FAQ-Kategorie: 01 Application

01.1.1 Program accreditation (reaccreditation)

If the administrative procedure is delayed despite timely application, this must not be to the detriment of the higher education institution or the students and graduates. The following therefore applies: If a reaccreditation application for program accreditation is submitted before the end of the previous accreditation period, the Accreditation Council will extend the accreditation period until the Accreditation Council makes a decision. The extension is „automatic“, so no separate application is required.

„Application“ in program accreditation continues to mean (§ 23 MRVO) the submission of the application in the electronic system ELIAS, including the submission of the associated documents (accreditation report, self-evaluation report), which allow at least a summary review. Subsequent submission of the documents is not possible.

The validity period of the accreditation is not extended. Reaccreditation is therefore granted retroactively in the event of success.

The automatic extension is based on a combination of Section 26 (2) and (3) MRVO. Section 26 (2) MRVO provides for „uninterrupted follow-up accreditation“ as a standard; Section 26 (3) sentence 3 MRVO indicates the intention that delays at this stage should not be to the detriment of the applicants.

If the application is submitted in ELIAS in good time, the higher education institution will receive notification of the deadline extension for accreditation for the duration of the administrative procedure at the Accreditation Council. If a previous accreditation of the study programme is missing in the accreditation database, this should first be updated so that the applicant higher education institution can receive the notification of deadline extension. Please contact the Foundation’s Head Office regarding the entry of missing accreditation information.

You can submit an application in ELIAS here.

01.1.2 System accreditation (reaccreditation)

To avoid an accreditation gap, it is sufficient to submit the application for renewed system accreditation by the expiry of the accreditation period. If the Accreditation Council only issues the system reaccreditation after the previous accreditation has expired, this is done retroactively in accordance with § 26 para. 2 MRVO, so that there is an uninterrupted follow-up accreditation.

The university continues to be listed as an accredited higher education institution in the Accreditation Council database. The database entry indicates that this is an ongoing procedure and that the existing accreditation will be extended until the Accreditation Council decides on reaccreditation. In addition, the higher education institution in question will receive a notification via ELIAS regarding the deadline extension for the duration of the administrative procedure at the Accreditation Council.

The internally accredited study programmes of a system-accredited higher education institution remain continuously accredited for the internally issued deadline. Until the Accreditation Council’s decision on reaccreditation, the higher education institution retains the right to continue to award internal accreditations and to award the Accreditation Council’s seal.

You can submit an application in ELIAS here.

According to § 26 para. 1 sentence 1 MRVO, retroactive accreditation is possible for initial accreditations. Specifically, this means

Accreditation is valid retroactively from the beginning of the semester or trimester in which the Accreditation Council made the accreditation decision in accordance with § 26 para. 1 sentence 1 MRVO.
Examples:

• One study programme will be accredited for the first time on 15.09.2019.
  The accreditation period runs from 01.04.2019.
• One study programme will be accredited for the first time on 10.12.2019.
  The accreditation period runs from 01.10.2019.
• A higher education institution will be system accredited for the first time on 15.09.2019.
  The accreditation period runs from 01.04.2019.
• A higher education institution will be system accredited for the first time on 10.12.2019.
  The accreditation period runs from 01.10.2019.

(In these examples, it is assumed that the winter semester runs from October 1 to March 31 and the summer semester from April 1 to September 30. These deadlines change accordingly if the semester runs differently).

However, higher education institutions must comply with the applicable state law. The host country may require a successfully completed accreditation for the start of study operations. In this case, an application for program accreditation of a study programme that has not yet been opened at the time of the inspection must be submitted in good time so that the decision of the Accreditation Council can be made before the start of the study programme. Details must be clarified with the responsible ministry. Due to the different requirements under state law, applications for initial accreditation are also given priority by the Accreditation Council.

You can submit an application in ELIAS here.

As it is sufficient to submit the application for reaccreditation in good time before the expiry of the accreditation deadline in order to avoid an accreditation gap (see FAQ 01.1.1 ), applications for initial/concept accreditation are prioritized when planning the meetings of the Accreditation Council.

That means:

In the case of an application for initial/concept accreditation in program accreditation:

• up to 12 weeks before the meeting: The motion is usually dealt with at the next meeting.
• up to 8 weeks before the meeting: It can no longer be guaranteed that the application will be dealt with at the next meeting.
• up to 6 weeks before the meeting: It is not expected that the application will be dealt with at the next meeting.
• 0 to 6 weeks before the meeting: The motion cannot be dealt with at the next meeting.

Reasons for non-treatment despite application up to 12 weeks before the meeting may be, for example, an accreditation report that is not ready for a decision or incomplete application documents.

Please note: Treatment does not necessarily mean that the accreditation decision has been finalized. If the Accreditation Council intends to deviate from the proposed resolution in the accreditation report in accordance with § 22 para. 3 MRVO, the higher education institution is given the opportunity to make a new statement. If the higher education institution waives this opportunity, the resolution becomes effective; this is usually the case a few weeks after the AC meeting. If a statement is submitted, the final decision is usually made at the next regular supervisory board meeting. If initial accreditation is absolutely necessary with effect in a particular semester, a longer lead time should be planned to be on the safe side.
In the case of an application for reaccreditation:

The application will be dealt with as quickly as possible. However, it is not possible to promise treatment at a specific meeting.

You can submit an application in ELIAS here.

The Accreditation Council carries out a plausibility check of the resolution recommendation of the accreditation agency and the peer review panel set out in the accreditation report. Therefore, in case of doubt, the Accreditation Council must have the opportunity to verify the resolution recommendation on the basis of the study program documents.

According to § 23 MRVO, the accreditation and self-evaluation report must be submitted with the application for program accreditation. The self-evaluation report must also include the complete annexes. If study program documents have been revised during the course of the procedure, for example as part of a quality improvement loop, the Accreditation Council requires the documents in the revised version.

In addition, the higher education institution has the option of submitting a statement on the accreditation report. If this is not done, the Accreditation Council and its Head Office assume that

a) the status described in the accreditation report is correct from the perspective of the higher education institution and

b) all assessments are undisputed from the point of view of the higher education institution and the results (recommendations / conditions) are perceived as appropriate and accepted.

If a) and/or b) do not apply, this must be indicated in a statement, as the Accreditation Council will otherwise make its decision solely on the basis of the accreditation report and the other application documents.

Changes relevant to the assessment between the completion of the report and the opening of the administrative procedure must be reported even if they do not relate to recommendations or proposed conditions of the Agencies and the peer review panel. The instrument of the statement on the accreditation report must be used for this purpose.

Such changes relevant to the assessment after the administrative procedure has been opened should remain the exception and must be reported to the German Accreditation Council immediately in ELIAS by means of a statement. In this case, please also inform your contact person at the Head Office of the Accreditation Council via an ELIAS system message.

The procedure described here for program accreditation also applies analogously to system accreditation.

The application documents can be submitted in the usual file formats (PDF, ZIP – file formats such as Word or Excel are only possible in ZIP archives). The maximum size per uploaded file is 25 MB. The Accreditation Council asks you to refrain from referring to temporary links.

In order to ensure an efficient assessment process, the Accreditation Council requests that the following be observed when submitting an application:

• If the annexes to the self-evaluation report are combined into one document, a “clickable” table of contents is essential.
• File names such as “Appendix a.1.2” cannot be assigned without further ado, so self-explanatory names such as “Examination Regulations for Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering” should be chosen for outsiders.
• Different procedural statuses must be clearly identified. Ideally, documents revised in the course of the procedure should be summarized in a (zip) file; as a minimum, the version history must be clear from the name of the individual file. (For example, “Examination regulations old” versus “Examination regulations revised”)

According to § 26 para. 2 MRVO, reaccreditation follows directly after the previous accreditation.

The purpose of this regulation is to ensure the seamless accreditation of study programmes. However, if an application for reaccreditation is submitted well before the end of the previous accreditation period, this would mean that the reaccreditation period would begin well into the future. This would mean that there would be far more than eight years between the Accreditation Council’s consideration of the study programme. This would also mean that the accreditation decision would be based on an outdated assessment at the time it came into effect.

This will be illustrated with an example: An application for reaccreditation is submitted in March 2020. The accreditation in place at this time does not expire until 30.09.2023. The Accreditation Council makes a positive accreditation decision in June 2020. In this example, the reaccreditation period would run from 01.10.2023 to 30.09.2031. The Accreditation Council decision made in 2020 would come into effect three years later and would possibly no longer be up to date. In addition, the Accreditation Council would not deal with the study programme again until 2031. There would therefore be more than eleven years between the Accreditation Council meetings, not the eight provided for in the MRVO.

For this reason, the Accreditation Council, in consultation with the legal supervisory authority, decided at its meeting on 04.06.2020 to use the regulation for concept accreditations in § 26 para. 1 MRVO for the interpretation of § 26 para. 2 MRVO, according to which the accreditation period begins at the latest at the beginning of the second semester following the announcement of the decision. In the example case described, this would mean that the reaccreditation period would begin on 01.04.2021 and then run until 31.03.2029.

No. The Accreditation Council stores the accreditations it has issued in the accreditation database at https://antrag.akkreditierungsrat.de; the Accreditation Council’s accreditation decisions can be viewed publicly there and the corresponding notifications can be downloaded in the internal area. The documents provide information about the Accreditation Council’s decision, including the reasons, any conditions imposed and the specified accreditation period. In particular, the page with the accreditation information for each study programme, each university-internal QM system and each Alternative Procedures can be linked so that the current status is documented and can be communicated at any time. Each certificate would fall short of the information content of these database entries.

Certificates would have to be maintained and reissued on an ongoing basis, for example when the accreditation period is extended, when a course name changes or another essential change is made, when new partial study programmes are assigned in combined study programmes or when partial study programmes are discontinued, et cetera. The documents would have to be documented on the database page, would make it more confusing and would duplicate the information in the Resolutions, albeit not completely.

Despite the possibilities for automation in the electronic informationand application system“ELIAS”, the maintenance of certificates would entail additional programming effort and additional complexities, for which neither personnel nor financial capacities are available in the sense of a lean and affordable accreditation system. This is all the more true as the Accreditation Council has also received various requests for English-language certificates, for which the existing accreditation information does not provide a basis, so that the texts required for this would have to be created and checked separately.

In addition to the database, the Accreditation Council provides an electronic seal for accredited study programmes, QM systems and Alternative Procedures, which can be used for self-promotion, especially on the Internet.

Different submission deadlines apply to the processing of applications for initial accreditation and reaccreditation.

Applications for first-time system accreditations are given priority, as the higher education institutions submitting the application are generally dependent on a quick resolution due to expiring accreditation deadlines at program level. For first-time accreditations, the accreditation period begins at a clearly defined point in time in accordance with § 26 para. 1 sentence 1 MRVO, namely retroactively from the beginning of the semester or trimester in which the Accreditation Council made the accreditation decision. A delayed decision could therefore result in accreditation gaps at program level.

In the case of reaccreditation procedures, however, it is sufficient to submit the application in good time before the expiry of the accreditation period in order to avoid gaps in accreditation, as the start of the new accreditation period is set retroactively in the event of a positive decision by the Accreditation Council (see FAQ 01.1.1 ).

Processing periods for initial system accreditation

A guideline value of 12 weeks applies to the processing of applications for initial accreditation . This means that an application must be submitted at least 12 weeks before the Accreditation Council meeting at which the application is to be decided. An overview of the meeting dates can be found here.

In particular, if a higher education institution urgently requires an accreditation decision at a certain point in time, it is recommended to contact the Accreditation Council at an early stage in order to be able to plan the scheduling of the procedure and the resolution in good time.

Please note that the duration of the procedure may be extended in the following cases:

• If the Accreditation Council receives incomplete documents and/or an application for accreditation that is not ready for a decision, it cannot guarantee that the application will be processed within the specified period of 12 weeks.
• Treatment of the accreditation application does not necessarily mean that the accreditation decision has been finalized. If the Accreditation Council intends to deviate from the proposed resolution in the accreditation report in accordance with § 22 para. 3 MRVO, the higher education institution is given the opportunity to make a new statement. If the higher education institution waives this opportunity, the resolution becomes effective; this is usually the case a few weeks after the AC meeting. If a statement is submitted, the final decision is usually made at the following regular supervisory board meeting. If initial accreditation is absolutely necessary for a specific semester, a longer lead time should be planned to be on the safe side.

Processing periods in system reaccreditation

In the case of accreditation procedures for the reaccreditation of a QM system, it is sufficient to submit the application in good time before the expiry of the accreditation period. In the event of a positive decision by the Accreditation Council, the start of the new accreditation period is set retroactively so that there is no gap in accreditation (see FAQ 01.1.1 ).

Applications for re-accreditation will be processed as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, it is currently not possible to guarantee treatment in a specific session.

You can submit an application in ELIAS here.

The Accreditation Council does not issue operating licenses for study programmes. This is done the respective Ministry of Science as the responsible supervisory authority. Zhere are a variety of possible approaches between the Länder and different types of higher education institutions, including the delegation of the operating license decision to the higher education institution, but this is not the issue here. 

From an accreditation perspective, the start of a study programme or the implementation of a change to an existing study programme not wait for the final accreditation accreditation decision before starting a program or implementing a change to an existing program. In most Federal States, however, there is an accreditation obligation enshrined in higher education legislation. Under certain circumstances, ministries also expect certain changes to a study programme to be approved before their implementation (reaccreditation, essential change).) completely, i.e. including the decision of the Accreditation Council, have gone through.  

Should it becomes apparent that the decision of the Accreditation Council is not yet available by the desired start date of the (amended) study programmetit is recommended that the higher education institutions as early as possible with the supervisory authority responsible for it as early as possible.