Go to top of page

Prospective higher education providers update - October to December 2016

29 March 2017

1. Overview

Since the inception of TEQSA in January 2012, 122 organisations have submitted or indicated their intention to submit applications for initial registration to TEQSA.

Applicants for registration as higher education providers are subject to a two-stage process: preliminary assessment and, if the requirements of section 19 of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 have been met, substantive assessment. Registration applications must include applications for accreditation of one or more course(s) of study, and are therefore assessed against the full Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards), as opposed to the reduced requirements for renewal of registration applications under TEQSA’s Core+ model of assessment.

2. Prospective higher education providers

This report, drawn from data captured on 31 December 2016, provides summary statistics of the status of applications and prospective Higher Education Providers (HEPs), organised by:

  • pre-submission applicants (pre-sub) – those who have indicated an intention to submit an application for registration but are yet to do so; and
  • post-submission applicants (post-sub) – those who have submitted registration applications, the assessment of which has not yet been finalised.

It is intended that this report be published quarterly.

Note: withdrawals of applications can occur at any stage of the assessment process.

3. Statistics of note

  • As of 31 December 2016 there were 86 prospective providers to the higher education (HE) sector which currently consists of 168 registered providers.
  • Of the 86 prospective providers, 50 are registered training organisations (RTO).
  • During Q2 2016/2017, 10 new organisations applied, or advised of their intention to apply, to enter the HE sector. Of these 10 organisations, 80% identified as an RTO – an increase from 30% in Q1 2016/2017.
  • The number of applications under assessment grew from 24 in Q1 2016/2017 to 35 in Q2 2016/2017, an increase of 45%.

4. Quarter overview

The following statistics in the ‘Quarter overview’ represent the numbers of providers in each status/decision category during the relevant quarter. Note: these figures are not cumulative (e.g. From 3 October – 31 December 2016 (Q2) 10 new providers were recorded with TEQSA).

 

Provider status/decision

Q1 2016

Q2 2016

  • Decisions to register new providers

1

2

  • Applicant withdrew registration

1

1

  • New prospective providers (total)

10

10

  • New prospective providers (RTO)

3

8

  • Prospective HEPS now under assessment

8

14

 

5. Prospective provider breakdown

The following statistics in the ‘Prospective provider breakdown’ represent the number of providers in each status/category as at the relevant quarter end date. Note: these figures are cumulative (e.g. as at 31 December 2016 (end Q2) a total of 51 prospective providers were recorded at pre-submission stage with TEQSA).

Overall they provide an indication of some of the characteristics of entities that are intending to apply or have applied to TEQSA to be registered as HEPs in the 2016/2017 financial year thus far.

5.1  Prospective providers assessment status

The following table represents the number of prospective providers that have indicated an intention to submit an application for registration but are yet to do so (pre-submission), as well as those providers that have submitted an application for registration (post-submission). The table includes a breakdown of the current stage their application is at within TEQSA’s assessment process.

All Prospective Providers

 

Q1 2016

Q2 2016

Status

Pre-sub

Post-sub

Total

Pre-sub

Post-sub

Total

Under preliminary assessment

 

3

 

 

11

 

Awaiting substantive assessment

 

2

 

 

4

 

Under substantive assessment

 

19

 

 

20

 

Total

50

24

74

51

35

86

5.2   Prospective providers that are RTOs[1] by State[2]

The following table represents the number of prospective providers in each category (pre-submission and post-submission) that have identified the entity that is applying for registration as a Higher Education provider is already registered as an RTO. These numbers are further broken down to indicate the location of each prospective provider that is already registered as an RTO by state.

RTO Prospective Providers

 

Q1 2016

Q2 2016

State

Pre-sub

Post-sub

Total

Pre-sub

Post-sub

Total

New South Wales

7

4

11

12

4

16

Victoria

9

2

11

10

5

15

Queensland

6

3

9

7

5

12

South Australia

1

1

2

2

1

3

Australian Capital Territory

1

0

1

2

0

2

Western Australia

0

2

2

1

1

2

Unknown

6

0

6

0[3]

0

0

Total

30

12

42

34

16

50

5.3   Prospective providers that are RTOs with current CRICOS registration

The following table represents the number of prospective providers in each category (pre-submission and post-submission) that have identified the entity that is applying for registration as a Higher Education provider is already registered as an RTO and is currently registered on CRICOS to deliver courses to international students.

 

RTOs with CRICOS

 

Q1 2016

Q2 2016

 

Pre-sub

Post-sub

Total

Pre-sub

Post-sub

Total

Total

19

7

26

20

11

31

 

5.4 Most prevalent Broad FoE[4] course applications

The following table represents the type of courses, identified by Broad Field of Education (FoE), that are most common in the proposed/submitted course accreditation applications from prospective providers in each category that accompany a proposed/submitted application for registration.

 

 

 

Q1 2016

Q2 2016

Broad FoE

Pre-sub

Post-sub

Pre-sub

Post-sub

08 Management and Commerce

25

14

34

22

02 Information Technology

8

1

10

4

06 Health

3

4

6

4

09 Society and Culture

4

3

4

3

 

 

[1] Not including RTOs that are related entities.

[2] Head office location may not be the same as the provider’s delivery site(s).

[3] Unknown prospective provider location data corrected to relevant states

[4] Some providers intend to offer courses in two Broad Fields of Education, and have therefore been counted against both.