Our aim is to provide affordable and useful learning and development opportunities for practitioners working in OH. As an organisation we wish to offer a wide range of options; however, we have reviewed the accreditation options available which, in the occupational health setting, are limited before becoming prohibitively expensive. The accreditation on offer differs greatly in the robustness of the accreditation process, the associated charges and time requirements of the provider.
At this point we have chosen not to gain formal accreditation for learning and development opportunities as the more robust accrediting bodies are appropriately more expensive, with high fees to be paid each year for reaccreditation or if any changes are made to the content. This makes a continual improvement approach challenging. There are then further fees which can only be passed on to the delegate in relation to certificates with the accrediting body’s logo. Some accrediting bodies offer a desktop review of course material content but there is no observation of the trainers. Even where trainers are observed, it may be that only one trainer out of the team is observed. Some accrediting bodies may have difficulty finding an appropriately competent person for the course content.
Learning does not need to be ‘accredited’ to meet legislative, Health and Safety Executive guidance, NMC revalidation or SEQOHS standards. HSE guidance on legislation, the NMC and SEQOHS standards generally require staff ‘that are competent to do their job role’. The level of competency and potential learning required should be assessed against the nature of the risks in the working environment in which they are giving advice or completing health surveillance, for example.
Our internal quality assurance processes:
- our offerings are written by experienced and knowledgeable practitioners with learning and development backgrounds to promote learning and recall as well as confidence in delegates to apply this to their practice
- where applicable, any technical content is peer reviewed by subject matter experts who are occupationally competent; their role is to check for the accuracy of any technical content
- new courses will initially be delivered by the trainer with the course author so the content can be developed and improved as required
- trainer and participant feedback from each course is reviewed and considered
- formal course content reviews will occur annually
- trainers and course authors undergo internal performance reviews and peer feedback processes
- include a complaints procedure