1.  Introduction

This Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) outlines the structured process that National College of Ireland (NCI) follows to design and develop new academic programmes prior to formal validation. It operationalises the requirements set out in the Policy on Programme Development, and should be read in conjunction with that policy.

For programmes involving technology-mediated learning (TML), this SOP should also be read alongside the Policy on Blended and Online Learning Programmes and, where applicable, the Asynchronous Learning Development Policy. For statutory apprenticeship programmes, this SOP should be read in conjunction with the Policy on Apprenticeships and associated governance and procedural documentation.

This SOP applies to all programme types, including those leading to QQI major, minor, and special purpose awards, such as micro-credentials. It also applies to non-award professional programmes delivered by NCI, whether offered independently or in collaboration with industry or external agencies. In all cases, internal academic governance and quality assurance oversight are maintained through the Executive Group and Academic Programmes and Quality Committee (APQC).

2.  Development Process

The programme development process at NCI establishes a structured, consultative, and phased pathway for designing new academic programmes prior to internal review and external validation. It ensures that proposed programmes are strategically aligned, academically robust, and operationally feasible before they proceed into the formal validation process, governed by the Programme Validation SOP.

While timelines vary depending on programme complexity, delivery mode, and external requirements, the typical development cycle begins approximately 19 months before the prospectus publication date for the intended first intake. This allows sufficient time for strategic and academic approval, descriptor development, internal review, and external validation ahead of marketing and recruitment.

2.1. Programme Development Timelines

The programme development process is designed to ensure that new programmes are validated in time for inclusion in the relevant prospectus, allowing marketing and recruitment to proceed ahead of the first intake.

Timelines are calculated backwards from the prospectus publication date for the intended first intake. This ensures all stages, strategic and academic approval, full descriptor development, internal review, and external validation, are completed with sufficient lead-in time for governance reporting and marketing activities.

• Undergraduate Programmes – The CAO prospectus is typically published in September of the year before the first intake. To meet this deadline, the process starts approximately 19 months before prospectus publication with the submission of POP Part A to QIE.
• Postgraduate Programmes – The postgraduate prospectus is typically published in January of the year of first intake. The process also starts approximately 19 months before prospectus publication, but the governance sequence is offset to align with the later publication date.

The sequence of tasks and committee reviews is anchored to these fixed prospectus publication points. Governance checkpoints are scheduled accordingly:

• POP Part A – 19 months before prospectus publication
• POP Part B – 13 months before prospectus publication
• Internal Review & External Validation – completed several months before publication to allow for approvals and final documentation submission to QQI.

A call for POP forms will be issued by QIE each January, covering all programmes proposed for inclusion in prospectuses in the following cycle. Schools should plan their proposals to meet this annual starting point.

The diagrams below illustrate the standard timelines for undergraduate and postgraduate September starts, showing the positioning of each stage relative to prospectus publication and intake dates.

2.2. Programme Opportunity Proposal (Part A) – Strategic Case

~19 months before prospectus publication

The Programme Opportunity Proposal (POP) begins with the development of Part A, which outlines the strategic and operational rationale for a new programme. This proposal must be endorsed by the School Committee prior to submission. All new proposals, including micro-credentials and non-award professional programmes, must complete Part A of the Programme Opportunity Proposal Form. This ensures strategic oversight is maintained across all academic offerings, regardless of award type or external validation route.

Actions:

• The Programme Proposer completes POP Part A, including:
  • Programme overview and proposed intake
  • Strategic alignment and market rationale
  • Target learner groups and delivery mode
  • Resource and capacity implications
  • Summary of internal and external stakeholder consultations
• Internal consultations must include:
  • Registry
  • Admissions & Marketing
  • Finance
  • International Office
  • Teaching Enhancement Unit (mandatory if TML is proposed)
  • Academic Partnerships Manager (mandatory where collaborative, transnational, or joint delivery arrangements are planned)
  • Careers / Employer Engagement
• QIE reviews the submission for completeness.
• If complete, QIE submits the proposal to the Executive Group for review.

Executive Group Outcomes:

• Approved → Referred to APQC for academic consideration (Part B)
• Approved with Conditions → Returned to the proposer via School Committee for revision
• Not Approved → Proposal does not proceed

For programmes proposing blended, online, or hybrid delivery, the Online Feasibility Checklist must also be completed as part of Part A.

2.3. Programme Opportunity Proposal (Part B) – Academic Case

~13 months before prospectus publication

Following approval of the strategic case, the academic rationale must be developed for all programmes, including QQI-validated micro-credentials and professional programmes that do not require QQI submission. While validation requirements differ, all academic proposals must demonstrate alignment with NCI's quality assurance standards and academic governance procedures. Upon approval of Part A, the proposer develops POP Part B, which sets out the academic rationale for the proposed programme and confirms that sufficient academic planning and consultation has taken place to support descriptor development.

Actions:

• The Programme Director (or proposer) prepares POP Part B, including:
  • Programme rationale and draft Minimum Intended Programme Learning Outcomes (MIPLOs)
  • Indicative programme structure and module titles
  • Alignment with relevant QQI award standards
  • Summary of teaching, learning, and assessment approach
  • Proposed entry criteria and learner support considerations
• Prior to submission, further academic consultation must be completed with:
  • Registry
  • Teaching Enhancement Unit (if applicable)
  • Academic leads in other Schools (for shared or elective modules)
  • Relevant committees or partnership units where collaborative delivery is involved
• QIE reviews POP Part B for completeness and forwards the submission to the Academic Programmes and Quality Committee (APQC).

APQC Outcomes:

• Approved → Programme proceeds to full descriptor development
• Approved with Conditions → Returned via School Committee for revision
• Not Approved → Proposal does not proceed

APQC acts under delegated authority from Academic Council and reports all approvals for noting.

2.4. Programme Validation Descriptor Development

begins ~12–13 months before prospectus publication; first draft completed ~3 months before internal review

Following APQC approval of Part B, the Programme Team begins full development of the Programme Validation Descriptor (PVD).

For QQI micro-credentials, the PVD must follow the special purpose award structure and meet the criteria set out in QQI’s Guidance for Micro-Credentials (2024). These programmes are typically validated for a maximum of three years and may undergo a desk-based external review rather than a full evaluation panel.

For non-award professional programmes, a PVD-equivalent document must be developed, aligned with NCI's internal standards, and suitable for APQC approval even if QQI submission is not required.

Actions:

• QIE schedules a project initiation meeting with the Programme Team to confirm timelines and provide document templates.
• The Programme Team undertakes detailed consultations with:
  • Internal stakeholders: Registry, TEU, Finance, Marketing, International Office, Careers, Employer Engagement, Academic Partnerships Manager (if applicable)
  • External stakeholders: industry representatives, professional bodies, external academics, learner feedback panels
• For apprenticeship proposals, structured engagement must also occur with the Consortium Steering Group (CSG) and relevant employer representatives.
• The Programme Team develops the PVD, including:
  • Programme rationale, structure, and NFQ level
  • Module ECTS, titles, and delivery modes
  • Assessment and progression models
  • TML strategy and supports (if applicable)
  • Work placement or work-based learning (where relevant)
  • Learner supports and indicative resources
  • Draft reading lists and sample assessment outlines
• QIE provides formal feedback on the draft PVD to ensure alignment with relevant expectations and internal standards. The team revises as needed.

For Apprenticeship Programmes, the PVD must additionally include:

• On-the-job learning model and mentor training framework
• Workplace assessment strategy and governance
• Documented input from CSG
• Reference to Memorandum of Agreement Guidelines and Workplace Mentor Training Programme

The completed PVD then forms the basis of the Internal Review and subsequent external validation, as governed by Policy on Programme Validation.

Version Control