1.  Introduction

This Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) outlines the steps and documentation required for the internal and external validation of new academic programmes at National College of Ireland (NCI). It operationalises the requirements set out in the Policy on Programme Validation, and should be read in conjunction with that policy.

For programmes involving technology-mediated learning, this SOP should also be read alongside the Policy on Blended and Online Learning Programmes and, where applicable, the Asynchronous Learning Development Policy (for fully online or flexible asynchronous elements).

For statutory apprenticeship programmes, this SOP should be read in conjunction with the Policy on Apprenticeships and associated governance and procedural documents.

This SOP also applies to QQI-validated micro-credentials, which follow a tailored validation process under QQI’s Guidance for Micro-Credentials. These are typically validated as special purpose awards for a maximum of three years and may be subject to desk-based external review.

Professional programmes that do not require QQI or external awarding body validation are not covered by this SOP but must follow the internal approval process outlined in the Policy on Programme Development.

2.  Validation Process

The programme validation process at NCI is structured into three key phases, ensuring that all new academic programmes meet institutional, national, and regulatory quality assurance standards before they are delivered to learners. These phases include structured approvals, internal and external review mechanisms, and final regulatory validation.

2.1. Indicative Timelines

The validation process is time-sensitive and is scheduled to ensure that final QQI approval is received in time for programme inclusion in the relevant prospectus and marketing cycle. Timelines are calculated backwards from the prospectus publication date for the intended first intake:

• Undergraduate programmes – CAO prospectus typically published in September of the year before the first intake; validation is normally completed by July–August of that year.
• Postgraduate programmes – Postgraduate prospectus typically published in January of the intake year; validation is normally completed by October–November of the preceding year.

From Internal Review to QQI approval, the process can take 6–9 months, depending on panel scheduling and response times. Programme Teams should allow adequate time for conditions of validation to be addressed following the Independent Evaluation Panel.

For new programme proposals, QIE will advise on specific deadlines in line with the annual programme development schedule and prospectus publication timelines.

2.2. Phase 1 – Internal Review

This phase ensures institutional confidence in the programme before submitting it for external review. The process guarantees that all academic, financial, and regulatory requirements have been met.

2.2.1. Programme Descriptor Finalisation & Internal Review Preparation

~4 weeks before Internal Review

Finalise all required documentation and prepare for the internal review process.

Actions:

• Programme Team updates the Programme Validation Descriptor based on:
  • Internal and external stakeholder feedback.
  • QIE recommendations.
  • Additional resource confirmations (staffing, facilities, external partnerships).
  • Requirements for specific programme types (e.g., apprenticeships, programmes using technology-mediated learning, micro-credentials).
  • Dean of School signs off on the final Programme Descriptor for internal review scheduling.
• QIE liaises with the Academic Programmes and Quality Committee (APQC) to schedule the internal review and circulate documentation.
• The APQC may request input from additional internal or external experts where programme-specific expertise is required, for example:
  • For apprenticeship programmes, the APQC may consult with a member of the Consortium Steering Group (CSG) or an academic with relevant experience in statutory apprenticeship delivery.
  • For programmes involving technology-mediated delivery (blended, hybrid, or online), the APQC may seek advice from a specialist in digital pedagogy, instructional design, or TML policy implementation.
  • Alternatively, the APQC may request a structured briefing on NCI’s internal TML framework prior to the review event.
  • For micro-credentials, the APQC may seek advice from a specialist with experience in short-form programme design, digital credentialing, or sectoral training needs analysis. Where appropriate, QQI’s streamlined validation expectations for micro-credentials may also inform the internal review structure
• For apprenticeship programmes, the Programme Descriptor must include:
  • Evidence of employer engagement and CSG endorsement (see Consortium Steering Group Terms of Reference)
  • Detailed description of the on-the-job learning environment, workplace mentor supports, and assessment structures (see Employer & Industry Engagement Procedures )
  • Confirmation that a Memorandum of Agreement will be in place with participating employers
  • Outline of mentor training compliance (see Workplace Mentor Training Programme)

2.2.2. Formal Notification to QQI

~4 weeks before Internal Review

QIE informs QQI that programme validation is moving forward and that an Independent Evaluation Panel (IEP) will be convened under NCI’s devolved responsibility, in accordance with QQI requirements.

Actions:

• QIE submits a formal notification to QQI, including:
  • Approved Programme Validation Descriptor.
  • Indicative timeline for external review.
  • Expected first learner intake.
  • Programme classification (e.g., statutory apprenticeship, technology-mediated learning including blended, hybrid, or fully online delivery, micro-credential, or programmes requiring professional accreditation).
• QQI acknowledges validation request and logs the programme entry on QHub.
• QIE liaises with QQI to confirm panel timelines.

2.2.3. Internal Review APQC

Documentation circulation to APQC members occurs at least 2 weeks before the review event

The Academic Programmes and Quality Committee (APQC) conducts an internal review of the proposed programme to assess its coherence, feasibility, and compliance with QQI validation criteria and NCI policies.

Actions:

• QIE circulates documentation to APQC members and any invited contributors at least two weeks before the review event, including:
  • Programme Validation Descriptor
  • Draft Learner Handbook
  • Resource Feasibility Plan
  • Sample assessment methodologies
  • Stakeholder consultation summary
• APQC Review Event & Programme Team Presentation:
  • The Programme Team presents the programme rationale, structure, and assessment approach.
  • The APQC reviews the submission for alignment with QQI standards and institutional policies.
  • For programmes using technology-mediated learning (TML), the committee will review:
    • Clarity of the proposed instructional settings
    • Accessibility and digital supports for learners
    • Online assessment integrity and learner identity verification mechanisms
    • Alignment with the Policy on Blended and Online Learning Programmes and, where relevant, the Asynchronous Learning Development Policy
  • The APQC may pose questions to the Programme Team to confirm academic robustness and institutional readiness.
• Review Outcomes:
  • Conditions – Must be addressed before submission for external validation.
  • Recommendations – Advisory suggestions for enhancement.
  • Commendations – Programme strengths noted during review.

2.2.4. Internal Review Report & Programme Response

Documents the findings of the internal review and ensures that all required revisions are addressed before submission for external validation.

Actions:

• QIE compiles the Internal Review Report (IRR) within 1 week after the review, on behalf of the APQC and circulates it to:
  • Programme Team
  • Academic Programmes and Quality Committee (APQC)
• Programme Team formally responds to any conditions issued by the APQC within 3 weeks after the review, including:
  • Documenting how each condition has been addressed
  • Revising the Programme Validation Descriptor and any supporting materials
  • Where TML-related conditions or recommendations have been issued, demonstrating alignment with the Policy on Blended and Online Learning Programmes and, where applicable, the Asynchronous Learning Development Policy
• Final Approval:
  • The Chair of the APQC signs off on the Internal Review Report once all conditions have been satisfactorily addressed. Ideally within 4 weeks post-panel review
  • QIE confirms documentation is complete, as appropriate, and clears the programme for submission to QQI for external validation
     

2.3.                    Phase 2 – External Review (Pre-Panel)

This phase ensures that the programme is formally submitted to QQI for Independent Evaluation Panel (IEP) review. It involves finalising documentation, liaising with QQI, and confirming the external panel timeline.

2.3.1. Finalisation of External Validation Documents

~12 weeks before External Panel Event

Ensure that all required documents are completed, reviewed, and approved before submission to QQI.

Actions:

• QIE & Programme Team finalise the following documents:
  • Self-Evaluation Report (SER) → A critical document reflecting institutional review, programme alignment with QQI criteria, and stakeholder feedback.
  • Final Programme Validation Descriptor (PVD) → Incorporating all conditions and recommendations from the APQC review.
  • Presidents Letter & Fee Note → Official documentation confirming institutional approval and financial structure.
  • Protection of Enrolled Learners (PEL) Arrangements → Ensuring learner continuity if the programme ceases.
• For programmes using technology-mediated learning (TML), the Programme Validation Descriptor must include:
  • A description of instructional settings and rationale
  • Learner access to digital infrastructure, support services, and training
  • Assessment strategy and academic integrity considerations in digital environments
  • Reference to the Policy on Blended and Online Learning Programmes and, where applicable, the Asynchronous Learning Development Policy
• For apprenticeship programmes, additional documentation must be included in the submission to QQI, including:
  • Consortium Steering Group endorsement letter or meeting minutes confirming programme support
  • Overview of the employer engagement strategy and work-based learning infrastructure
  • Summary of Memoranda of Agreement in place with employers
  • Confirmation of Workplace Mentor Training requirements
• For micro-credentials, the Programme Validation Descriptor and Self-Evaluation Report must align with QQI’s micro-credential validation framework. This includes documentation of sectoral need, standalone value, and a clear rationale for volume (typically 5–30 ECTS). Where QQI confirms a desk-based review, the panel process may be adjusted accordingly.
• Final Internal Approvals:
  • Dean of School signs off on the Programme Descriptor.
  • Director of QIE & VP for Academic Affairs formally approve before submission to QQI.

2.3.2. Submission to QQI & QHub Upload

~10 weeks before External Panel Event

Submit the programme for formal validation through QQI’s QHub system.

Actions:

• QIE submits the following to QQI via QHub:
  • Self-Evaluation Report (SER).
  • Programme Validation Descriptor (Final).
  • Institutional approval documentation.
  • PEL arrangements.
• QQI Acknowledges Submission & Reviews for Completeness:
  • If complete, QQI proceeds to panel formation.
  • If incomplete, QQI requests resubmission with additional details.
• QIE Responds to QQI Feedback (if required):
  • Addresses documentation gaps.
  • Clarifies any outstanding queries before formal acceptance.

2.3.3. Independent Evaluation Panel (IEP) Formation & Scheduling

8–6 weeks before the External Panel Event

The Independent Evaluation Panel (IEP) is responsible for reviewing programme proposals, ensuring alignment with national and institutional quality standards, and making evidence-based recommendations. The composition of the panel varies depending on whether the validation process falls under Devolved Responsibility (DR) or is managed directly by QQI.

2.3.3.1.          Panel Composition Under Devolved Responsibility (DR)

QIE is responsible for identifying, appointing, and confirming external panel members. The panel must meet the following composition requirements:

• Panel Chair – A senior academic or industry expert with significant experience in programme validation, quality assurance, or accreditation.
• External Academic Experts – Subject matter specialists with expertise in the programme discipline and experience in higher education teaching, learning, and assessment.
• Industry Representatives (if applicable) – Professionals with industry-relevant expertise to ensure alignment with sectoral needs and professional standards.
• Learner Representative (where required) – A current or former learner who can provide insight into the learner experience.

For Apprenticeship Programmes, the panel must include:

• At least one Employer Representative from the relevant occupational sector, preferably a member of the CSG or a participating employer with direct training experience
• A panellist with experience in coordinating statutory apprenticeship provision or national work-based learning models

The panel should be briefed in advance on NCI’s apprenticeship QA model, governance structures, and industry partnership arrangements.

• For micro-credentials, the panel may be reduced in size or convened through a desk-based review only, subject to QQI’s confirmation. At minimum, one panellist must have experience in quality assurance and/or short programme design. Where the validation is managed by QQI directly, the panel composition will be determined by QQI in accordance with its micro-credential guidance.

2.3.3.2.          Panel Composition When Managed by QQI

When validation is not under DR, QQI appoints external panel members and liaises directly with QIE to confirm the schedule and documentation submission requirements.

2.3.3.3.          Panel Selection and Confirmation Process

• Nomination and Selection:
  • QIE sources potential panel members from QQI’s List of Reviewers and Evaluators.
  • Panel members are selected based on:
    • Expertise in the programme’s academic discipline.
    • Experience in validation and quality assurance processes.
    • Diversity of perspectives, including industry and learner input.
    • Where the programme includes technology-mediated delivery, at least one panellist should have experience in online or blended programme design, digital pedagogy, or e-learning QA. Alternatively, a structured panel briefing must be provided in advance to ensure informed evaluation.
  • QIE ensures that no conflicts of interest exist by verifying each panellist’s credentials.
• Completion of Required Forms:
  • Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Form – All panel members must complete this form to declare any conflicts of interest and to ensure confidentiality of the validation process.
  • Expert Details Form – Panellists complete this document to outline their qualifications, subject matter expertise, and experience relevant to the validation process.
• Confirmation of Panel Membership:
  • QIE formally appoints panellists, confirming:
    • Panel composition meets QQI and NCI standards.
    • Panellists are available for the scheduled review event.
  • Appointment letters are issued to panel members outlining their responsibilities.
• Final Schedule Confirmation:
  • QIE finalises the panel schedule in coordination with panellists, the Programme Team, and QQI (if applicable).
  • Programme Teams are notified of their scheduled panel review date

2.3.4. Pre-Panel Preparation & Documentation Circulation

Once the Independent Evaluation Panel (IEP) is confirmed, QIE is responsible for ensuring that all necessary documentation is prepared and circulated to panel members in advance. The goal is to provide the panel with sufficient information to conduct a comprehensive review of the programme and ensure that any preliminary concerns are addressed before the formal validation event.

QIE  circulates the following documents at least two weeks before the scheduled panel review event:

• Programme Validation Descriptor (PVD) – The full programme document detailing rationale, curriculum structure, assessment strategy, learning outcomes, and alignment with QQI standards.
• Self-Evaluation Report (SER) – Institutional review and reflection on the programme development process, including evidence of stakeholder consultation.
• Assessment Strategy and Sample Assessments – Examples of formative and summative assessments aligned with programme learning outcomes.
• Institutional Policies on Learning, Teaching, and Assessment – Including academic integrity, grading, and appeals procedures.
• Protection of Enrolled Learners (PEL) Arrangements – Where applicable, to ensure continuity for learners in the event of programme discontinuation.
• Policy on Blended and Online Learning Programmes, and
• Asynchronous Learning Development Policy – if applicable
• Overview of delivery model and instructional settings for TML delivery

For Apprenticeship Programmes, additional documentation may be required, including:

• Employer Engagement Reports – Detailing industry collaboration and work-based learning integration.
• Apprenticeship Delivery Plan – Including structured work-based learning components and employer assessment frameworks.

Handling Panel Queries Before the Validation Event

IEP Initial Comments Template is provided to panel members along with the documentation. Panel members are expected to use this template to record their initial observations, commendations, and any areas requiring clarification.

Panel members submit their completed templates to QIE at least one week before the validation event. QIE compiles all comments and circulates them to the Programme Team for review. This process ensures that key queries are addressed before the panel event, allowing the Programme Team to prepare clear responses.

QIE may schedule a Pre-Panel Meeting to facilitate a structured discussion among panel members before the validation event. The meeting allows panellists to:

• Identify key themes and areas of focus for the review.
• Clarify any preliminary concerns regarding the programme proposal.
• Request additional documentation if needed.

The Programme Team does not attend this meeting but is available to respond to pre-panel queries if necessary.

Where the programme includes TML elements, the Programme Team should be prepared to clarify digital infrastructure, learner access and support, delivery balance (synchronous/asynchronous), and online assessment strategy. This may be informed by learner experience data from comparable modules/programmes

Final Confirmation of Panel Event

QIE finalises the date, format (in-person/virtual), and agenda for the validation event.

Programme Teams ensure that key stakeholders (academic leads, industry representatives, learner representatives) are prepared to attend.
 

2.4.                    Phase 3 – External Review (Post-Panel)

This phase covers the evaluation of the Independent Evaluation Panel (IEP) report, provider response, and final decision on programme validation.

2.4.1. Independent Evaluation Panel (IEP) Report Submission

~2 weeks post External Panel Event

• Panel Chair Submits Independent Evaluation Report (IER)
  • The Panel Chair compiles findings, including:
    • Programme strengths & commendations.
    • Conditions for validation (mandatory changes).
    • Recommendations (advisory but not required).
    • Compliance with NFQ and institutional QA policies.
• For programmes delivered using TML, the panel report should explicitly address:
  • Appropriateness of delivery modes and instructional settings
  • Alignment with QQI’s Statutory QA Guidelines for Blended and Online Learning
  • Adequacy of learner supports, staff readiness, and assessment integrity measures
  • Alignment with NCI’s Policy on Blended and Online Learning Programmes and, where applicable, the Asynchronous Learning Development Policy
• For apprenticeship programmes, the panel report should explicitly address
  • National apprenticeship framework standards (QQI/SOLAS)
  • The governance and engagement model outlined in the Consortium Steering Group Terms of Reference
  • The employer and industry engagement infrastructure in line with the Employer & Industry Engagement Procedures
• The IER is sent to QIE for review.
• QIE Conducts Factual Accuracy Check
  • QIE reviews the IER to identify factual errors.
  • The IER is sent to the Programme Team for accuracy confirmation.
• Programme Team Factual Accuracy Review
  • The Programme Team reviews and flags inaccuracies (if any).
  • QIE liaises with the Panel Secretary to review proposed amendments.
  • If amendments are needed, QIE sends the revised IER back to the Panel Chair for approval.

2.4.2. QQI Review & Approval of IER

~4 weeks post External Panel Event – 2-week reply window

• QQI Review of Independent Evaluation Report (IER)
  • QQI reviews the IER within a two-week window.
  • If queries arise, QQI liaises with QIE for clarification.
  • If accepted, QQI grants written approval.
• QIE Integrates IER Outcomes into Provider Response Template (PTR)
  • QIE documents:
    • Conditions of validation (mandatory changes).
    • Recommendations (best-practice enhancements).

  • The PTR is sent to the Programme Team for response.

     

2.4.3. Programme Team Responds to IER & PTR

~6–8 weeks post External Panel Event

• The Programme Team:
  • Amends programme documentation to meet conditions. This includes any required changes to delivery mode, digital learning environment setup, or assessment protocols.
  • Provides a formal response to recommendations.
  • Prepares supporting evidence (if required).
  • The revised documentation is submitted to QIE.
• Where the programme is an apprenticeship, the Provider Response must also include:
  • Any revisions to the Memorandum of Agreement model
  • Updated plans for mentor training or industry engagement (if conditions relate to implementation)
  • Clarifications from the Consortium Steering Group if sectoral conditions or employer commitments are involved
• QIE Finalises Provider Response
  • QIE reviews the response and inputs conditions into the PTR.
  • If satisfactory, QIE submits the PTR & updated documents to the External Panel.

2.4.4. External Panel Considers Provider Response

~10 weeks post External Panel Event

• QIE Sends PTR & Updated Documents to External Panel
  • Provider Response to Panel Report detailing:
    • Specific responses to each special condition of validation.
    • Programme modifications addressing panel recommendations.
  • Updated Programme Validation Descriptor, incorporating necessary changes.
  • In the case of apprenticeships, the Panel also verifies that governance, mentor oversight, and industry delivery responsibilities have been adequately addressed, with reference to the Apprenticeship & WBL Policy and associated documentation.
  • Any additional supporting documents (e.g., module descriptors, learner assessment plans).
• Panel members independently review the Provider Response to Panel Report and assess:
  • Whether all conditions of validation have been fully addressed.
  • If any remaining concerns exist regarding programme alignment with QQI validation standards.
  • The extent to which recommendations have been implemented (if applicable).
  • For TML programmes, the panel assesses whether revised delivery structures, learner support mechanisms, and academic integrity measures are clearly described and feasible.
• Decision-Making Outcomes:
  • Accepted: Panel confirms the conditions have been met, and the programme may proceed.
  • Further Clarifications Required: Panel requests additional explanations or minor modifications.
  • Revisions Required: Significant conditions are unmet, requiring further amendments before approval.
• Panel Chair Final Confirmation
  • Panel convenes (virtually or in-person) to discuss final conclusions.
  • Panel Chair reviews final documents and determines whether to:
    • Sign off using the Panel Sign-Off Template officially confirming the programme is ready for QQI submission.
    • Request additional clarifications or amendments from QIE and the Programme Team.
• QIE Compliance & Final Submission Readiness
  • Verifying all panel-requested clarifications have been addressed.
  • QIE verifies that, where applicable, all TML-related feedback from the panel has been addressed and that final documentation reflects NCI’s TML standards and policy expectations.
  • Liaising with the Programme Team for any last-minute revisions.
  • Preparing the final validation package for QQI submission.

• If a Programme Team disputes the External Panel’s final decision, they may initiate an internal dispute resolution process. For full procedural steps, refer to the Procedure for Handling Disputes & Failed Outcomes.

   

2.4.5. Submission to QQI and Operational Setup

~12 weeks post External Panel Event

Following completion of the external review and receipt of the Panel Chair’s final confirmation, the programme proceeds to QQI for formal validation and institutional setup. For details on submission to QQI, post-validation integration, and national listing, refer to the QQI Submission and Validation Procedure.

Version Control