Lung Function in Growth and Aging
Appendix 3 PDF Print E-mail
  1. To expedite the process an accreditation advisory panel is empowered to act on behalf of the professional organisation and grant Accreditation according to the recommendations of the Assessment Panel.
  2. The accreditation advisory panel should comprise a senior officer of the professional body, the accreditation coordinator and the assessment panel which assessed the particular laboratory.
  3. The assessment panel may recommend that accreditation be awarded unreservedly or subsequent to rectification of identified deficiencies. In the latter case accreditation should be granted on receipt of evidence that all suggested changes have been implemented.
  4. The application should lapse after 12 months from the date of issue of the recommendations in the absence of such evidence. Rectification should only apply where the panel considers that the changes are relatively minor and can be implemented and verified without need for a further site visit. (The process seeks "substantial compliance" with the standards. It is recognised that local conditions may preclude absolute compliance with every standard.)
  5. A recommendation against Accreditation should normally be referred to the senior tier of the professional body for confirmation before the report is issued.
  6. A Certificate of Accreditation should be issued once the recommendation for accreditation is ratified by the accreditation advisory panel or, where applicable, the professional executive. The Certificate should be signed by the Chairman of the professional body on behalf of the Society.
  7. Accreditation is granted for a period of three years, and a centre should notify the Accreditation organisation of any major changes from their assessed state ( e.g. personnel, equipment or accommodation changes)
  8. Appeals
    Where, in the opinion of a particular accreditation advisory panel, a report is potentially contentious or there is disagreement over its recommendations, the report should be referred to an appeal process for comments and decision.
  9. Laboratories that fail accreditation should be advised of the reasons for the decision.
  10. If the laboratory wishes to challenge the decision it must do so in writing to the accreditation appeals coordinator within 21 days of receiving the decision stating the reasons for appeal.
  11. The appeal should then be considered by a meeting of the professional body executive to be convened within six weeks of receipt of the appeal.
  12. A recommendation against accreditation following appeal should be confirmed before the report is issued. The accreditation coordinator should advise the laboratory of the decision on the appeal and the reasons for the decision.
  13. A laboratory that fails accreditation may re-apply at any time that it believes its standards have met those required for Accreditation.
  14. The professional body should provide an Annual Report of success, partial success and the number of failed applications to the accreditation process and should display this on their website.
Last Updated on Wednesday, 07 January 2009 20:46