Body

Providers should note that Guidance Notes are intended to provide guidance only. They are not definitive or binding documents. Nor are they prescriptive. The definitive instruments for regulatory purposes remain the TEQSA Act and the Higher Education Standards Framework as amended from time to time. 

When would TEQSA vary a registration or accreditation period?

This guidance note covers the processes of TEQSA either shortening or cancelling a higher education provider’s period of registration or accreditation of course(s) of study because a provider has:

• failed to meet the requirements of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2015 (HES Framework) in relation to its registration or accreditation of a course, or
• breached a condition imposed on its registration or accreditation.

At its discretion, TEQSA may also vary periods of registration or accreditation for other purposes by mutual agreement with a provider, such as for the purposes of aligning regulatory requirements and minimising regulatory impact on providers. This could include granting an extension under either section 37A or section 57A of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 (TEQSA Act). These circumstances are subject to a separate policy (the Extensions to the period of provider registration or course accreditation policy) and are not the subject of the remainder of this note.

Relevant legislation

The relevant legislative framework is:

• the TEQSA Act, as amended from time to time, and
• the HES Framework.

Basic principles of regulation

When making a decision to shorten or cancel a period of registration or course accreditation, TEQSA considers the relevant evidence about a provider. In doing so, TEQSA complies with the basic regulatory principles set out in the TEQSA Act of reflecting risk, proportionate regulation, and regulatory necessity.

• Reflecting risk 
  • TEQSA takes into account (as applicable) the following aspects of the provider’s operations, (as well as the history of persons related to the provider as applicable):
    • scholarship
    • teaching and research
    • internal quality assurance
    • student experiences
    • financial status and capability
    • previous compliance with the HES Framework, the TEQSA Act and its associated provisions and other laws regulating education 
    • risks of the provider not complying with the HES Framework and its associated provisions. 
• Proportionate regulation
  • TEQSA considers whether shortening or cancelling a registration or course accreditation is proportionate to any non-compliance or risk of future non-compliance with the HES Framework or the TEQSA Act and its associated provisions. 
• Regulatory necessity
  • TEQSA considers whether shortening or cancelling a registration or course accreditation would burden the provider any more than necessary. 

Registration

The power to shorten or cancel registration applies in all of the circumstances listed in S98(a) to (d) of the TEQSA Act.

Shortening registration

Shortening a higher education provider’s registration involves bringing forward the date on which the registration is due to expire. In these circumstances, the provider must apply to renew its registration at an earlier time (either 180 days prior to the new date or such shorter period as TEQSA allows) or stop delivering by the new date.

Before making a decision to shorten a period of registration, TEQSA will give the provider an opportunity to comment on the basis on which such a decision is being considered and will consider the provider’s response.

Cancelling registration

Cancelling a provider’s registration means the provider cannot continue its higher education operations from the date of effect of the cancellation. Cancelling registration is the most serious administrative sanction available to TEQSA. For this reason, TEQSA will only decide to cancel registration where there are no effective alternative regulatory remedies available.

Before making a decision to cancel a registered higher education provider’s registration, TEQSA must give both the provider and the Minister of the relevant State or Territory responsible for higher education a written notice. The notice must state that TEQSA intends to make a decision to cancel the provider’s registration for specified reasons and it must provide a reasonable opportunity for the provider to respond to TEQSA in relation to the proposed decision. TEQSA must consider this response.

When making a decision to cancel registration TEQSA will also consider what transitional arrangements need to be made, including for any third-party arrangements the provider currently has in place, to ensure that students’ interests are appropriately addressed.

Once a higher education provider’s registration has been cancelled, the provider is prevented from applying again for registration for a period of two years after the date the cancellation takes effect. TEQSA may shorten this period if it considers it appropriate to do so.

Course accreditation

TEQSA accredits courses of study offered by registered higher education providers where the provider does not have the authority to accredit its own courses. All accredited courses of study must meet and continue to meet the requirements of the HES Framework.

TEQSA may shorten or cancel the accreditation of a course(s) of study after considering other options for addressing a provider’s non-compliance with the Standards. TEQSA may take this action for a failure or breach as listed in S98(a) to (d) of the TEQSA Act.

If a course accreditation has been cancelled, the provider must stop delivering the course to students from the date of effect of the cancellation. 

If an accreditation is shortened, the provider must apply to renew the accreditation of the course at an earlier time (either 180 days before the new date set by TEQSA or a shorter time period that TEQSA allows) or stop delivering the course from the new date. A higher education provider must not:

• falsely represent that it offers a course of study leading to a higher education award 
• falsely represent that a course of study is accredited, or 
• provide a course of study, which leads to a regulated higher education award, where the course of study is not accredited.

Before making a decision to shorten a period of course accreditation, TEQSA will give the provider an opportunity to comment on the basis on which such a decision is being considered and will consider the provider’s response.

Note to providers with self-accrediting authority (limited or unlimited): while TEQSA does not accredit a course where a provider has authority to self-accredit the course, such providers should note that TEQSA may impose conditions restricting or removing the provider’s authority to self-accredit a course (in compliance with the principles of part 2 under the TEQSA Act).

Review of decisions

Decisions to vary a provider’s registration or course accreditation may be reviewed by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal under part 10 of the TEQSA Act.

National Register

TEQSA maintains the National Register of higher education providers. The National Register is the means by which TEQSA publishes information about the status of a provider, including whether a higher education provider’s registration or course accreditation(s) have been shortened or cancelled.

Public reporting

Information about TEQSA’s approach to publicly reporting its decisions is available on our Policy on public reporting of TEQSA's decisions page.

Further information

Notifications regarding varying a period of registration or accreditation will come from the relevant TEQSA team, and further information regarding the notification should be discussed with the team directly.

Resources and references

TEQSA (2016), Extensions to the period of provider registration or course accreditation policy.

TEQSA welcomes the diversity of educational delivery across the sector and acknowledges that its Guidance Notes may not encompass all of the circumstances seen in the sector. TEQSA also recognises that the requirements of the HESF can be met in different ways according to the circumstances of the provider. Provided the requirements of the HESF are met, TEQSA will not prescribe how they are met. If in doubt, please contact the TEQSA Enquiries Management team at providerenquiries@teqsa.gov.au. 
 

Version #	Date	Key changes
1.0	19 August 2016	Made available as beta version for consultation. Replaces previous information sheets on ‘shortening or cancelling’ a period of registration or accreditation.
1.1	26 August 2019	Amended in response to consultation feedback.

Body

Providers should note that Guidance Notes are intended to provide guidance only. They are not definitive or binding documents. Nor are they prescriptive. The definitive instruments for regulatory purposes remain the TEQSA Act and the Higher Education Standards Framework as amended from time to time. 

What do wellbeing and safety encompass?

The Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2015 (HES Framework) includes a Section on wellbeing and safety that requires providers to provide timely and accurate advice on access to student support services and to promote and foster a safe environment on campus and online. While the Standards of the HES Framework encompass organisational responsibilities for the wellbeing of staff, their primary focus is on supporting the wellbeing and promoting the safety of students. This Guidance Note focuses generally on current students, irrespective of their mode of participation. Special requirements exist for younger students, particularly in relation to international students under the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 [ESOS Act]. This Guidance Note is focused on the requirements of the HES Framework.

The terms ‘wellbeing’ and ‘safety’ are used in their ordinary meanings, broadly encompassing ‘overall wellness’ and ‘freedom from harm’ respectively. The Standards implicitly recognise that many factors may affect wellbeing (e.g. social, financial, health, cultural, educational, etc.), many of which may not be under the control of the provider. The Standards also implicitly acknowledge that ‘safety’ is regulated in more detail through other frameworks, such as workplace-safety legislation, and do not seek to duplicate those mechanisms.

Managing issues to do with risks to wellbeing or safety may become quite complex for providers, particularly in distinguishing events that occur within the scope of the provider’s operations (e.g. an assault on campus) from events that occur outside the scope of the provider’s operations. These may entail differing levels of response, however even incidents that fall outside the scope of the provider’s operations may have adverse impacts on subsequent educational experiences (e.g. an unwelcome approach from a fellow student at a private weekend function) and the provider may need to ensure support is available. Other parties may also be involved (e.g. in the case of a mishap or other difficulty in a work placement, or an incident at a third-party location). Remote circumstances may also have an impact, such as civil unrest in the home country of international students who are studying in Australia.

Providers should actively use their influence and governance links to support affiliated entities (such as residences and university colleges) to promote and foster a safe environment for students enrolled at the provider. There are particular risks posed by recurring sexual assault and sexual harassment at residences, and providers should use their best offices to encourage residences to implement counter-measures, such as evidence-based sexual violence prevention education programs, as well as programs to counter the harmful effects of alcohol and drug abuse.

Relevant Standards in the HES Framework

The Standards that are directly concerned with wellbeing and safety are in Part A of the HES Framework (Standards for Higher Education) as a separate Section (2.3) within the Learning Environment domain. The Standards encompass (paraphrased):

• 2.3.1 avenues and contacts for support for students if needed
• 2.3.2 availability of specific types of personal support services
• 2.3.3 ensuring that support services offered reflect the needs of student cohorts
• 2.3.4 promotion of a safe environment
• 2.3.5 management of critical incidents.

The ‘support’ components of these Standards complement and supplement the learning support requirements encompassed by the Standards in Section 3.3: Learning Resources and Educational Support.

Intent of the Standards

The HES Framework broadly contemplates a provider recognising that it has a range of responsibilities to students and, in so doing, taking active responsibility for fostering an environment of wellbeing and safety for its students. This includes:

• conducting effective risk assessments and implementing preventative controls for the risks identified
• providing advice about actions to take, staff to contact and support services that are accessible (whether directly or through another party) if students’ personal circumstances are having an adverse effect on their education, including:
• conducting evidence-based sexual violence, drug and alcohol abuse prevention education programs
• providing support for affected students where needed (whether directly or through another party)
• having systems and processes to respond to incidents and prevent recurrences.

These actions presuppose the provider will have an overarching framework of guiding policies and effective processes for these functions, and that there is sufficient corporate commitment to promoting wellbeing and safety with enough resources to support these activities. The Standards also presuppose that the provider will identify risks to wellbeing and safety, take steps to understand the support needs of particular student cohorts, and implement effective mitigation and management strategies for identified risks.

Risks to quality

Failure to meet the requirements of the Standards concerned with wellbeing and safety (Standards 2.3.1-2.3.5) is likely to interfere with success in students’ studies, whether individually and/or for cohorts as a whole. This may be compounded by personal loss and suffering for individual students arising from preventable adverse circumstances. In failing to meet the preparedness elements of the Standards, a provider will also not be sufficiently prepared to predict and manage risks, or to respond to adverse incidents should they occur. As a consequence:

• the provider’s educational performance is likely to be diminished
• students may incur avoidable loss and suffering
• students may fail to maintain academic progress
• the provider may be exposed to legal action and/or reputational damage
• TEQSA or another regulator may need to intervene
• the reputation of higher education in Australia may be harmed.

In view of the multifaceted potential causes of diminished wellbeing, providers are advised to contemplate potential impacts on student wellbeing when considering the requirements of other Standards beyond those directly under the heading of wellbeing and safety (Standards2.3.1-2.3.5). For example, the following list identifies a series of Sections and Standards and the underlying risks they are seeking to manage, all of which could manifest in an adverse impact on student wellbeing:

1.1.1       admission of students who are ill-equipped to cope with their course

1.3.2       insufficient needs analysis, early feedback and targeted support

1.3.6       not ensuring equivalent opportunities for different modes of participation

2.1.1       unsuitable facilities, including for placements

2.1.2       unsecure IT systems exposing students’ systems to interference

2.1.3       students having limited interactions with, or being isolated from, other students

2.2.1       failure to acknowledge needs of diverse groups

2.4          insufficiently accessible complaints and grievance processes and support

3.3.4       not maintaining adequate contact with students

5.2          insufficient effort to prevent inadvertent breaches of academic integrity

5.3.5       not obtaining or disregarding student feedback

5.4          poor management of arrangements with other parties, including onshore and offshore partner education providers

6.1.4       abrogation of corporate responsibility for promoting and fostering a safe environment

6.2.1c     inadequate resourcing

6.2.1e     poor risk identification and management

6.2.1i       inadequate contingency arrangements, including for business continuity

7.2          inadequate information to enable informed participation

7.2.4       insufficient notice of potential disruptions to participation

7.3.3b     breaches of privacy or confidentiality

7.3.3c     insufficient or poor records of management of incidents.

Providers also have statutory obligations to provide for the support of international students who are studying in Australia under the ESOS Act, with its associated National Code of Practice for Providers of Education and Training to Overseas Students 2017 (National Code). These obligations include requirements for providing a safe environment, especially for students under the age of 18 years.

What will TEQSA look for?

This part of the guidance note covers the full extent of the Standards, and corresponding evidence that TEQSA may require, in relation to wellbeing and safety.
 

For new applicants seeking initial registration and course accreditation, TEQSA will require evidence to be provided in relation to all relevant Standards.
 

For existing providers, the scope of Standards to be assessed and the evidence required for particular applications may vary. This is consistent with the regulatory principles in the TEQSA Act, under which TEQSA has discretion to vary the scope of its assessments and the related evidence required. In exercising this discretion, TEQSA will be guided by the provider’s history, its risk profile and its track record in delivering high-quality higher education.
 

The evidence required for particular types of application is available from the application guides on the TEQSA website.
 

Providers are required to comply with the Standards at all times, not just at the time of application, and TEQSA may seek evidence of compliance at other times if a risk of non-compliance is identified. 
 

In the first instance, TEQSA will need to be satisfied that a provider is acting responsibly and proactively to create an environment of wellbeing and safety for all students. This should be evident in the commitment of the governing body (see Standard 6.1.4) and the framework of policies, processes and activities that have been established to foster and maintain wellbeing and safety (e.g. Standard 2.3.4). This information also needs to be accessible to students (see Standard 7.2.1). 
 

Actions taken to promote a safe environment, and the information provided to students about the actions they can themselves take and the support available, should be tailored to the needs of particular student cohorts (Standards 2.3.2-44). This will include students who are studying in different modes of participation, i.e. on campus, online or blended modes, and students who are involved with other delivery partners (whether onshore or offshore) or in clinical or other work placements. It will also include students whose studies are impeded by health issues, including mental health issues requiring access to counselling. Support services can be outsourced, but must be accessible, and any charges must be reasonable. 
 

An important element of fostering wellbeing and safety is the preparedness of the provider and its capacity to respond to incidents, especially critical incidents (Standard 2.3.5). Another aspect of preparedness is a provider’s capacity to anticipate issues through risk identification and mitigation (see Standard 6.2.1e), and to implement preventative actions. TEQSA will expect to see evidence of risk identification consistent with the scale and context of the provider and its environment, and how this guides the provider’s preparedness.

Critical incidents

In relation to critical incidents, TEQSA will expect to see evidence (e.g. policies, procedures, checklists, rehearsals, accountabilities) of how a provider intends to respond to a range of foreseeable major events either on or off-campus that pose risks to students or staff. These might include:

• violent behaviour, assaults, bomb scares
• serious accidents, explosions, fire; or
• deaths.

TEQSA accepts that many incidents will require a tailored response but nonetheless expects to see an overall approach to preparedness that is considered and likely to be practicable, that should include a critical incident management plan. The plan should include a review and reporting phase to ensure lessons are learned as part of the follow-up (Standard 2.3.5). TEQSA will also expect a provider to be prepared to respond to events of different nature and scale, e.g. responding to an event affecting many students collectively, such as a terrorism incident, as distinct from an isolated event involving an individual such as an assault or sexual harassment.

Other incidents, assault and harassment

Where incidents do occur on campus, off campus or online, TEQSA will expect a provider to implement an appropriate and effective response, including where necessary taking disciplinary action against those found to be responsible for assaults and making any adjustments to its policy framework and practices to reduce the risk of recurrence and enhance safety and security.

All incidents considered significant by the provider should be recorded and monitored, including ‘near misses’ that do not result in harm, but easily could have. Patterns of recurring incidents should be identified, reported to the responsible managers and governance bodies and action taken to mitigate future risk.

Providers should report to TEQSA (as material changes) incidents that indicate material breaches in safety or preventative controls, including recurring incidents of sexual assault or sexual harassment.

Incidents of assault or harassment may give rise to student grievances, which should be addressed with reference to Section 2.4 of the HES Framework (Student Grievances and Complaints) and the related Guidance Note. Complaints resolution processes should be accessible and effective.

Some incidents (particularly assaults) may need to be reported to the police, where there is reason to believe a criminal offence may have been committed. Any other reporting must be consistent with the requirements of privacy legislation.

At the same time as taking action to respond to incidents as they occur, providers should take pre-emptive action to minimise incidents, including through appropriate evidence-based sexual violence prevention education programs and campaigns.

Staff and students should be clearly advised that the provider will take a zero-tolerance approach to sexual assault and sexual harassment and other forms of harmful misconduct.

In some cases students may experience a misadventure that is outside the control of the provider and unrelated to their course of study, e.g. a violent assault in a city street. While the provider may not have jurisdiction to investigate such incidents or take action against those responsible (unless the assailant is a fellow-student), it may need to provide access to support to mitigate any flow-on effects on the student’s education, e.g. through temporary incapacitation, or where the assailant could be a fellow student. TEQSA expects a provider to have contemplated how it intends to deal with such matters, at least in principle, and to have a clear understanding of the boundaries of its responsibilities. For example, will the provider implement follow-up actions such as offering ongoing counselling and academic support?

Where staff have particular accountabilities for providing support, TEQSA will need to be satisfied that they are competent to undertake their roles by way of qualifications, experience and currency of knowledge.

TEQSA will not seek to duplicate safety regulation that is carried out by other authorities, but will nonetheless wish to be assured that a provider is meeting its obligations to other authorities, consistent with the HE Framework, including occupational health and safety requirements. TEQSA will also be interested in any lapses in compliance with safety regulations that may occur and will want to be assured that such lapses have been rectified and action has been taken to prevent recurrences.

TEQSA may also be alerted to lapses in the wellbeing and safety environment through complaints from staff and students or referrals from other agencies.

Resources and references

Australian and New Zealand Student Services Association Inc., ANZSSA Guidelines for Professional Practice.

Australian Government, Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000.

Australian Government, National Code of Practice for Providers of Education and Training to Overseas Students 2017.

Australian Human Rights Centre, University of New South Wales, Strengthening Australian University Responses to Sexual Assault and Harassment Project.

Australian Human Rights Centre, University of New South Wales, On Safe Ground report (August 2017).

Enhancing Student Wellbeing project.

Healthy Universities Network (UK).

Henry, A., Macrae, M., and Kaplan, A., The Hunting Ground Australia Project.

National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education.

Universities Australia, (12 February 2016), Respect. Now. Always campaign.

TEQSA, Guidance Note: Grievance and Complaint Handling. 

TEQSA welcomes the diversity of educational delivery across the sector and acknowledges that its guidance notes may not encompass all of the circumstances seen in the sector. TEQSA also recognises that the requirements of the HESF can be met in different ways according to the circumstances of the provider. Provided the requirements of the HESF are met, TEQSA will not prescribe how they are met. If in doubt, please contact the TEQSA Enquiries Management team at providerenquiries@teqsa.gov.au. 

Version #	Date	Key changes
1.0	28 July 2017	Made available as beta version for consultation.
1.1	11 October 2017	Minor amendment to ‘What will TEQSA look for?” text box, and addition of resource from the Australian Human Rights Centre.
1.2	8 January 2018	Amendments in the light of submissions received during and after the consultation period.

Body

Providers should note that Guidance Notes are intended to provide guidance only. They are not definitive or binding documents. Nor are they prescriptive. The definitive instruments for regulatory purposes remain the TEQSA Act and the Higher Education Standards Framework as amended from time to time. 

What does workforce planning encompass?

‘Workforce Planning’ is a term used for the collective processes that are used by an organisation to plan, establish, develop, maintain and optimise its staffing profile to achieve its objectives. ‘Human resource planning’ and ‘staffing’ are sometimes used as synonyms. In the case of a higher education provider, the upshot of successful workforce planning is a staffing profile that will not only fulfil the provider’s higher education mission but also ensure that the provider meets, and continues to meet, the requirements of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2015 (HES Framework) and operates as an efficient organisation, both academically and corporately. 

TEQSA sees workforce planning as encompassing all types of staffing¹ and all stages of a provider’s development, including: 

• establishment of a new provider
• offering a new course, especially in a new field
• staged development of a new provider 
• maintenance or optimisation of an established provider’s ongoing workforce needs
• a change of mission or other new development that alters workforce needs.

Relevant Standards in the HES Framework

The HES Framework does not address workforce planning per se. Rather, it specifies the outcomes that must be met through a provider’s staffing arrangements (which, in turn, flow from the provider’s workforce planning processes). 

The HES Framework addresses and/or affects workforce requirements through a number of Standards, both directly and indirectly. The provider’s governing body is accountable for setting and monitoring corporate directions and targets (Standard 6.2.1b), seeing that sufficient resources are available to maintain and sustain the provider’s business model while meeting the requirements of the HES Framework (Standard 6.2.1c) and for identification and management of risks (Standard 6.2.1e). An appreciation of the provider’s capacity to deliver on its mission through its workforce is thus a central role of corporate governance. Academic matters must also operate according to an academic governance framework established by the governing body (Standard 6.2.1f). These governance requirements necessarily encompass oversight of workforce needs and capabilities. They also extend to any delivery arrangements with other parties (Standards 5.4.1, 5.4.2).  

The staffing complement of each course of study must be sufficient to meet the educational, academic support and administrative needs of student cohorts (Standard 3.2.1) in an environment that fosters wellbeing and safety (Section 2.3). The overall academic staffing profile must be sufficient to provide academic oversight and leadership consistent with the nature and level of expected learning outcomes (Standard 3.2.2). The attributes of teaching staff are specified (Standards 3.2.3, 3.2.4) and include keeping up to date with contemporary developments (Standard 3.2.3a). Teaching staff are expected to be accessible to students for individual assistance (Standard 3.2.5). Research staff are required to be equipped for their role (Standard 4.1.2). The research training Standards require that research training be provided in a scholarly environment (Standard 4.2.2) under specified supervisory requirements (Standard 4.2.3). Teachers and supervisors are expected to have access to feedback on their performance and to be supported in enhancing these activities (Standard 5.3.6). The facilities and infrastructure (2.1.1 – 2.1.3) and learning resources (3.3.1 – 3.3.4) of the provider need to be fit for purpose, sufficient for the students who use them and accessible when needed, all of which require appropriate administrative and management staffing, typically by professional staff. 

The HES Framework requires institutional mechanisms for governance oversight (Section 6.3) and quality assurance (Sections 5.1-5.4) of academic activities, which have implications for staffing of these processes. Numerous Standards specify or imply the availability of staff with particular skills and expertise such as academic skills, detailed technical expertise (e.g. application of admissions policies, recognition of prior learning), and awareness of institutional policy and/or statutory requirements (e.g. for international students under the ESOS Act), all of which have implications for the recruitment and continuing development of staff, whether professional or academic.  

Intent of workforce planning

Ideally, effective workforce planning should ensure that a provider has the right people, with the right skills, in the right positions, at the right time, to achieve its mission and to continue to meet the requirements of the HES Framework. In essence workforce planning needs to encompass both the sufficiency of staffing and the capability of individual staff and teams.  For the purposes of this note, ‘capability’ is taken broadly to include cross cultural competence and diversity, as well as technical and management capabilities. 

The nature and extent of workforce planning will vary with a provider’s circumstances, stage of development and scale. It will be particularly important when a provider is commencing operations as a higher education provider or is undertaking a new initiative such as establishing a new course of study or introducing a new field of education or AQF level. For existing providers, periodic workforce planning will most likely be more concerned with ensuring that the staffing profile is developed, refined and sustained, or adapted to changing circumstances and emerging opportunities. 

Workforce planning will involve different levels of the provider, in many different ways (e.g. corporate oversight by the governing body, business unit budgeting, optimising the academic staffing profile for a course of study, succession planning for critical positions, matching the academic or support needs of particular cohorts of students).

Risks to quality

Failure to engage in effective workforce planning can result in numerous types of risks depending on where or how the staffing arrangements are inadequate, particularly in the case of providers with an overall medium or high risk rating. These might include:

• unrealistic projections of staffing requirements with unsustainable financial and/or educational outcomes
• a staffing mix that is collectively unable to provide sufficient academic leadership and oversight at a level appropriate to the education offered staff numbers and capabilities not rising in line with rising student numbers as operations scale up, with attendant risks to educational delivery, student experiences and provider reputation
• teaching staff who are unable to lead intellectual inquiry at the level required
• a learning environment that does not foster scholarship or (where applicable) research training
• an insufficient or inappropriate skills base to provide academic or personal support for student cohorts
• insufficient recognition of staff development needs
• inconsistency in staffing practices
• poor organisational capacity to adapt to changing circumstances
• insufficient capacity to anticipate and respond to contingencies and uncertainties
• inadequate service delivery
• failure to properly consider the practical workforce implications of academic and/or corporate developments.

What TEQSA will look for

In the first instance TEQSA will need to take account of the stage of development of the provider (e.g. new, developing or established) and whether the provider is in a relatively stable phase of staffing or is proposing new initiatives that require significant new workforce planning, such as:

• introducing a new field of education or course of study
• developing a new campus or mode of delivery
• a proposed change of provider category
• marked changes in service delivery
• marked changes in the scale of operations.

In the case of new providers and new developments, TEQSA will need to be satisfied that the provider will meet the staffing requirements of the HES Framework for the initial establishment phase and then continue to meet the requirements through subsequent phases. They will need to show how they will scale up their workforce progressively as student numbers are projected to increase.

TEQSA acknowledges that workforce planning can be undertaken in various ways according to the circumstances, scale and stage of development of the provider. In so doing TEQSA does not seek to prescribe how workforce planning is done or the form a workforce plan might take. Some providers may prefer to incorporate workforce plans in another planning framework (e.g. strategic plan, business plan), or to have a stand-alone workforce plan. Irrespective of the approach taken by particular providers, TEQSA will expect to see key elements of a workforce planning process encompassing planning, target setting, monitoring and improvement and that these elements give rise to informed views at senior executive and governing body level. Note: Some notes on accepted elements of good practice are in Appendix A of this document for information.

TEQSA’s prime focus will be on the outcomes of workforce planning and the likelihood that the relevant Standards of the HES Framework that relate to staffing will be met and continue to be met on the basis of the planning. TEQSA will expect to see the following:

• Governance mechanisms that provide oversight of a provider’s staffing arrangements. These arrangements will need to show that the provider and the corporate governing body meet oversight requirements relevant to staffing (Standards 6.2.1b, 6.2.1c, 6.2.1e) and that the corporate governing body ensures that there is a policy framework in place that provides leadership and governance of academic activities (Standard 6.2.1f). The policy framework will need to cover selection and development of staff (including underperforming staff) and address the requirements of the Standards for academic staffing (Standards 3.2.1-3.2.5), including research staffing and research training if applicable to the provider (Standards 4.1.2, 4.2.2, 4.2.3). The governing body will also need to satisfy itself that administrative, management and service delivery staffing are consistent with the provider’s mission and sustainability.
• The actual, or projected, staffing complement for each course of study (including support functions and services). The data (or projections) will need to demonstrate that the level of staffing and attributes (e.g. numbers, levels, fields, skills and experience) of staff involved in both academic and support roles meet the requirements of the relevant Standards. In particular, a provider will need to demonstrate that staffing arrangements reflect the needs of student cohorts (e.g. Standards 2.3.3, 3.2.1) and are capable of achieving the expected learning outcomes for the course of study (Standard 3.2.2). In the case of a new provider or new development, staffing projections will need to be accompanied by a credible analysis of the projections and a plan for how they are expected to be achieved (see related TEQSA Guidance Note - Staffing, Learning Resources and Educational Support). 
• A risk analysis for projected developments. The provider will need to demonstrate that the risks associated with projected developments (including those relating to the ability to meet staffing requirements) have been identified and that these can be managed and mitigated (Standard 6.2.1e).
• An outline of the actual or projected governance and quality assurance systems for academic activities (including boards and committees) and provision for staff to operate and support them. The outline will need to demonstrate that the requirements of the relevant Standards (Sections 5.1-5.3, 6.3, and 5.4 if third party arrangements are involved) are met or will be met.

Related guidance notes

• Staffing, Learning Resources and Educational Support
• Determining Professional Equivalence
• Scholarship

Resources and references

Australian Qualifications Framework Council (2013), Australian Qualifications Framework Second Edition January 2013.

Coates, H., et al, 2009, The attractiveness of the Australian academic profession: A comparative analysis, ACER Research Briefing, retrieved 5 June 2014.

Hugo, G. and Morriss, A., 2010, Investigating the Ageing Academic Workforce: Stocktake, report commissioned by Universities Australia from The National Centre for Social Applications of Geographic Information Systems, retrieved 5 June 2014.  

Standards Australia, HB 299-2008 Workforce Planning.  

Workforce planning guide, Australian Public Service Commission.

TEQSA welcomes the diversity of educational delivery across the sector and acknowledges that its guidance notes may not encompass all of the circumstances seen in the sector. TEQSA also recognises that the requirements of the HESF can be met in different ways according to the circumstances of the provider. Provided the requirements of the HESF are met, TEQSA will not prescribe how they are met. If in doubt, please contact the TEQSA Enquiries Management team at providerenquiries@teqsa.gov.au. 
 

Version #	Date	Key changes
1.0	21 December 2017	Made available as beta version for consultation.
1.1	3 April 2019	Amended in response to consultation feedback.

Appendix A

Notes on Good Practice in Workforce Planning

Desirable features of a workforce planning process

Some of the features of a workforce planning process that TEQSA recognises as good practice include:

• systematic analysis of a staff profile (numbers, levels, skills and experience, fields) needed to meet a provider’s higher education objectives and achieve expected student learning outcomes, and of gaps compared to current staffing
• consideration of both external factors (such as availability of skills, competition, changes in government policy) and internal factors (such as the age of the workforce, budget, current and proposed higher education courses of study, fields of education and research areas)
• formulation of strategies and objectives into a plan, including targets 
• alignment of the plan with the organisational strategic plan and budgets
• a consultative and deliberative approval process that ensures the plan is considered and authorised by the appropriate managers and governance bodies
• implementation of the plan through effective policies and procedures e.g. for staff selection and appointments
• a cyclical process of periodic revision to ensure that the plan remains adapted to future needs. 

Desirable elements of a workforce plan

TEQSA recognises that approaches to workforce planning are likely to vary over the diverse range and scale of higher education providers. 

A fully developed workforce plan will typically encompass the following elements:

• Outline of the strategic context
  • including the provider’s overall strategic objectives
• Analysis of the current and future staff profile 
  • especially qualifications and experience and numbers of staff at all levels and in the various fields of education currently taught and planned
• Identification of gaps between current and future staff profile
• Identification of strategies and/or initiatives to fill the gaps and build the profile, such as:
  • recruit new staff members
  • develop and promote existing staff members
  • manage the performance of underperforming staff members.
• Designation of managers responsible for carrying out the strategies
• Identification of performance indicators and targets that will assist in determining whether the objectives are being met.

Of these, the most important elements to be codified in a plan are identification of strategies and initiatives to achieve human resources objectives, and how the achievement of these objectives will be assessed or measured. 

Once a plan has been finalised, it then needs to be implemented, and periodically the provider needs to monitor whether the objectives of the plan are being achieved.

Body

Providers should note that Guidance Note are intended to provide guidance only. The definitive instruments for regulatory purposes remain the TEQSA Act and the Higher Education Standards Framework as amended from time to time.

What does work-integrated learning encompass?

In the context of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021 (HES Framework), work-integrated learning (WIL) encompasses any arrangement where students undertake learning in a work context as part of their course requirements. WIL can be undertaken as part of coursework or research training.

WIL activities may include:

• professional workplace placements (also known as internships, clinical placements, fieldwork, practicums) whether local, interstate or international
• online or virtual WIL (e.g. telehealth) with real clients or industry input
• industry-partnered projects in the classroom (e.g. hackathons, incubators/start-ups) that involve industry, community or professional partners
• a simulated work environment with industry input, consultation or assessment, or
• activities in other contexts involving industry or community partners.

The nature and scope of WIL may vary in purpose (with a focus on technical skill acquisition, professionalism, professional responsibility, identity and values, enculturation to professional roles etc), duration (short-term to long-term, part-time or full-time), timing in the curriculum (in the first, middle or final years), extent of supervision and tasks and responsibility given to students, as well as the extent of integration of the student learning with the activities of the workplace or with the remainder of the student’s coursework.

In all cases WIL experiences must build towards the learning outcomes of a course and meet other HES Framework requirements such as those regarding staff qualifications, professional accreditation and student support tailored to the needs of the cohort. The specific variations in the form of the WIL activity and the field of study should also be considered in accordance with the HES Framework.

Positive WIL experiences can enable a provider to build and grow relationships with industry or community organisations to inform and enhance approaches to teaching and learning. Importantly, positive WIL experiences ensure that students have educationally sound opportunities to further develop and demonstrate their learning and build their professional networks. Developing good practice in WIL is a dynamic field of educational research and practice. TEQSA recognises this dynamism as a strength and will support innovative approaches to WIL, providing that they safeguard the quality of the student experience and meet the applicable requirements under the HES Framework and other applicable laws.

What TEQSA will look for

The HES Framework requires TEQSA to consider a provider’s WIL arrangements both directly under Standard 5.4.1 as well as indirectly through several others, as below:

Part A: Standards for HE Providers	Key considerations
5.4.1: Delivery with Other Parties	Provider is to ensure that WIL experiences and supervisory arrangements for WIL experiences are quality assured
1.4: Learning Outcomes and Assessment 3.1: Course Design	Methods of assessment are to be appropriate for the level and nature of learning outcomes
2.3: Wellbeing and Safety 2.4: Student Grievances and Complaints	Provider remains responsible for the student’s safety and welfare

Further, WIL may form part of a provider’s engagement with employers, industry and the professions (Provider Category Criteria B1.2.9 and B1.3.12, as applicable).

The HES Framework requires TEQSA to consider the following aspects of a provider’s WIL arrangements:

• WIL forms part of a coherent course of study including through sound constructive alignment between expected learning outcomes of a course of study and methods of assessment and the teaching and learning content of WIL
• WIL is delivered through adequate facilities and infrastructure to support the student’s success, including supporting diversity and equity considerations
• the provider has taken effective steps to monitor and support the wellbeing and safety of students engaged in WIL, and has clear student grievance processes capable of resolving issues students may have with the WIL aspects of their course of study, as well as managing critical incidents should they eventuate
• the provider has in place and implements policies and procedures for quality assuring WIL including quality assuring the student experience and external supervision
• WIL is well-conceived in design and rationale, educationally sound and its implementation is quality assured and monitored by the provider, irrespective of approach. Ideally this should be supported by authoritative educational research and ongoing WIL-related scholarship by staff involved in planning and delivering WIL units
• WIL that forms part of requirements for professional accreditation is fit for that purpose and is clearly and accurately described in representations made by the provider or its agents.

Identified issues

Within the context of the HES Framework, TEQSA has identified a range of issues which are indicative of risks to the quality of WIL. These include, but are not limited to:

• the role and integration of WIL is inadequately considered by the provider in designing a course of study and/or specifying and assessing the expected learning outcomes. Relatedly, a provider’s supports services may not be adequate to meet the needs of students undertaking WIL (Standard 5.4.1 and Section 2.3)
• students involved in WIL experience limited engagement with their provider during their experience, and have few opportunities to engage with other students (Standard 5.4.1 and Section 1.4)
• the outcomes and effectiveness of WIL vary markedly from site to site, or from time to time (Standard 5.4.1)
• the experience does not contribute to achievement of the learning outcomes associated with the WIL units, such as in a simulation which is too different from a real-life application of the targeted skills (Standard 5.4.1, and Sections 1.4 and 3.1)
• the roles and expectations of all parties involved are not agreed, e.g. through a formal agreement, or are poorly specified, including expectations about the ownership of any intellectual property generated by the student in the course of a WIL experience (Standard 5.4.1)
• the provider’s expectations of the role and outcomes of WIL are unrealistic, unreasonable, impractical, or not informed by input from the relevant industry or sector, or are not supported by the provider’s level of involvement  (Standard 5.4.1 and Section 3.1)
• there are lapses by the WIL partner for which the provider remains accountable, such as where the partner:
  • lacks capabilities which are key to learning outcomes
  • does not adequately provide for supervision of students, including training of and support for supervisors
  • does not obtain or use student feedback, or
  • does not adequately protect academic integrity (Standard 5.4.1 and Section 3.1).

The risks involved with WIL experiences are highly contextual depending on the circumstances of the provider, industry or community partner, method or mode, location, students, expected learning outcomes, and field of education.

While students may be invited to take the initiative in searching for WIL opportunities, under the HES Framework a provider remains accountable for ensuring that the WIL experience is educationally sound and students have access to appropriate support. WIL should not be treated merely as another form of ‘work’. WIL arrangements must be consistent with the guidance available from Fair Work Australia on work experience and internships. For overseas students, workplace arrangements must conform with local employment and workplace legislation, including safety.

TEQSA welcomes the diversity of educational delivery across the sector and acknowledges that its guidance notes may not encompass all of the circumstances seen in the sector. TEQSA also recognises that the requirements of the HESF can be met in different ways according to the circumstances of the provider. Provided the requirements of the HESF are met, TEQSA will not prescribe how they are met. If in doubt, please contact the TEQSA Enquiries Management team at providerenquiries@teqsa.gov.au.

Version #	Date	Key changes
1.0	19 August 2016	Made available as beta version for consultation.
1.1	25 August 2017	Updated to incorporate consultation feedback.
1.2	11 October 2017	Addition to ‘What will TEQSA look for?” text box.
2.0	4 May 2022	Major revision.

Body

TEQSA’s regulatory processes may require information that is confidential to a higher education provider, including commercial-in-confidence information. This document provides further information about TEQSA’s approach to confidential information. Information about TEQSA’s handling of personal information is set out in TEQSA’s Privacy Policy. 

Relevant legislation

TEQSA has statutory obligations of confidentiality pursuant to Division 2 of Part 10 of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011.

TEQSA also operates within a public accountability framework. This includes obligations:

• to provide information to Ministers, the Parliament or Parliamentary Committees
• under the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act), the Auditor General Act 1997, and the Ombudsman Act 1976
• to provide reasons for TEQSA’s decisions, including in the context of court or tribunal proceedings.

In particular, the FOI Act requires TEQSA to consider each individual FOI request on its merits at the time the request is made. TEQSA will also consider any exemptions or conditional exemptions under the FOI Act. The FOI Act does not give agencies discretion to apply exemptions on a blanket basis. More information about the operation of the FOI Act is available in the Information Commissioner’s guidelines on the FOI Act.

TEQSA’s approach

Where a higher education provider considers that its information should be treated as confidential by TEQSA, the provider should contact the relevant Assessment Manager or TEQSA team. If in doubt, contact the TEQSA Enquiries Management team at providerenquiries@teqsa.gov.au. Examples of the kind of information a provider may request be treated as confidential include:

• records of confidential commercial discussions in relation to possible arrangements with third parties
• confidential legal advice about ongoing court proceedings
• confidential records of disciplinary proceedings against individual staff members.

The provider will need to give TEQSA the reasons for requesting that the information be treated as confidential (without disclosing any confidential information to TEQSA as part of those reasons).

TEQSA may request further information from a provider about a claim for confidentiality and will consider all requests from a higher education provider that information be treated as confidential. In appropriate cases, TEQSA may suggest that TEQSA and the provider enter into a written arrangement setting out the basis on which the information will be treated as confidential. TEQSA may also suggest that the provider gives TEQSA other information which is not confidential, or that the provider gives TEQSA the information in a form, which is not confidential.

Where TEQSA has received a request to disclose a provider’s confidential information, TEQSA will usually consult the provider and give the provider an opportunity to make submissions on whether TEQSA should release the information. However, in certain cases this may not be possible.

While the FOI Act precludes the application of exemptions on a blanket basis, in the case of FOI applications, TEQSA will carefully take into account any relevant considerations, including the commercial sensitivity of particular information where appropriate.