Malpractice and maladministration

This policy deals with two different failures. Malpractice is deliberate: an act intended to obtain a result, a credential or an advantage that was not earned, or to help someone else obtain one. Maladministration is failure without that intention: an error, an omission, or a process carried out wrongly. Both damage the meaning of a CBA credential, and both are dealt with here. The policy applies to candidates and credential holders, to Approved Learning Partners and the people who work for them, to referees named in an experience declaration, and to CBA itself.

Who this policy covers

It applies to you from the moment you register for a CBA programme, and continues for as long as you hold a CBA credential.

It applies to an Approved Learning Partner from the date of approval, and to anyone acting on the partner’s behalf in connection with a CBA programme.

It applies to CBA: to its staff, to contractors acting for it, and to the subject-matter experts and standard-setting panel members who work on its assessments. A finding of maladministration against CBA is recorded and acted on in the same way as a finding against anyone else.

It sits alongside the examination rules, the Code of Professional Conduct, the complaints and appeals policy and the terms of service. Where one of those documents describes a process in more detail, it applies as well as this one.

The difference between the two words

Malpractice requires intent, or an indifference to the rules that amounts to the same thing. The question is not whether harm resulted, but whether the act was chosen.

Maladministration does not require intent. It covers mistakes, delay, poor record keeping and process not followed, whether by a learning partner or by CBA. A finding of maladministration is not a finding of dishonesty, and CBA does not describe it as one.

One can become the other. A partner that registers candidates on the wrong programme has committed maladministration. A partner that is told, and continues, has committed malpractice.

Examples of malpractice by a candidate or credential holder

• Arranging for another person to sit your examination, or sitting an examination in another person’s name.
• Using assistance that the examination rules prohibit, including a second device, another person present, or any tool not permitted for that paper.
• Offering such assistance to another candidate, whether or not it is taken up.
• Copying, photographing, recording, transcribing, reconstructing from memory or distributing examination questions, during or after your paper, whether or not money changes hands.
• Holding examination content that could only have been obtained because someone copied it, or seeking that content out.
• Submitting a Practitioner workbook that is not your own work, or submitting another candidate’s file as your own.
• Falsifying a professional experience declaration: describing work you did not do, overstating the period, or altering dates.
• Naming a referee who does not exist, who did not agree to act, who does not know the work described, or who is acting at your direction, including where the address given for the referee is one you control.
• Confirming an experience declaration as a referee when you know that what it says is untrue.
• Altering a certificate, a result notification or a credential ID, or producing a document made to resemble one.
• Presenting a credential you do not hold, hold at a different level, or that has expired or been withdrawn.
• Making an allegation under this policy that you know to be untrue.
• Interfering with an investigation: destroying or altering material, asking another person to give a false account, or pressing a witness.

Examples of malpractice by a learning partner

• Guaranteeing a pass, promising a result, or implying to a candidate that the standard is not applied as published.
• Supplying candidates with live examination content, or teaching from material reconstructed from what candidates remember of a live paper.
• Completing any part of an assessment for a candidate, or amending a candidate’s workbook before submission.
• Submitting an experience declaration or a referee confirmation on a candidate’s behalf.
• Describing its relationship with CBA inaccurately: claiming approval for a programme it is not approved for, describing itself as part of CBA, or presenting its own certificate as a CBA credential.
• Registering a candidate without that candidate’s knowledge, or holding a candidate’s account credentials in order to control access to a result.

Examples of malpractice by a person acting for CBA

• Disclosing live examination content, or the contents of an item bank, to anyone not entitled to see it.
• Recording a sign-off in the name of a subject-matter expert who did not give it, or entering an item into a live bank without review.
• Altering a score, a result or a register entry other than through the correction process set out below.
• Issuing a credential without the record that the award requires, including any attempt to work around the rule that refuses a Professional credential where no verified experience record exists.

Examples of maladministration by a learning partner

• Registering a candidate on the wrong programme, the wrong level or the wrong examination date.
• Failing to pass on a registration or a fee, or passing it on late.
• Failing to tell a candidate how to request a reasonable adjustment, or holding a request until after the booking has been made.
• Teaching from a superseded blueprint after notice of a change.
• Keeping records so poorly that a candidate’s registration or submission cannot be evidenced.

Examples of maladministration by CBA

• Mis-scoring a paper, applying the wrong answer key, or applying a cut score other than the one set for that examination.
• Allowing an item that is defective, keyed wrongly, or outside the published blueprint to reach a live paper.
• Assembling a paper that does not meet the published domain weightings, question count or time limit for the programme.
• Issuing a certificate or a register entry that contains an error: the wrong name, programme, level, grade or date.
• Failing to apply a reasonable adjustment that had been agreed.
• Losing a submitted workbook or experience declaration, or failing to record that it was submitted.
• Leaving a result, a verification or an appeal outstanding without telling you that it is outstanding.
• Publishing a directory entry showing a partner as approved for a programme it is not approved for.

How to report

Anyone may report suspected malpractice or maladministration: a candidate, a credential holder, an employer, someone working for a learning partner, someone working for CBA, or a member of the public. Use the contact page and say that the report concerns malpractice or maladministration.

Include as much of the following as you have:

• What happened, and when.
• Who was involved, and which programme or examination is affected.
• The credential ID, where a credential is involved.
• Any documents, messages, screenshots or links, including where examination content has been published.

You do not have to be certain before you report. A report made honestly is not held against you if the investigation finds nothing.

CBA acknowledges a report within five working days. Where your report is in substance a complaint about CBA’s service, or an appeal against your own result, CBA tells you and handles it under the complaints and appeals policy instead.

Reporting anonymously

You may report without giving your name, or give your name and ask CBA not to disclose it.

An anonymous report is assessed on the same basis as any other, and is not dismissed because it is anonymous. What anonymity changes is what CBA can do with it. CBA cannot ask you follow-up questions, cannot test the account you have given, and usually cannot put an anonymous allegation to the person concerned in a way that allows a fair answer.

CBA therefore treats an anonymous report as a reason to look rather than as evidence in itself. It is checked against the records CBA holds, which may include examination session data, response and timing patterns, item bank audits, registration records and correspondence. Where those records support the allegation independently, CBA acts on them. Where they do not, the report is recorded, and it is taken into account if a similar report arrives later.

CBA cannot tell an anonymous reporter what happened, because there is no route back to you.

Where you give your name and ask for it to be withheld, CBA does not disclose it to the person concerned unless the law requires disclosure, or unless the allegation cannot be put fairly without it. In the second case CBA tells you before doing so, and you may ask CBA not to proceed, although CBA may still act on evidence it already holds.

If you are reporting your own employer, whether your report is a protected disclosure is a question of employment law that CBA cannot decide for you. Take your own advice before you report.

What CBA does with a report

The Head of Assessment reviews every report and decides one of three things: that no further action is required, with the reason recorded; that the matter is a complaint or an appeal and belongs elsewhere; or that an investigation is opened.

Where a report concerns the person who would ordinarily decide, it passes to someone with no involvement in it. CBA is a small organisation, and where no sufficiently independent person is available inside it, the matter is referred to an external reviewer engaged for that purpose. Where an external reviewer is engaged, the person under investigation is told.

What CBA may do while an investigation runs

CBA may take interim action to protect the integrity of an assessment or a credential. Interim action is not a finding, and it is not a sanction.

• Withhold a result, or delay the issue of a certificate and the register entry.
• Postpone a booked examination, or decline a new booking, for the candidate concerned.
• Pause an experience verification.
• Suspend a partner’s ability to register new candidates, or pause its directory listing.

Interim action is applied only where it is necessary, and only for as long as it is necessary. You are told what has been applied and why. It is not published, and the public register is not marked while an investigation is open.

Where the allegation is not upheld, a withheld result is released and any certificate is issued without further delay. Where the delay caused you to miss a deadline that CBA controls, CBA extends that deadline.

The investigation

The investigation is carried out by a person who had no involvement in the matter under investigation.

CBA gathers the records it holds and asks the parties for what it does not hold. That may include asking you for an explanation, asking a partner for its registration records, or contacting a named referee directly to confirm what was declared. CBA relies on records and on what the parties provide.

The investigation is proportionate to the allegation. Some matters are resolved on the records alone.

CBA aims to complete an investigation within forty working days of opening it. Where an investigation remains open after that, because it depends on a response from someone else or on material CBA does not yet hold, CBA tells you at intervals of twenty working days that it is still open and what is outstanding.

If you are the subject of an investigation

You are entitled to each of the following, and no decision is taken until they have been provided.

• To be told that an investigation has been opened, and what is alleged, in enough detail to answer it: what act, when, and in which examination, submission or record.
• To see the material relied on. Where material cannot be disclosed in full, because it is live examination content or because it contains another person’s personal data, you are given a description sufficient to answer the allegation, and told why the material has been limited.
• At least ten working days to respond in writing, and longer if you ask and give a reason.
• To put forward evidence of your own, and to name people who can speak to it.
• To be accompanied or assisted by a person of your choosing at any meeting, at your own cost.
• To ask for an adjustment to the process itself, where a disability or a long-term condition affects your ability to take part in it.
• To be told the outcome in writing, with the finding, the reasons for it, any sanction, and the route and the deadline for an appeal.

A finding is made on the balance of probabilities. The more serious the allegation, the stronger the evidence CBA expects before treating it as proved.

If you do not respond, CBA may decide the matter on the evidence available. Silence is not treated as an admission.

An allegation that is not upheld is recorded as not upheld, and does not count as a previous finding in any later matter.

Sanctions

A sanction follows a finding, and is proportionate to what was found. The range available against a candidate or a credential holder is:

• A record of the finding, with no further action.
• A written warning.
• A requirement to complete specified remedial action within a stated period.
• Invalidation of the examination attempt. The fee paid for an invalidated attempt is not refunded.
• Refusal to issue a credential that has not yet been issued.
• A bar on entering any CBA examination for a period stated in the decision.
• Suspension of a credential for a stated period, during which you must not represent it as current.
• Withdrawal of a credential. This is permanent, and it is recorded on the public register: the credential ID continues to resolve, and the entry shows that the credential has been withdrawn. Withdrawn records are not deleted.
• Permanent refusal to register you for any CBA programme. This is reserved for impersonation, for the sale or distribution of examination content, and for forged documents.

Where a referee has knowingly confirmed a false declaration, CBA declines to accept confirmations from that person in future, and where the referee holds a CBA credential, deals with the matter under this policy.

In deciding a sanction, CBA takes into account:

• Whether the act was deliberate or careless.
• Whether it affected the integrity of a result.
• Whether you disclosed it yourself before it was found.
• Whether it was repeated, or continued after a warning.
• The effect on other candidates.
• What you said in response.

CBA does not impose fines. The only financial consequence of a sanction is that a fee already paid for an invalidated attempt is not refunded.

Where an investigation establishes that examination items have been compromised, those items are withdrawn from the bank, and affected candidates may be required to sit a replacement paper. A candidate who took no part in the compromise sits the replacement at no cost.

Where a learning partner is at fault

A finding against an Approved Learning Partner carries its own range of outcomes:

• A recorded finding, with a requirement to correct what went wrong.
• An action plan with a completion date and stated evidence of completion.
• A requirement to tell its own candidates what happened, in terms CBA approves.
• A requirement to put affected candidates back in the position they would have been in, including meeting the cost of a re-registration made necessary by the partner’s error.
• Suspension of the ability to register new candidates.
• Amendment or removal of the directory entry.
• Restriction of approval to particular programmes.
• Withdrawal of approval, for a stated period or permanently, with removal from the directory.

Candidates are not penalised for a partner’s failure. Where a partner’s malpractice affects results, CBA distinguishes candidates who took part in it from those who did not. A candidate who took no part keeps the result where it can be relied on, and sits again at no cost where it cannot.

Where approval is withdrawn, CBA writes to the candidates registered through that partner and tells them what happens to their registration and to any voucher they hold.

Where CBA is at fault

CBA investigates allegations against itself under this policy, by the same process, and records a finding against itself in the same way.

Where maladministration by CBA is established, CBA corrects the error and tells you what was wrong and what has changed.

Where a result was wrong:

• If you should have passed, CBA reinstates the pass with the date it should have carried, issues the credential, and creates the register entry.
• If the paper cannot be reliably re-scored, CBA offers a re-sit at no cost, to be taken at a time you choose within twelve months of the offer.
• If you paid for a re-sit that CBA’s error made necessary, CBA refunds it.
• If a certificate was issued that should not have been, and you were not at fault, the record is corrected and a re-sit is offered at no cost. The correction is recorded as CBA’s error and not as misconduct.

Where the same error may have affected other candidates, CBA re-scores every affected paper, including the papers of candidates who passed, and tells those candidates the outcome. Where a defective item is found, it is withdrawn from the bank and its sign-off is reviewed.

Anyone who relied on an incorrect record is told. The public register does not require a person to identify themselves in order to check a credential, so CBA cannot always know who relied on an entry. CBA corrects the entry, and writes to any employer, learning partner or other party that you identify, or that CBA’s own records show was given the incorrect information, confirming what the record should have said.

CBA does not ask you to keep a correction confidential as a condition of making it.

CBA refunds the fees it charged for an assessment affected by its own error, and meets the cost of a re-sit made necessary by that error. CBA has not adopted a wider compensation scheme.

Beyond those amounts, the limits of CBA’s liability are set out in clause 12 of the terms of enrolment, which also state what cannot lawfully be limited and is therefore not. If you believe you have suffered loss beyond a fee you paid, take your own advice.

Appealing a decision under this policy

A finding or a sanction under this policy may be appealed by the person or the partner subject to it. A decision that CBA’s own maladministration did not occur may be appealed by the person who reported it.

Submit an appeal within 30 days of the date of the written decision, through the complaints and appeals route. The grounds are:

• The process set out in this policy was not followed.
• The finding was not reasonably open on the evidence.
• The sanction is disproportionate to the finding.
• There is evidence that was not reasonably available before the decision was taken.

An appeal is considered by a person who took no part in the investigation or in the decision, and where nobody inside CBA is sufficiently independent, by an external reviewer.

No fee is charged for an appeal against a finding under this policy.

CBA acknowledges an appeal within five working days and aims to decide it within twenty-five working days. Where an external reviewer is engaged it may take longer, and CBA tells you. An appeal may confirm the decision, substitute or remove a sanction, or return the matter for further investigation.

The appeal decision is the final stage of CBA’s own process. CBA is not a regulated awarding organisation, so there is no statutory regulator above it for assessment decisions. A complaint about how CBA has handled personal data may be made to the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Records, confidentiality and personal data

CBA records the report, the material gathered, the response given and the decision reached.

A finding that affects a credential is kept for as long as the credential record itself, because the register has to remain capable of explaining what it shows. Every other investigation record, including one that led to no finding at all, is kept for six years from the conclusion of the matter — the same period as any other conduct record, and for the same reason: a decision that can be challenged has to be evidenced by the body that made it. The candidate records policy sets out the categories in full.

CBA does not publish the details of a case. The person concerned is not named, other than through the register entry where a credential has been withdrawn. A person who reports a matter is not usually told the outcome, because the person concerned is entitled to the same confidentiality that the reporter would be.

Where a credential is being misrepresented to an employer, CBA may confirm to that employer that the credential is not valid, by reference to the credential ID and the register entry.

Where conduct under investigation may also be a criminal offence, such as a forged document or a fraudulent claim, CBA may report it to the police or to another authority, and takes advice before doing so. CBA is established in the United Kingdom and acts under the law of the United Kingdom. Candidates sit CBA examinations in many countries, and CBA does not advise on the effect of the law where you are.