Independence, integrity, transparency
ICBEP's credibility rests on how it makes decisions. The council maintains clear governance so that recognition means something consistent, fair, and verifiable.
Governance structure
ICBEP is directed by a council with defined responsibilities for standards, review oversight, and policy. Operational review is carried out by reviewers who apply the published framework consistently.
Ethics principles
Honesty, fairness, and learner protection guide every decision. Institutions are expected to communicate clearly and avoid misleading claims about ICBEP recognition.
Review independence
Recognition decisions are kept separate from commercial relationships and membership status. Fees support the operation of the council; they do not purchase outcomes.
Conflicts of interest
Reviewers disclose any relationship that could affect impartiality and are recused where a conflict exists.
Complaints process
Concerns about an institution's use of ICBEP recognition, or about a review, may be raised in writing and are acknowledged and examined under a defined procedure.
Appeals process
Institutions may appeal a recognition decision. Appeals are considered by individuals not involved in the original decision.
Public disclosure approach
Recognition status and annual review records are made available through the directory and verification tools. See the Public Disclosure Policy.
Review Principles
Consistent, evidence-based evaluation applied fairly to every applicant.
Independence
Decisions separated from commercial and membership considerations.
Transparency
Published policies, verifiable records, and clear status definitions.