POLICIES

MALPRACTICE AND MALADMINISTRATION POLICY

This policy applies to all VTCT and ITEC qualifications. Who is bound by this policy: all ESA customers, learners who are taking or have taken VTCT and ITEC assessments, and personnel with responsibilities for managing, delivering, assessing and quality assuring qualifications in VTCT and ITEC approved centres.

Anyone who suspects or becomes aware that malpractice or maladministration has occurred is duty bound to report it. 

​

Malpractice is the term used for any action, activity, neglect, default or other practice which deliberately contravenes regulations and compromises the integrity of the internal or external assessment process, the validity of results and/or certificates or the reputation and credibility of ESA.
Malpractice has serious implications for the centre and learners and is always treated very seriously by ESA.
Malpractice may include a range of issues, from the deliberate failure to maintain appropriate records or systems to the deliberate falsification of records. In this policy, this term also covers misconduct and forms of unnecessary discrimination or bias towards certain groups of learners.

​

Maladministration is any activity, neglect, default or other practice that results in non-compliance with ESA’s requirements or any other applicable requirements and includes the application of persistent mistakes or poor administration within a centre. All approved centres are expected to maintain adequate systems and procedures and ensure that staff understand them and adhere to them always. Recurrent maladministration constitutes malpractice and will be treated as such.
 

Any investigation will be carried out by competent people who have no vested interest in the issue.

Where an associated investigation leads to the discovery of a failure in its assessment process, ESA AAtakes all reasonable steps to:

• identify any other learner who has been affected by the failure;

• correct or, where it cannot be corrected, mitigate as far as possible the effect of the failure;

• ensure that the failure does not recur in the future.

​

As a qualification centre we;

• ensure the investigation is carried out by competent investigators who have no personal involvement in the incident or interest in the outcome;

• ensure the investigation is carried out in an effective, prompt and thorough manner;

• ensure staff co-operate fully with the investigation, providing speedy and full responses to requests for information.

​

We are obliged to inform VTCT promptly of any suspected or alleged cases of malpractice or maladministration.

Any person may identify a matter that they think could constitute malpractice or maladministration. This will normally be a centre employee, a learner, a contractor (e.g. a moderator), or an external agency (e.g. the Education and Skills Funding Agency).

 

Any person making an allegation of malpractice or maladministration may wish to remain anonymous. An informant who is concerned that possible adverse consequences may occur if their identity is revealed to another party should notify ESA.

ESA will always aim to keep a whistle blower’s identity confidential where asked to do so, although it cannot be guaranteed. ESA may, for example, need to disclose an informant’s identity if the matter leads to issues that need to be taken up by other parties such as the police, fraud prevention agencies or other law enforcement agencies, the courts (regarding any court proceedings) or the regulators.
The investigator(s) assigned to review the allegation will not reveal the whistle blower’s identity unless the whistle blower agrees, or doing so is necessary for the purposes of the investigation. The investigator will advise the whistle blower if it becomes necessary to reveal their identity. A whistle blower should also understand that they may be identifiable by others due to the nature or circumstances of the disclosure (e.g. the party against whom the allegation is made may identify possible sources of disclosure without such details being disclosed to them).

​

In all cases the whistle blower will have the opportunity to raise with the investigators any concerns about the way the investigation is being conducted. It should be noted that ESA will not disclose details of all the investigation activities, and it may not be appropriate to disclose full details of the outcomes of the investigation due to confidentiality or for legal reasons (e.g. action to be taken against the parties concerned). 

​

The fundamental principle of all investigations is to conduct them in a fair, reasonable and legal manner, ensuring that all relevant evidence is considered without bias. In doing so, investigations will be underpinned by terms of reference based around the following broad objectives:

• to establish the facts relating to allegations to determine whether any irregularities have occurred;

• to identify the cause of the irregularities and those involved;

• to establish the scale of the irregularities and whether other qualifications may be affected;

• to evaluate any action already taken by the centre;

• to determine whether remedial action is required to reduce the risk to current registered learners;

• to preserve the integrity of the qualification;

• to ascertain whether any action is required in respect of certificates already issued;

• to obtain clear evidence to support any sanctions to be applied to the centre and/or to members of staff, in accordance with VTCT’s Sanctions Policy;

• to identify any adverse patterns or trends.

 

ESA may carry out the investigation itself or require the centre to carry this out, normally within 10 working days of the notification of the case.
ESA will expect all parties who are either directly or indirectly involved in the investigation to co-operate fully with the investigation. In carrying out any investigation ESA  will be sensitive to the effect on and the reputation of a centre and/or those members of staff or other individuals who may be subject to investigation. It will strive to ensure that the investigation is carried out as confidentially as possible.
The organisation/person who is the subject of the allegation will have the opportunity to raise any issues with the investigator(s) at any stage about the proposed approach and conduct of the investigation. The investigation may involve a request for further information from relevant parties and/or interviews with personnel involved in the investigation. Interviews will be recorded, dated and signed by all involved. The person(s) accused of malpractice or maladministration may choose to be accompanied in the interview by a work colleague, trade union representative or other person, and must be advised of this right in time to be able to arrange to be accompanied. Children, young people and vulnerable adults must be accompanied at the interview by an appropriate adult.

​

If the investigation confirms that malpractice or maladministration has taken place, VTCT considers what action to take to:

• minimise the risk to the integrity of the qualification(s);

• discourage others from carrying out similar instances of malpractice or maladministration;

​

The actions ESA may take include:

• undertaking additional/increased visits to a centre to provide a greater level of support and/or monitoring;

• requiring specific centre staff to undergo additional training and/or scrutiny by the centre if there are concerns about their ability to undertake their role effectively in the delivery of VTCT and ITEC qualifications;

• not permitting specific centre staff to be involved in the delivery or assessment of VTCT and ITEC qualifications (e.g. invigilation);

• imposing sanctions on the centre – if so, these will be communicated to the centre in accordance with VTCT’s Sanctions Policy together with the rationale for the sanction(s) selected;

• taking appropriate action against a learner(s) in relation to proven instances of cheating, plagiarism or fraud (see the Plagiarism, Cheating and Collusion process document);

• amending aspects of VTCT’s qualification development, delivery and awarding arrangements, and if required, assessment and monitoring arrangements and associated guidance to prevent the issue from recurring;

• informing relevant third parties (e.g. funding bodies) of VTCT’s findings in case they need to take relevant action in relation to the centre;

• carrying out additional, related investigations if VTCT suspects the issue may be more widespread at the centre and/or exist at other centres.

​

An appeal can be made against a decision or action taken/to be taken following an investigation into maladministration or malpractice.

​

Process for dealing with suspected or actual case of malpractice or maladministration

• An initial notification of suspected or actual malpractice or maladministration should be submitted to info@erasureskin.com no later than 2 days after the occurrence of the event. The notification must include the following information:

̵ centre name and contact details of person submitting the notification;
̵ learner’s name and registration number (if applicable);
̵ name(s) and job role(s) of centre/awarding organisation personnel involved in the case;
̵ qualification(s) or service(s) affected;
̵ nature of the suspected or actual malpractice or maladministration and associated dates;
̵ details and outcome of any initial investigation carried out by the centre or other person involved in the case, including any mitigating circumstances;
̵ declaration of any personal interest by the person making the allegation.

​

Malpractice
The following list provides examples of centre and learner malpractice. This list is not exhaustive and is intended as guidance as a definition of malpractice.

• Deliberate failure to adhere continually to VTCT’s centre approval and/or qualification approval requirements or actions assigned to the centre within stated timelines;

• Denial of access to premises, records, information, learners and staff by any authorised VTCT representative and/or the regulatory authorities;

• Inadequate centre procedures for the induction of staff or any contracted person involved in the delivery of qualifications;

• Failure to carry out internal assessment, internal moderation or internal verification in accordance with VTCT’s requirements;

• Deliberate failure to adhere to VTCT’s learner registration and certification procedures;

• Deliberate failure to maintain appropriate auditable records, e.g. certification claims and/or forgery of evidence.

• Fraudulent claim for certificates;

• Intentional withholding of information from VTCT which is critical to maintaining the rigour of quality assurance and standards of qualifications;

• Deliberate misuse of VTCT’s logo and trademarks or misrepresentation of a centre’s relationship with VTCT and/or its recognition and approval status with VTCT;

• Collusion or permitting collusion in exams/assessments, e.g. allowing another learner to copy work or the unsanctioned collaboration between a learner or another individual in the production of work to be submitted;

• Learners still working towards a qualification after certification claims have been made;

• Persistent instances of maladministration within a centre;

• Deliberate contravention by a centre and/or its learners of the assessment arrangements as specified for VTCT and ITEC qualifications;

• Loss of, theft of, or a breach of confidentiality in any assessment materials;

• Plagiarism of any nature by learners and/or staff;

• Copying from another learner (including using ICT to do so);

• Personation - assuming the identity of another learner or having someone assume the identity of the named learner during an assessment;

• Unauthorised amendment, copying or distributing of exam/assessment papers/materials;

• Inappropriate assistance to learners by centre staff (e.g. unfairly helping them to pass a unit or qualification);

• Deliberate submission of false information to gain a qualification or unit;

• Deliberate failure to adhere to, or attempts to circumnavigate the requirements of VTCT’s Reasonable Adjustments and Special Considerations Policy;

• False ID used at the registration stage;

• Creation of false records;

• Cheating;

• Cash for certificates (e.g. the selling of certificates for cash);

• Selling papers/assessment details/certificates;

• Failure to manage and prevent conflicts of interest;

• Failure to provide learners and staff, including contractors, with the knowledge of their responsibilities through policies and procedures;

• Failure to review systems, policies and procedures to ensure they remain fit for purpose;

• Centre postponement of visits by VTCT’s External Quality Assurer for more than 6 months;

• Failure to carry out delivery, internal assessment, internal moderation or internal quality assurance in accordance with VTCT's requirements;

• Failure to conduct assessments or other external assessment according to VTCT's procedures or regulations;

• Inaccurate recording of learner assessment decisions leading to invalid claims for certification;

• Deliberate falsification, fabrication or forgery of assessment evidence, records or authentication statements by centres or learners;

• Failure to retain accurate learner assessment decision for the specified timescale;

• Deliberate destruction of another’s work;

• Obtaining examination or assessment material without authorization;

• Introduction of unauthorised material into an assessment room, for example notes, study guides, own blank paper, personal stereos, mobile phones and other similar electronic devices;

• Obtaining, receiving, exchanging or passing on information during an assessment (or the attempt to) by any means;

• Failure to follow a centre's own malpractice and maladministration policy and/or report occurrences to VTCT;

• Tampering with learners' scripts or other assessed work after collection;

• Non-compliance with invigilation requirements during assessments;

• Failing to keep assessment papers secure prior to assessment;

• Withholding of information from VTCT, by deliberate act or omission, which is required to assure VTCT of the centre’s ability to deliver qualifications appropriately.

​

Maladministration
The following list provides examples of centre and learner maladministration. This list is not exhaustive and is intended as guidance on VTCT’s definition of maladministration.

• Failure to adhere to VTCT’s learner registration and certification procedures;

• Failure to adhere to VTCT’s centre agreement and/or qualification requirements and/or associated actions assigned to the centre;

• Late registration of learners;

• Unreasonable delays in responding to requests and/or communications from VTCT;

• Inaccurate claim for certificates;

• Failure to maintain appropriate auditable records, e.g. certification claims;

• Misuse of the VTCT or ITEC’s logo and trademarks or misrepresentation of a centre’s relationship with VTCT or ITEC and/or its recognition and approval status with regard to VTCT or ITEC qualifications. VTCT may take legal action if centres fail to cooperate with reasonable VTCT requests;

• Failure to adhere to, or to circumnavigate, the requirements of VTCT’s Reasonable Adjustments and Special Considerations Policy;

• Failure to adhere to VTCT policies, procedures and practices;

• Failure to adhere to VTCT financial payment terms and/or plans (whether infrequent or persistent).

​

​