University policy

Institutional Accreditation Committee (IAC)

The committee that steers the University through KAAE eligibility, candidacy, initial accreditation and five-year renewal: its 16–18 members, objectives, responsibilities, office support, meetings, minutes, voting and quorum.

Area
Quality & Accreditation
Responsible office
Institutional Accreditation Office (IAO)
Approval date
To be confirmed

Purpose

This policy establishes Soran University's Institutional Accreditation Committee (IAC), responsible for overseeing implementation of University Council decisions concerning institutional accreditation under the Kurdistan Accrediting Association for Education (KAAE). It covers eligibility, candidacy, initial accreditation and renewal on a five-year cycle. It defines the Committee's structure, scope and responsibilities to ensure a coordinated, evidence-based and strategic approach to obtaining and maintaining accreditation. The Committee shall report to the Institutional Effectiveness Committee on progress and implementation.

Policy Statement

Soran University recognises accreditation as an important mechanism for institutional confidence, continuous review and alignment with national and international standards. The University therefore establishes a dedicated accreditation committee to oversee all stages of accreditation under KAAE requirements. It shall coordinate compliance with core standards; guide the collection and submission of reports and evidence; support capacity development; and ensure timely submission of self-study reports and other required commitments. The policy promotes transparency, teamwork and sustained compliance.

Policy Summary

The policy defines the IAC's authority, structure and operating procedures, including the Accreditation Office and other participants. It empowers the Committee to oversee eligibility, candidacy, initial accreditation and subsequent stages. It also governs post-accreditation requirements, including regular self-evaluation reporting during the five-year renewal period. As the institutional coordinating body, the IAC shall submit quarterly reports and plans to the Institutional Effectiveness Committee. Following University Council approval, these shall form its work programme.

Scope and Responsibility

The policy applies to the IAC, its office, and all administrative units and academic departments participating in accreditation documentation and activities. The responsible office is the Institutional Accreditation Office (IAO), and the University President oversees implementation. Participants include IAC members, all University units responsible for accreditation standards, and the accreditation office.

Establishment and Membership

The IAC shall comprise designated representatives of academic and administrative units responsible for the work and documentary requirements of accreditation. For each standard, a focal person or persons shall be appointed. Membership shall ensure that each accreditation stage is led by persons operationally responsible for the relevant activities.

Members shall be selected according to their institutional responsibilities, ability to work collaboratively and participate in self-evaluation, and willingness and availability to contribute actively.

The Committee shall comprise 16–18 carefully selected members, balancing inclusion and efficiency and representing academic and administrative staff, students, graduates and external stakeholders. The proposed composition is:

  • Chair: a University Council member.
  • Two dean representatives from different faculties.
  • Two academic staff representatives from different faculties.
  • An IAO member responsible for coordination and technical oversight.
  • Head of the International Accreditation Unit.
  • Director of Quality Assurance (DQA).
  • Director of Finance.
  • Director of General Administration.
  • Director of the Pedagogical and Academic Development Centre.
  • A statistical analysis specialist.
  • Director of the Career Development Centre.
  • Director of University Registration.
  • One student representative nominated by the student representative body.
  • One graduate representative to contribute experience of the effectiveness of University education.
  • Two external stakeholder representatives.

The Committee may invite experienced specialists to provide technical advice on institutional accreditation.

Terms, Participation and Subcommittees

Members, including the Chair, shall serve two-year terms. After two years, performance and participation shall be evaluated. Successful members may be reappointed for a further two years; otherwise, replacements shall be selected, taking account of workload, expertise and diversity of institutional participation. The Chair shall recommend removal or appointment of members and the establishment of working groups to the University President.

For specific topics or work programmes, the Chair may invite additional members or observers. All members shall participate actively in meetings and decision-making, observing cooperation, transparency and accountability.

The IAC may propose subcommittees to the President for programme accreditation, assessment, academic and administrative systems, policy and document review, workshops, capacity development and other relevant matters. These provide focused expertise. Their members shall be nominated by the main Committee according to expertise and knowledge to support appropriate accreditation procedures across the University.

Selection shall consider knowledge of strategic planning, quality assurance and accreditation. The University Council shall appoint members to the positions defined in the composition. Student, graduate and external representation shall reflect diverse perspectives on institutional quality and effectiveness. Selection criteria shall be clear and transparent, including relevant experience, knowledge, meeting attendance and willingness to contribute. Professional development and continuing learning shall be provided to strengthen members' accreditation, assessment and quality assurance expertise.

Principal Objectives

  • Ensure institutional readiness for each accreditation stage.
  • Identify and remedy gaps against core standards during eligibility.
  • Coordinate stakeholders in developing the institutional plan during candidacy.
  • Guide the preparation and submission of evidence for initial accreditation.
  • Oversee five-year institutional accreditation renewal.
  • Guide self-study reports in accordance with KAAE requirements.
  • Develop institutional understanding and capacity in accreditation standards and procedures.

Role

The IAC shall provide strategic oversight, coordination and procedural organisation; lead institutional compliance planning; monitor progress and submission of evidence; support internal review mechanisms; prepare for external evaluation visits; and integrate accreditation into institutional planning and quality assurance.

Responsibilities

  1. Oversight of accreditation stages. Oversee and organise University activity at all three principal stages: identify and meet core requirements at eligibility; supervise the development and implementation of the institutional plan at candidacy; and ensure complete, supported evidence demonstrating compliance at initial accreditation.
  2. Gap analysis and action planning. Review institutional performance systematically against accreditation standards and develop corrective action plans, with specific steps and timelines, in collaboration with relevant stakeholders.
  3. Evidence management. Assign responsibility for standards to designated units or teams; review and validate evidence against KAAE expectations; and retain approved evidence in a dedicated, accessible repository supporting accuracy and continuity.
  4. Self-study reports. Establish procedures for preparation, review and submission of self-study reports at the various stages, ensuring that reports are accurate, comprehensive and evidence-based.
  5. Capacity building. Build institutional understanding of accreditation through training, workshops and orientation programmes for participants.
  6. Renewal. Oversee renewal every five years and ensure that evidence, reports and continuous-improvement actions are documented and ready for review.
  7. Institutional communication. Provide the Institutional Effectiveness Committee with progress, challenges and accreditation requirements. Coordinate communication with KAAE and other external bodies as necessary.
  8. Monitoring and reporting. Establish ongoing compliance-monitoring mechanisms and submit quarterly reports to the Institutional Effectiveness Committee on progress, challenges and accreditation readiness.
  9. Site visits. Organise logistical and technical arrangements for KAAE and other accreditation visits; ensure evidence is available and stakeholders are ready to meet evaluators.
  10. Alignment with quality assurance and strategic planning. Integrate accreditation with the University's quality assurance system, strategic objectives and institutional effectiveness framework.

Responsibilities of the Accreditation Office

The Office shall provide administrative and technical support, coordinate activities, document work and maintain continuity throughout accreditation. It shall:

  • Prepare and circulate meeting agendas to all members.
  • Send all relevant documents and evidence one week before meetings, allowing time for study and recommendations.
  • Ensure the venue is ready and free from logistical or technical problems.
  • Maintain administrative communication with members and stakeholders.
  • Prepare and circulate minutes after the Chair's approval.
  • Manage the IAC's official email, for example [email protected], and internal and external correspondence, including shared Google Drive files.
  • Coordinate communication among the Committee, University units, KAAE and external accreditation bodies.
  • Provide technical support and procedural clarification to units responsible for standards, including evidence organisation, timelines, reporting and compliance with prescribed procedures.
  • Organise and digitally archive meeting evidence, making documents accessible and easy to use.
  • Ensure no confidential or important documents remain in the meeting room after meetings.
  • Coordinate external visits, including venues, evidence access, stakeholder schedules and direct onsite support.
  • Follow up timely implementation of decisions, gather feedback and verify actions.
  • Keep stakeholder contact lists current each semester and provide document and stakeholder support.

Meeting Agenda

  1. The heading shall state whether the meeting is regular or extraordinary.
  2. The IAO officer shall manage the dedicated office email and oversee relevant documentation.
  3. The Chair shall be responsible for setting the agenda.
  4. The prescribed Meeting Agenda Template (QF-IAC-xx) shall be used.
  5. All matters to be discussed shall appear on the agenda.
  6. Items shall be numbered sequentially.
  7. Allocate an appropriate time to each item, for example 10:00–10:30 a.m.
  8. Provide a short summary of each item.
  9. Circulate the agenda to all members at least one week in advance.
  10. Include follow-up of duties and assignments from the previous meeting.

Notice and Attendance

Regular meetings require at least one week's notice; extraordinary meetings require at least 24 hours' notice. Notification shall be by email, with the agenda and other relevant documents attached.

Members shall respond to the IAO invitation within 48 hours. A member unable to attend owing to an emergency shall notify the Office by email headed "Leave", providing a brief and clear explanation.

Regular meetings shall take place monthly. After establishment of the Committee, a day in the first week of each month shall be designated. The Chair may call an extraordinary meeting for urgent or emergency matters.

A member who fails to attend three meetings within a year shall lose membership. Absence without justification or authorised leave shall result in direct removal; the Chair shall nominate a replacement within one week. A member wishing to withdraw shall write to the Chair explaining the request and shall obtain formal permission before ceasing duties. After withdrawal, any authority or privileges associated with membership shall end.

Chair's Responsibilities During Meetings

The Chair shall start and end meetings on time; list members granted leave; follow the agenda; maintain a calm environment; encourage active participation and expression of views; prevent any participant from dominating or interrupting others; close agenda items following majority agreement; explain agreed actions; respect all opinions; resolve disagreements promptly; notify participants of the circulation date for minutes; and sign the official approved record.

Minutes

The prescribed form shall be used. Files shall be named using the sequence: meeting number – meeting title – meeting date. The Office officer shall take the minutes. All minutes shall be recorded in SU Google Workspace Drive for sharing, review and completion, then archived. Communications shall use official Soran University email accounts only. The Chair shall sign the minutes.

The minutes shall include the date, time and venue; the Chair's and participants' names; apologies, recorded as "Nil" when none; each agenda item and a brief summary of discussion; and agreed actions and procedures. A word-for-word transcript is not required. Decisions and actions shall be recorded clearly.

Draft minutes shall be circulated to all participants within one week. Participants shall have 48 hours to review and correct them before conversion to the official record. The draft shall also be sent to the Chair within one week for review and approval. The Chair shall ensure that it accurately records discussion and decisions and approve it within two working days.

After approval, the filename shall use: Approved Minutes_Meeting Title_Meeting Date. Records shall be held on the Committee server in the "SIA-Meeting Minutes" folder in the Google Drive account [email protected]. The folder shall be shared with members as read-only, without permission to modify or correct records.

Voting

Voting shall be transparent, accountable and democratic. Every member representing a University group shall have an equal vote. A vote shall follow presentation of all relevant information. Members may vote "Yes", "No" or "Abstain". Decisions shall be determined by a simple majority of members present and communicated to relevant parties for action. Members shall act honestly, respect others' views and work together to improve institutional effectiveness.

Quorum

At least 50% of members shall be present to begin a meeting. For voting, more than 50% of Committee members shall be present.

Legal Responsibility

A breach or violation of this policy shall be dealt with under the applicable disciplinary procedures of the State and Public Sector Employees Discipline Law No. 14 of 1991, as amended.

Questions and requests for policy approval shall be sent to SUPO at [email protected].