Integrity
Information, evidence, findings, decisions, records, and accreditation claims should reflect the applicable facts and requirements without deliberate distortion or misleading presentation.
Accreditation depends on confidence that information is represented truthfully, evidence reflects actual practice, evaluation is impartial, decisions follow applicable processes, and records are handled responsibly.
Ethics and integrity therefore apply across the accreditation lifecycle — from application and evidence submission through assessment, decision-making, communication, records, continuing accreditation, and public representation.
Ethical accreditation requires more than technical compliance. Participants in the accreditation process should act in ways that support accurate information, responsible professional conduct, impartial consideration, appropriate confidentiality, and confidence in the resulting record.
Information, evidence, findings, decisions, records, and accreditation claims should reflect the applicable facts and requirements without deliberate distortion or misleading presentation.
Organizations and individuals should communicate relevant information accurately and avoid false, incomplete, or misleading representations.
Applicable standards, criteria, procedures, and evidence should be considered consistently and appropriately within the defined accreditation scope.
Assessment, review, and decision-making should not be improperly influenced by personal interests, relationships, preferences, or unrelated considerations.
Information requiring confidential handling should be accessed, used, shared, and maintained according to applicable responsibilities and requirements.
Individuals participating in accreditation activities should perform their assigned responsibilities carefully, appropriately, and within the authority of their role.
Integrity is not limited to the final accreditation decision. It begins with application information and continues through evidence, evaluation, findings, decisions, communication, records, and continuing quality assurance.
Application information should accurately describe the applicant, proposed accreditation scope, educational activities, operations, and other information relevant to eligibility and evaluation.
Submitted evidence should accurately represent applicable policies, practices, implementation, records, results, and other matters presented for evaluation.
Evaluation should consider applicable requirements and relevant evidence objectively rather than relying on personal preference or unsupported assumptions.
Accreditation decisions should follow the applicable process and remain connected to the defined scope, evaluation record, relevant findings, and authorized decision structure.
Accreditation information should accurately represent the applicable status, scope, entity, program, credential, certificate, or other official record.
Ethical responsibilities continue after accreditation through records, representation, continuing quality assurance, applicable reporting, review, and improvement.
Accreditation evaluation depends on evidence being relevant, reliable, appropriately documented, and connected with the requirement under review. Evidence should support understanding of actual implementation rather than create a misleading impression of practice.
Evidence should correspond with the actual organization, program, educational activity, process, record, or practice it is presented to demonstrate.
Documentation should have a meaningful relationship with the applicable standard, criterion, requirement, finding, or question being considered.
Where currency matters, evidence should appropriately represent the period, practice, status, or implementation relevant to the evaluation.
Evidence should provide sufficient context to support meaningful evaluation rather than relying on isolated material that could create an inaccurate impression.
Where appropriate, evidence should be capable of being connected with the applicable process, activity, record, requirement, or implementation being evaluated.
Evidence should not be altered, selectively represented, or described in a way that materially misrepresents the underlying practice or record.
Applicants and accredited entities contribute directly to accreditation integrity through the quality, accuracy, relevance, and representation of the information they provide.
Provide information that accurately represents the organization, program, educational activities, accreditation scope, operations, and other matters relevant to the application.
Submit documentation and records that relate meaningfully to the applicable requirements and accurately represent implementation.
Describe the proposed or accredited scope accurately so that organizational, provider, institutional, or program status is not represented more broadly than applicable.
Where additional information or clarification is appropriately requested through the accreditation process, responses should remain accurate and relevant to the matter under review.
Maintain applicable records supporting educational activities, assessment, completion, quality assurance, accreditation requirements, and other relevant functions.
After accreditation, represent the resulting status and scope consistently with the applicable official record.
Evaluation integrity requires professional judgment to remain connected to the applicable accreditation requirements, defined scope, relevant evidence, and assigned evaluation responsibilities.
Evaluate against the standards, criteria, scope, and other requirements applicable to the accreditation activity rather than unrelated expectations.
Consider evidence according to its relevance, reliability, relationship to the requirement, and connection with actual practice.
Findings should have an appropriate basis in the applicable requirement and available evidence rather than assumption or personal preference.
Evaluation findings should be sufficiently clear, relevant, and supported to explain their relationship with the requirement under review.
Information encountered during evaluation should be handled according to applicable confidentiality, privacy, professional, and procedural responsibilities.
Potential conflicts affecting impartiality should be disclosed and managed through the applicable conflict-of-interest process.
Decision integrity requires accreditation outcomes to proceed through the applicable governance and decision process rather than being determined by payment, influence, unsupported preference, or factors outside the relevant requirements.
Decision-making should consider the applicable evaluation record and relevant findings developed through the accreditation process.
Outcomes should remain connected to the standards, criteria, scope, and procedural requirements applicable to the accreditation matter.
Formal accreditation decisions should be made through the function authorized to exercise the applicable decision responsibility.
Decision responsibilities should be protected from inappropriate interests, relationships, influence, or other factors that could compromise impartiality.
The resulting decision should clearly relate to the institution, organization, provider, program, or other accreditation scope actually considered.
Accreditation status should be interpreted according to the resulting official record and applicable verification information.
Ethical communication requires accreditation, credentials, certificates, programs, provider status, and related quality claims to be described accurately and in a way that does not create a materially misleading impression.
Represent accreditation according to the status reflected in the applicable official record.
Do not extend accreditation beyond the institution, organization, provider, program, activity, or other scope represented by the applicable record.
Do not present accreditation, professional credentials, educational certificates, directory listings, or other records as though they represent the same status.
Use titles, descriptions, accreditation categories, credential names, and other terms consistently with the applicable official information.
Claims concerning accreditation or quality should have an appropriate factual basis and should not imply status or scope that has not been established.
Where accreditation or another official status is claimed, stakeholders should be able to connect the claim with the applicable verification record.
Accreditation activities may involve organizational records, assessment information, personal information, internal documentation, communications, and other material requiring appropriate handling.
Information should be accessed by individuals whose responsibilities appropriately require access within the applicable process.
Information obtained through accreditation activity should be used consistently with the purpose, responsibility, and applicable requirements governing that information.
Confidential or restricted information should not be disclosed outside applicable responsibilities, procedures, permissions, or requirements.
Records containing confidential, personal, evaluation, or other protected information should be handled according to applicable record and information requirements.
Information obtained during assessment should be handled responsibly and should not be used for unrelated purposes inconsistent with the evaluation role.
Where personal information is involved, applicable privacy requirements should be considered alongside accreditation and professional responsibilities.
Reliable records help connect accreditation activity, educational implementation, assessment, completion, decisions, credentials, certificates, and public claims with the underlying information they represent.
Records should accurately represent the activity, person, organization, program, result, status, decision, or other matter they document.
Information maintained across relevant records should be sufficiently consistent to support reliable interpretation and verification.
Where applicable, records should allow relevant information to be connected with the corresponding activity, decision, participant, program, provider, or accreditation scope.
Records should be handled in a manner appropriate to their sensitivity, confidentiality, purpose, and applicable requirements.
Applicable records should remain available as required to support accreditation, quality assurance, verification, or other authorized purposes.
Official records should support appropriate confirmation of accreditation, credentials, certificates, or other published status where verification is provided.
Ethical principles form one part of the wider accreditation accountability system. Other safeguards provide specialized mechanisms for impartiality, oversight, concerns, review, and formal requirements.
Conflict safeguards identify and manage circumstances that could affect, or reasonably appear to affect, impartial accreditation responsibilities.
Governance provides defined responsibilities, oversight, decision structures, accountability, and institutional controls supporting accreditation integrity.
Defined procedures provide appropriate routes for raising concerns and seeking review of eligible accreditation decisions or outcomes.
Different ethical and integrity matters may require different resources. Use the applicable policy, conflict process, complaints procedure, governance mechanism, or verification resource according to the nature of the question.
Use the formal policy library when the question concerns an applicable ethics, professional conduct, confidentiality, governance, or procedural requirement.
Use the conflict-of-interest framework where a relationship, interest, prior involvement, or other circumstance may affect impartiality.
Use the applicable complaints process where a concern falls within the scope of the formal complaint procedure.
Use the applicable appeal procedure where review is sought for an eligible accreditation decision or outcome.
Use official accreditation information when the question concerns whether an accreditation claim matches the applicable entity, scope, status, and record.
Contact IABCET where a specific ethics, accreditation, policy, record, or procedural question cannot be resolved through the applicable published resource.
This resource explains the broader ethics and integrity framework. Formal obligations, responsibilities, procedures, confidentiality requirements, conflict safeguards, and other applicable requirements should be determined from the current controlling IABCET documents.
Use the applicable ethics and professional conduct policy for formal requirements governing ethical responsibilities and conduct.
Use the applicable conflict-of-interest policy for formal requirements concerning disclosure, assessment, management, recusal, and related safeguards.
Use the applicable governance and procedural documents for responsibilities, authority, review mechanisms, and other formal accreditation arrangements.
Key questions about ethical conduct, evidence, impartiality, confidentiality, accreditation representation, conflicts, professional responsibility, and formal requirements.
Accreditation relies on organizations and stakeholders being able to trust the information, evidence, evaluation, decisions, records, and representations supporting the accreditation process.
Evidence integrity means presenting information and documentation in a way that accurately represents the underlying practice, implementation, activity, record, or result relevant to the applicable requirement.
Evaluation should consider applicable requirements and relevant evidence objectively rather than being driven by personal preference, unsupported assumptions, inappropriate relationships, or unrelated interests.
Accreditation may involve organizational, assessment, personal, or other information requiring responsible handling according to applicable professional, procedural, privacy, and confidentiality requirements.
Accreditation should be described according to the applicable official status and scope without extending the claim to entities, programs, activities, credentials, certificates, or other matters not represented by the record.
Use the current IABCET policies and documents for applicable ethics, professional conduct, conflict-of-interest, governance, confidentiality, and related requirements.
Review the formal policy library, conflict-of-interest safeguards, or governance framework for the requirements and responsibilities supporting ethical, impartial, and accountable accreditation practice.