Standard 2 - Governance and quality

As detailed by the evidence list, this requirement demonstrates that AEIs and delivery sites abide by UK regulation as required by the specific type of programme. This will likely include evidence that the AEI is compliant with the General Conditions of Recognition.

Where an AEI validates a programme delivered at a partner delivery site, the validation process must be clear, and evidence of the validation approval provided. If validation has not yet been undertaken, a planned date must be provided, and this requirement will only be met once validation is approved. If the validation has already been granted, it is expected that a condition is included referencing the need to address RCVS requirements.

The mapping documents for the RCVS Day One Competences, Skills and Professional Behaviours are suggested as evidence in order to demonstrate that the governance and quality processes have checked that the qualification meets RCVS requirements.
The QAA Subject Benchmark statements are only required for HE programmes. Module / unit paperwork is not required for this requirement.

It is imperative that evidence and documentation is received by regulatory bodies in accordance with their published timescales; completing the requisite action plans, for example, will demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

For existing programmes, providing evidence of liaison and communication with regulators, during auditing procedures, for example, can also be used as evidence. Submissions of data returns to regulators could also be used as an evidence example.

This requirement differs from that in Standard 1 in that this exclusively references the Code of Professional Conduct for Veterinary Nurses and aims to ensure that the Code is embedded throughout the qualification. It is expected that the governance and quality processes include checks to ensure that this is the case.

The RCVS Veterinary Nurse Registration Rules stipulate the mandatory requirements which qualifications must include, such as the hours required in clinical practice. It is expected that the governance and quality processes include checks to ensure that this is the case.

There are various different models of veterinary nurse qualifications, thus the evidence requirements will vary depending on the specific approach utilised.

Where an AEI validates a programme delivered at a partner delivery site, there must be an MOU in place detailing how the relationship is managed, who undertakes which elements of the agreement and what the expectations are.

AEIs, or their delivery sites, must also have a MOU in place with the TPs they approve, or that they utilise as a secondary affiliated TP (see Standard 6). These MOUs also need to include the relationship details, who undertakes which elements of the agreement and what the expectations are.

All MOUs need to be reviewed at a regularly specified point, for example annually or biannually, and include details of role requirements. It is also expected that site inspections are undertaken at regular intervals, assuring all parties that the learning environments remain safe, effective, and fit for purpose.

Linking back to Standard 1 (Requirements 1.10 and 1.11), promotion of equal, diverse, and inclusive approaches is an expectation of all veterinary nurse qualifications. This requirement considers those previous requirements in the context of student recruitment and how AEIs and delivery sites are assured that recruitment, selection and retention is fair.

This will include examples of recruitment processes, such as the interview process if utilised, with accessible options, as well as the follow up selection processes and how that is managed in a fair and inclusive way. The retention of students can be evidenced by
consideration of how the AEI or delivery site supports students with additional needs, and thus promotes programme completion by potentially underrepresented groups.

The RCVS does not set entry criteria for veterinary nurse qualifications; these must be set by each AEI and be specific to the type of course. For example, a Foundation Degree will have different entry criteria to a Bachelor’s Degree. Additionally, the entry criteria must be relevant for the programme outcomes and ensure that the basic science, mathematics, and English language requirements are considered.

AEIs utilising an apprenticeship pathway must ensure that the entry criteria do not contradict that specified by IfATE.

AEIs utilising UCAS for the application process should consider the standard points requirements for similar programmes.

All programmes are expected to have accepted equivalencies, enabling students who have not undertaken the typically expected qualifications to have access to the course. It must be clear what can be considered for equivalency and why, although it is accepted that not every example can be included, and some applicants will need to be considered on a case-by case basis. The process for checking qualifications should be clear.

AEIs and delivery sites must validate qualifications provided for the entry criteria; this ensures there are no obstacles to programme completion at a later point.

The RCVS does not stipulate what should be included in RPL policies and processes, rather that each AEI has a robust policy which can be effectively applied. It is accepted that RPL can be challenging for veterinary nurse qualifications, thus each AEI must have a clear rationale for its approach.

The RPL policy may be applicable to the whole AEI, or there may be a separate approach for the veterinary nurse qualifications. The RPL policy must also consider the UK educational regulatory requirements for the specific type of programme.

RPL in this context can also accommodate the following:

APL – accredited prior learning
RPEL – recognition of prior experiential learning
APEL – accredited prior experiential learning

Different AEIs, delivery sites and TPs will have differing approaches to achieving this requirement; providing students have the opportunity to access the relevant information it is not mandated as to how this is managed. This may include printed handbooks, or online inductions, depending on the AEI and the access requirements of its students.

It is expected that AEIs, delivery sites and TPs will ensure that the required information is updated as necessary and remains relevant to each cohort of students. AEIs will want to ascertain that students can understand the information they are accessing; this is routinely checked by panel members and RCVS personnel during accreditations and quality monitoring.

When providing evidence to the RCVS, AEIs may wish to consider providing direct access to the online or virtual learning platform.

delivery site; it is not acceptable to reference the RCVS guidance without a supportive, institution specific policy or procedure. This must include a clear statement that the RCVS will be notified of concerns as required. If the policy is an AEI, or delivery site, wide policy, this may be covered with reference to the PSRB requirements.

Student veterinary nurses must be informed about the importance of disclosure of criminal convictions, and how this may affect their ability to register upon completion of the programme. It is suggested that AEIs and delivery sites revisit this discussion at multiple points throughout the programme. Student veterinary nurses should be supported to be honest about any criminal convictions, acting with the integrity expected of registered professionals. Nonetheless, it is likely they will be worried about the impact of disclosing, and they must be supported with this.

TPs must also be aware of, and follow, the AEI fitness to practise policy, empowering students to work within the scope of the Code and their capabilities.

The academic award references the AEI qualification, which is awarded upon successful completion, whereas the professional award references the eligibility for student veterinary nurses to apply to join the RCVS Register of Veterinary Nurses. Students may complete their academic award but choose not to Register.

Additionally, if students cannot complete the professional elements, for example they cannot achieve the programme requirements relating to the RCVS Veterinary Nurse Registration Rules, they may only be eligible to be awarded an exit, or step-off, award. This should be clearly indicated and justified. Exit, or step-off, awards cannot utilise the term ‘veterinary nursing’ (or derivatives of this term) in the title.

The personnel responsible for awarding the qualification must be familiar with these requirements and the process must be clearly documented.

Whilst this requirement appears to be similar to Requirement 1.1, and does relate to health and safety, this requirement is more relevant to the checks undertaken.

The AEI must be assured that campus reviews are undertaken, be that at the AEI or its delivery site. Likewise, AEIs and delivery sites must be assured that effective reviews are conducted of their TPs. This requirement is not referencing the specific checks which are undertaken, but a rationale and approach for the reviews, which are clearly documented.

AEIs, delivery sites and TPs must be able to demonstrate that they can safely and effectively recruit when required. This is not about the current programme team, or recruitment of clinical supervisors, but demonstrating that an appropriate person specification can be written, effective advertisement is undertaken, and there is a clear onboarding and induction process.

This requirement is only relevant to new provision, with the exception of existing programmes that have made significant amendments to the practical assessments.

For existing provision, this requirement can be marked as ‘not applicable’.

For new provision, or those making changes to the practical assessments, an indication as to when the mock assessment will likely run would be helpful.

The purpose of the examination trial is to check that the examination delivery can be completed in the way described in the policy and procedure documents. Given that this activity will take place a year before the first cohort sits the examination (for new provision) it may not be appropriate for students to take part. In this case consideration should be given to using newly-qualified nurses or clinical supervisors to play the role of the student.

Veterinary nurse qualifications are accredited by Veterinary Nurse Education Committee; should a change be made to the accredited programme it is no longer the programme which was reviewed and accredited by the Committee. Thus, all changes must be reported to the RCVS, and then accepted by Veterinary Nurse Education Committee before they can
be implemented.

It is helpful for AEIs and delivery sites to have a standard process which is followed in this scenario, which should also consider other educational regulatory requirements and Competition and Markets Authority stipulations. Guidance can be provided by the RCVS as required.  

This requirement should demonstrate that there is, or will be, sustainability of provision.

This covers the financial sustainability, for example, that the AEI, and delivery sites, can afford to run the programme, with all of the associated costs. This may be best evidenced by a profit and loss breakdown, clearly demonstrating income versus outgoings, and further planned developments.

Additionally, this requirement covers programme sustainability, such as a market demand for the programme with effective recruitment meeting the needs of the AEI. This should clearly reference a critical number / critical mass consideration demonstrating at which point the modelling becomes unsustainable and the programme would not be able to run. It is accepted that new programmes may make a financial loss in the first few years; the AEI is expected to acknowledge this and agree to the modelling.