Another National Certification Secret

[rwand1]

Over the last few months, the National Accreditation Council has been reviewing a number of training programs from providers across the country for the purpose of determining which of those meet the requirements of the National Occupational Standards. The Council came to the conclusion that none of the reviewed programs adequately dealt with issues of liability and contracts. The National Certification Authority has accepted the suggestion that this section of the NOS not be a required component of a trainer's curriculum. Instead, Certification candidates will have to demonstrate that they have received this type of training somewhere. This training may be obtained from seminars such as the one that will be held in Calgary, but could also be obtained from other sources, including local association meetings and seminars, stand-alone courses, or supplements to existing training.

To summarise, people who apply to be National Certificate Holders will have to demonstrate they they meet this requirement of the NOS. This may be accomplished through the background review process, but simply taking one of the programs that will soon be accredited by the National Certification Authority will not be sufficient in itself. We appreciate that the conference organizers are taking a proactive approach to make sure that training of this type will be available to attendees, but we want to alleviate any concern that this is the only offering of a seminar that will meet this requirement, or that people who do not attend will be denied eventual status as a National Certificate Holder.

On another note, the National Certification Authority expects to have a report detailing the Pilot Project experience out to CAHPI Member Bodies within two weeks. This is an exciting time, and we look forward to your comments and feedback when it is released.

Graham Clarke, P.Eng., RHI
Chair - National Certification Authority

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Another surprise those who expect to use the National Certification Might just as well Join CAHPI .
They are the ones who will have complete control over you .
It will be the Secret Society who has all the say ,
You will follow their SOP.
You will follow their Discipline committee rulings .
No matter how good they try and make it sound ,
You will have no say you will at this time have no idea who it is in control.
You will do as they tell you just like CAHPI/OAHI has now .
They do not listen to the members .
They do not give out true finical statements .
The statements they give out are always late .
I was involved as a helper in the last three elections I was with OAHI and not one ( yes not one ) was run properly .
Why should we expect any improvement in the future .
They do not wish you to try and improve things .
That is why and Just maybe others have not renewed with OAHI.
If you know an OAHI member who is not on the BOD ask them if they think it is run fair and honesty.
I have not had One active member tell me they think every thing is properly run .

Roy Cooke ......NACHI is the one for ME!!!!!!!!

[Claude Lawrenson]

Some time ago I posted a note on the NACHI forum indicating that any person that becomes a national certificate holder has a "right" to hold office or position in the national certification process. Now provided that is not right away but shortly after the pilot project has created enough successful applicants to become such - national certificate holders.

The governance of the national certification process will provide an equal opportunity for one and all.

The same thing applies to other positions within that national model. These positions are "pro-temp". In other words temporary to move the process forward. If any person really and honestly can prove this is not the case than please feel free to submit your claim to me. Than I will remove this statement and rewrite this submission.

The background review process involves a review of the applicants prior learning and background as the name implies. Points are accumulated for verifiable education, experience, training, continuing education, and such that must exceed the set point number of points. Accredited training follows the strict application that tests/exams are proctored or taken by the applicant and that the courses or program of study are recognized and continue to meet or exceed the learning outcomes recognized by the national occupational standards. Therefore it does become important to those training venues to submit their training materials.

Also to possibly clear up another concern that has come to my attention - those applicants undergoing test inspection with peer review regardless of membership or lack thereof are treated fairly and equally. There are at least two examiners and a chief examiner involved in the review process. It is impossible for one person such as "one some people" may despise as being the only person rendering a decision on an applicant. Furthermore if there is a "conflict of interest" the applicant and the examiner may ask and disclose the concern for such. Applicants are tested on their practical home inspection skillsets, not their personality.

Equally the same reference of fairness and equal treatment applies for the time frame for the allotment of time to inspect the test house and report to the examination team is set based on the pilot studies and reference to other assocaition time frames.

Added: This is really not a secret - its based on fact.

[lewens]

On another note, the National Certification Authority expects to have a report detailing the Pilot Project experience out to CAHPI Member Bodies within two weeks. This is an exciting time, and we look forward to your comments and feedback when it is released.

Graham Clarke, P.Eng., RHI
Chair - National Certification Authority[/quote]

Claude
This statement is somewhat confusing to me. Is not the mandate of the certification authority to ensure that all stake holders, and not just Cahpi member bodies receive information, or are we, in Nachi, not considered stake holders? Do we in this associaton not have the right to know what is going on regarding the National Certification process? Are we to be kept in the dark? I would like to challenge the National Certification authority to disclose the final numbers of people picked for the Pilot Project and their affiliations. I would also like to know the ratios of applicants to the pilot and thier affiliations. If you cannot give me the answers I would like to know who I can go to and ask.
Larry

[Claude Lawrenson]

Greetings Larry, I would suggest that the point of contact to address your questions would be Graham Clarke of Carson & Dunlop - Chair of the National Certification Authority.

[rwand1]

Claude

Where would I obtain a copy of the by-laws pertaining to The National Certification Authority and or by-laws pertaining to CAHPI and the NCA?

Any comments regarding BC and licencing and the fact that CAHPI seems to be left out of the equation and/or the NCA?

Thanks,

[rwand1]

Oh I forgot to ask ...

What are in the plans to discipline non CAHPI NCA holders? Will the NCA deal directly with complaints or will complaints be sent to the provincial body? (i.e. would a Nachi member in Ontario be disciplined by OAHI)

Thanks,

[Claude Lawrenson]

Raymond, rather than state what I think - you are best to go the source.

First on the issue "obtain a copy of the by-laws pertaining to The National Certification Authority and or by-laws pertaining to CAHPI and the NCA?" - the by-laws for the NCA are likely based on a "governance" document produced through the NCA - so Graham is likely your best point of contact. Even at this point I have not seen one.

On the issue of bylaws between CAHPI-(National) and the NCA, that would likely fall in the juisdiction of NCA committee with Graham as Chair, and Mike Guihan CAHPI President.

My personal comments regarding the possibility of licensing in B.C. is one in which I have viewed two parties positioning their associations. I do not feel that any official winner or looser has been announced at this juncture, so its still open. I have seen releases on both sides that lead me to believe that the government will likely not declare one clear group as a winner over another. That is one of the strong points of the national initiative, its open for anyone that would like to apply. B.C. sent reps to review the national initiative and the processes, so I would not say its a slam dunk for anyone at this point.

On the issue of discipline, I could foresee the need for a separate and distinctly appointment of a discipline committee. This would likely be based on the elected NCA board committee members. That would assure fairness that all parties in the process are treated fairly and equally. It is my understanding that this will most likely be part and parcel of the governace document that the NCA has been working on.

[John Bowman]

What a terrible name for a committee. "The Discipline Committee". Kinda makes you feel guilty before even presenting your case.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by jbowman

What a terrible name for a committee. "The Discipline Committee". Kinda makes you feel guilty before even presenting your case.

John did you not know thats exactly the way it works ask any of the active members they all know it for a fact .
Roy Cooke

[Claude Lawrenson]

Interesting perhaps it should be the committee who investigates professional practice and discipline. You seem to be implying its officially named. I was simply trying to answer a question - in its obvious somebody is intent on nit-picking.

I guess thats what I get for trying to respond. Now I understand why I should not bother. That's really unfortunate.

[Roy D. Cooke, Sr]

Originally Posted by clawrenson

Interesting perhaps it should be the committee who investigates professional practice and discipline. You seem to be implying its officially named. I was simply trying to answer a question - in its obvious somebody is intent on nit-picking.

I guess thats what I get for trying to respond. Now I understand why I should not bother. That's really unfortunate.

Come on Claude you have been a member of OAHI for years and you know how the Displine committee works .
The BOD do not want fair and proper handling of the complaints .
You know how many they have removed .
You Have to have heard the complaints on this BB you must know what has happened to Bill m and his sone in law .
Hiding from the facts and the truth is not the way it should be handled . Sorry but I know of more then you have read on this BB and this is very far from proper .
Roy Cooke

[rwand1]

Claude

Sorry I have to agree with Roy. Things are not as they appear within the DPPC. Anyone being investigated or accused of doing something improper within OAHI through the DPPC or by other directors would be well advised to know what your rights are.

Also I understand that the next group to be Nationally Certified if CAHPI members will only be charged $500 and non CAHPI members will be charged $1,000. Why the huge descrepency in fees?

[John Bowman]

Originally Posted by clawrenson

Interesting perhaps it should be the committee who investigates professional practice and discipline. You seem to be implying its officially named. I was simply trying to answer a question - in its obvious somebody is intent on nit-picking.

I guess thats what I get for trying to respond. Now I understand why I should not bother. That's really unfortunate.

Claude,

Why in heavens name would this group need a discipline committee. Isn't the mission of this National thingy to simply hand out self regulated certification in the guise of protecting the public. It's a voluntary group with yearly dues. I would imagine that the National always has the options of "right of refusal" of membership or "right of refusal" too further someones membership".

What on heavens earth would you discipline. There are no government regulations for home inspectors. I just don't understand. What would you base your discipline on. Looks or what?

[John Bowman]

Last I looked ASHI lists OAHI as a Chapter of ASHI. Does ASHI get the fine money that OAHI imposes?