non-EFL programmes.
Not surprisingly, some institutions complained from time to time at having to undergo, and pay for,
inspections by both the British Council and BAC. A number of joint inspections were organised
40

Fostering links within the independent education sector
on an experimental basis and proved to be generally successful. However, problems over the
scheduling of inspections and the coordination of the detailed inspection arrangements meant
that joint inspections remained the exception rather than the rule.
Over the years there have been several changes in the structure of the quality assurance
scheme for the EFL sector. In 1983 the British Council was contracted to provide an accreditation
scheme for the independent EFL sector, the English Language Schools Recognition Scheme
(ELSRS). Subsequently the British Council and the British Association of State Colleges in
English Language Teaching (BASCELT) set up a quality assurance scheme on similar lines but
for the state sector only. In the mid-1990s this and the ELSRS were unified into the English in
Britain Accreditation Scheme, with the running of the Scheme contracted to the British Council
on a five-yearly basis. In the early days of this arrangement there were still some criteria in the
Scheme which applied to the state sector only and some which applied to the private sector only.
Following the signing of a 50/50 partnership agreement between the British Council and English
UK (the national association of accredited ELT centres) in 2006, the Scheme was wholly unified
and was rebranded as Accreditation UK.
Throughout this time the current accreditation scheme for the EFL sector has been represented
on BAC’s Accreditation Committee and BAC has been represented by its Chief Executive or
Accreditation Manager on the equivalent committee (today this is Accreditation UK’s Accreditation
Scheme Advisory Committee). The British Council is also represented on BAC’s governing
Council and there are strong links between the equivalent membership associations, Study UK
and English UK.
41

Fostering links within the independent education sector
Study UK
Given the growing numbers of BAC-accredited institutions in recent years and the potential
conflict of interest which would be involved if, as an inspection body, BAC also took on the role of
representative body or trade association, it was felt that there was a need for a separate body to
represent the interests and concerns of independent colleges. Accordingly, Study UK was formed
in July 2007 to be the membership association for BAC-accredited colleges. It was known at first
as the BAC Accredited Colleges Association and changed its name on incorporation. With over
50 members, Study UK is now the largest association of its kind in the UK’s independent further
and higher education sector.
Study UK’s main goal is to represent the interests of the independent college sector and
international students to governments, governmental agencies and other organisations in the
UK and overseas. In a period of substantial change for the independent sector, particularly with
regard to the admission of international students, Study UK has become an important source of
information and advice for colleges.
42

Fostering links within the independent education sector
43

44
Fostering links within the independent education sector

Fostering links within the independent education sector
BAC overseas
Before 2006, BAC’s engagement overseas was limited to the inspection and accreditation of a small
number of institutions. The period since 2006 has seen BAC’s influence extend far beyond the UK. It joined
the International Network of Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE) and became an
Associate of the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA). BAC also began
to confer with accreditation agencies from other states. Its expertise in applying rigid criteria to assess the
quality of private colleges, and its determination to rebuff colleges unwilling or unable to meet those criteria, no
matter how persuasive, persistent or influential their principals or owners might be, seemed to offer a lifeline to
small countries who suddenly found themselves awash in private colleges, many of them styling themselves
as universities.
The most recent example of this is was a substantial project with the Government of the newly independent
Republic of Kosovo, which invited BAC to carry out an inspection of the country’s private institution sector.
During the summer of 2008, BAC inspected the premises, interviewed key staff, and analysed a wealth of
material submitted by private colleges in Kosovo. The BAC Kosovo Accreditation Project 2008 report was
published with its findings, and hard-hitting recommendations were made on the licensing of these institutions.
Further work during 2009, supported by the British Council and World Bank, has resulted in a second major
report by BAC’s Head of Inspection Services, Professor Steve Bristow, on Licensing and Accreditation under
the Law on Higher Education in Kosovo 2002-2009.
BAC’s Chief Executive from 2006 to 2008, Dr Stephen Vickers, was instrumental in implementing this
international strategy and set about making BAC known to High Commissions and Embassies around the
world. He also visited several accreditation agencies in countries such as Singapore and Mauritius, although
never at BAC’s expense! Meanwhile BAC’s President, Lord Watson of Richmond, hosted Professor Adnan M.
Wazan, the then Vice-Chancellor of Umm Al-Qura University in Saudi Arabia. Lord Watson also travelled to
Saudi Arabia on BAC’s behalf to deliver a lecture at Umm Al-Qura’s campus in Mecca, an event unprecedented
in the history of the university.
In recent years, BAC has welcomed delegations from Governmental and Accreditation Agencies in Bahrain
(pictured to the left with BAC’s Chief Executive Dr Gina Hobson), Barbados, Kosovo, Qatar and Singapore to
its Holborn offices and has arranged inspection observation and other professional development activities for
these valued overseas guests.
BAC’s international activities look set to increase in the years to come as more and more countries seek our
advice in helping to develop their own approaches to post-compulsory accreditation and licensing systems.
45

46
Principal officers and administrative staff at BAC

Principal officers and administrative staff at BAC
Principal Off icers and
administrative staff at BAC
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
President
Chairman
Lady Plowden Sir Wilfred Cockroft Baroness Brigstocke Lord Watson
Deputy Chairman
John Dancy Eric Meats Tim Cox
Chief Executive
Gareth Howell
John Henry
Bill Gibbs
AC Chairman
David Parry
Robin Laidlaw
Caroline
Bucklow
Robin
Laidlaw
Stephen
Vickers
Gina
Hobson
John Henry
Honorary Treasurer
Head of Inspection Services
Eric Glover
Bill Gibbs
Diane Billam
Chief Inspector
Robin Laidlaw
Steve Bristow
Fred
Parrot
Peter
Willmore
Peter
Marlow
Ann
Ridler
Robin
Laidlaw
Ron Tuck
Gerald
Vinten
Sheila
Needham
1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
In May 1993, BAC’s inaugural Chief Executive, David Parry, resigned after almost nine years of
stalwart service in order to take up a new post. Tribute should be paid to him for all he achieved
in getting BAC up and running, in establishing its systems and procedures and in slowly but
surely increasing the number of institutions in accreditation in the face of general government
indifference. Reference should also be made to the good work done by Mary Roseweir, who
for most of the first nine years was BAC’s only other full-time employee and ensured that the
operation was efficient on a day to day basis. Shortly after David Parry resigned, the Chairman
(John Dancy) announced that he too felt that the time had come for him to resign.
47

The first year of the BAC was memorable, amongst other things, for the legal threat
to restrain publication of the first list of accredited colleges by an organisation
disgruntled at the BAC’s decision to refuse it accreditation.
The BAC itself led a somewhat nomadic existence in its early years moving
from one Middlesex Polytechnic campus to another, finally coming to temporary
rest in accommodation rented from the Methodist Church opposite Madame
Tussaud’s.
Each summer the education press, light on genuine education news stories,
took to private college ‘bashing’. This was followed by the autumn angst as we
waited for accredited colleges to pay their annual subscriptions.
The first conference of BAC inspectors was held five years after its establishment
allowing BAC staff to see whether the imagined images of those to whom they
had spoken regularly by telephone over the years matched reality.
The international reputation of the BAC was enhanced by the presence of a
BAC representative at successive British Council education fairs in Hong Kong
and Kuala Lumpur and by attendance at similar fairs in Taiwan. This enabled
the recruitment practices of publicly and privately funded higher education
institutions to be compared at close quarters - sometimes with surprising
results!
-David Parry, former Chief Executive
48

Principal officers and administrative staff at BAC
Throughout the period 1993 to 2005, BAC continued to operate with only a very small number
of staff. Reference has already been made to the massive workload taken on by Robin Laidlaw,
BAC’s Chief Executive for most of 1993-2004. Special tributes are also due to Dr Ann Ridler
who, during her period as Chief Inspector, undertook a particularly large number of visits and
inspections and shared the brunt of this work with the Chief Executive, and to her successor,
Ron Tuck, who played a very significant part in the extension of BAC accreditation to overseas
institutions. Mention should also be made of the contribution of Sarah Richmond, the Head of
Administration, who, for over ten years, almost single-handedly looked after finances, dealt with
the day-to-day administration of BAC and arranged most of the visits and inspections. For the
majority of this time BAC’s Chairman was Eric Meats, who was elected to the role after a brief
spell as Acting Chief Executive.
By 2005 it had become clear that BAC could no longer continue to run efficiently with just four staff.
The new Chief Executive, Dr Caroline Bucklow, proposed that BAC should take the bold step of
committing itself both to hiring more staff and renting larger office space of better quality, a move
which won the approval of the Executive Committee. The assumption behind this decision was
that, given BAC’s ever growing inspection workload, the additional costs would in due course be
covered by the additional income from accreditation fees. In August 2005, BAC moved from 42
Manchester Street to its present offices at 44 Bedford Row.
In March 2006 Dr Stephen Vickers took over as Chief Executive at a time when BAC was about
to enter an even busier phase. With the announcement of the Government’s plan to implement
a Points-Based System (PBS) for immigration in 2007, and the Home Office approval of BAC as
an accrediting body under the new system, applications for accreditation began to climb steadily
but surely. In response to this growth in applications, the administrative staff at BAC’s Head
Office grew significantly; today there are around 20 staff members divided between the three
departments of Accreditation, Finance and Communications led by their respective department
managers Francine Koubel, David O’Rourke and Alex Proudfoot.
Dr Vickers brought with him a background in international studies and under his leadership BAC
began to forge links with accreditation and awarding bodies around the world. Not long after
he joined BAC we also welcomed Professor Gerald Vinten as Chief Inspector, Professor Steve
49

Principal officers and administrative staff at BAC
Bristow as Head of Inspection Services and Lord Watson of Richmond as BAC’s new President.
This fresh perspective and wealth of experience enabled BAC to successfully navigate the
turbulent political waters around the implementation of the PBS, and emerge stronger both
financially and in terms of reputation. Sadly, Professor Vinten died of a brain tumour in June
2008 and was replaced in January 2009 by Ms Sheila Needham who in her first year as Chief
Inspector has firmly emphasised the importance of professional development and consistency of
approach amongst BAC’s inspectorate. Under her leadership, BAC has for the first time invited
institutions to evaluate and report on their experience of inspection and has helped to drive the
systems improvement work which has contributed to BAC’s transformation from a voluntary
accrediting body into a quasi-regulatory body.
Following Dr Vickers’ departure in February 2009 BAC’s Accreditation Manager of several years,
Dr Gina Hobson, stepped up to the position of Acting Chief Executive and, after an open and
competitive process, was appointed Chief Executive in May 2009. Together with her senior
colleagues, Dr Hobson has been determined to ensure a sound future for BAC as the national
accrediting body for independent further and higher education.
50

A glance at the past and a look to
the future.
A final word from our Chief Inspector
and Head of Inspection Services
“The BAC inspectorate has had to face two major
challenges over the past two years. Firstly, the
implementation of the UK Border Agency’s Points
Based System and BAC’s new status as an ‘approved
accrediting body’ have required BAC to evolve further from its origins as an
organisation purely focused on educational standards to what on a good day
is described as a ‘quasi-regulatory body’ and on a bad day as ‘the policing arm
of UKBA’!
Secondly, the introduction of the PBS has meant that institutions of all shapes
and sizes are now obliged to seek accreditation by one of the approved
accrediting bodies if they still wish to recruit overseas students, and this has
resulted in applications from all manner of educational establishments hitherto
hidden from view. Imagine the challenge faced by inspectors, well versed in
the provision of courses leading to awards in law, accountancy, business
management and information technology, suddenly being required to inspect
institutions specialising in such subjects as equine dentistry, eurythmy and
embroidery. (We have yet to receive an application from embalmers or elephant
trainers, but it’s surely only a matter of time!)
I’m glad to report that the inspectorate has risen to the challenge and continues
to do so. Inspection monitoring statistics, obtained from feedback submitted
by institutions, show an extremely high level of satisfaction in the work of the
inspectorate. Happily, the feedback also shows that, despite having to spend a
substantial amount of time on compliance issues, inspectors are still managing
to provide a high-quality service designed, as originally intended, to raise
standards in the independent sector.”
-Sheila Needham, Chief Inspector
51

“The last two years have been a challenging but
fascinating time quite unlike any in BAC’s history.
Its present fortunes are, to a considerable extent
but by no means exclusively, bound up with the
arrangements which Government and Parliament
make for students who need visas. Since 2001, BAC
has undoubtedly benefited from the trust placed by
successive immigration control agencies in its work
in identifying bona fide institutions in the private
sector.
As Sheila Needham so rightly notes in her report, the sheer diversity of the
institutions which have approached BAC for the first time as a result of new
immigration rules is both pleasing and surprising, even to those of us who
have worked in the sector for many years. It certainly has challenged at times
BAC’s tireless team of staff, inspectors and committee volunteers, but it also
has reaffirmed the vibrancy and richness of a sector whose particular qualities
so often slip beneath the public radar. Moreover, the number and scope of
independent institutions now accredited by BAC have both proved the flexibility
built into our system of accreditation and demonstrated that, now more than
ever, there is a vital role to play for a trusted and transparent national body
working to raise and safeguard standards in the independent sector.
And this goes to the heart of the issue. If BAC hadn’t been invented in 1984,
it would need to be now. Its specialist work within a sector of education that
has to operate commercially yet deliver value for money and high standards
for its students, many of whom have travelled many thousands of miles to take
up their educational opportunities, lays duties upon it which are different from
those which apply to publicly funded or employer-supported providers.
In celebrating a quarter of a century of service to international students,
independent institutions and the wider public interest, and in doing so without
a penny of support from the public purse, BAC has shown that it can act
consistently as guardian of standards and quality development agency for the
independent sector, as well as trusted adviser to Governments in the UK and
overseas.
52

Its role may now be more “quasi-regulatory” and compliance focused than in
earlier years but BAC remains “the national accrediting authority for independent
further and higher education”, dedicated to “improv[ing] and enhanc[ing] the
standards of independent further and higher educational institutions by the
establishment of a system of accreditation”, as its Memorandum of Association
so clearly stated when approved by Companies House on 29th June 1984.”
-Professor Steve Bristow, Head of Inspection Services
53

Appendix 1:
Figures showing development of BAC over the period
1984 – 2009...........................................................................pg 55
Appendix 2:
Principal Officers during the period 1984-2010......................pg 56
Appendix 3:
BAC’s addresses during the period 1984-2010.........................pg 58

Appendix 1
Figures showing development of BAC over the period 1984 – 2009
Year Ending Accredited Colleges Turnover Surplus/Deficit Reserves
UK Overseas
£
£
£
1985 35 32,909 5,799 5,799
1986 41 27,656 - 5,476 323
1987 52 36,439 12,357 12,680
1988 61 68,286 5,470 18,150
1989 69 68,419 2,836 20,986
1990 69 79,239 8,088 29,588
1991 75 91,335 - 7,653 20,638
1992 79 108,571 1,975 22,613
1993 82 115,769 14,834 37,447
1994 92 113,043 3,564 41,011
1995 95 110,390 -7,640 33.371
1996 96 107,822 -10,371 23,000
1997 105 137,849 4,490 27,490
1998 102 150,157 12,208 39,698
1999 105 156,600 12,942 52,640
2000 100 150,211 2,834 55,474
2001 105 11 199,455 12,366 67,840
2002 110 13 191,918 11,889 79,729
2003 125 15 223,726 8,533 88,262
2004 166 16 286,366 9,990 98,252
2005 200 20 423,349 -13,734 84,518
2006 209 27 478,295 13,527 98,045
2007 242 27 601,414 20,528 118,573
2008 303 27 800,149 25,229 143,802
2009 408 29 TBC TBC TBC
55

Appendix 2
Principal Officers during the period 1984-2010
Presidents
December 1986 – December 1990
January 1991 – September 1999
November 2000 – April 2004
June 2007 – present
Lady Plowden
Sir Wilfred Cockcroft
Baroness Brigstocke
Lord Watson
Chairmen
July 1984 – May 1993
December 1993 – May 2002
May 2002 – present
John Dancy
Eric Meats
Tim Cox
Deputy Chairmen
May 1985 – May 1990
June 1990 – June 1993
December 1993 – present
Gareth Howell
John Henry
Bill Gibbs
Chairmen of Accreditation Committee
September 1984 – June 1993
September 1993 – April 2004
April 2004 – present
John Henry
Bill Gibbs
Diane Billam
Honorary Treasurer
December 1986 – present
Eric Glover
56

Chief Executives
September 1984 – September 1986
September 1986 – March 1987
April 1987 – June 1993
June 1993 – August 1993
September 1993 – August 1998
September 1998 – April 1999
May 1999 – August 2004
September 2004 – August 2005
September 2005 – March 2006
March 2006 – February 2009
March 2009 – April 2009
May 2009 – present
David Parry
Bill Bonney Rust (Acting)
David Parry
Eric Meats (Acting)
Robin Laidlaw
Graham Middleton (Acting)
Robin Laidlaw
Caroline Bucklow
Robin Laidlaw (Acting)
Stephen Vickers
Gina Hobson (Acting)
Gina Hobson
Head of Inspection Services
January 2002 – August 2007
September 2007 – present
Robin Laidlaw
Steve Bristow
Chief Inspector
September 1984 – December 1987
January 1988 – May 1991
June 1991 – August 1995
September 1995 – August 1999
September 1999 – December 2001
September 2002 – June 2006
January 2007 – June 2008
January 2009 – present
Fred Parrott
Peter Willmore
Peter Marlow
Ann Ridler
Robin Laidlaw
Ron Tuck
Gerald Vinten
Sheila Needham
57

Appendix 3
BAC’s addresses during the period 1984-2010
September 1984 - September 1987
September 1987 - September 1989
September 1989 - May 1993
May 1993 - March 1996
May 1999 - August 2000
August 2000 - June 2002
August 2005 - 2010
Middlesex Polytechnic Building
114 Chase Side
Southgate
London N14 5PN
Middlesex Polytechnic Building
Bounds Green Road
London N11 2NQ
Middlesex Polytechnic Building
All Saints
White Hart Lane
London N17 8HR
Methodist Building
27 Marylebone Road
London NW1 5JS
(rooms shared with ODLQC)
Methodist Central Hall
Storey’s Gate
Westminster
London SW1H 9NH
(rooms shared with ODLQC)
Methodist Central Hall
Storey’s Gate
Westminster
London SW1H 9NH
Open University Building
44 Bedford Row
London WC1R 4LL

The British Accreditation Council for Independent Further and Higher Education is registered as a charity
(Charities Registration No. 326652) and is a private company limited by guarantee (Registered in England No. 1828990)
This work is copyright © 2010 by the British Accreditation Council for Independent Further and Higher Education. Permission granted to reproduce the
entirety of this work or extracts from it for personal and educational use only. Extracts from this work must be acknowledged. All other rights reserved.
This work is registered with the UK Copyright Service.
‘Avenue of silver birch trees’ photograph by Stuart Bell
Design by Erin Sanna