Award of accreditation and publication of award decisions

Den Danske Kvalitetsmodel
DDKM in English
Award of accreditation and publication of award decisions

The decision about award of accreditation status is made by the Accreditation Award Committee, an impartial authority detached from IKAS and the Board of IKAS in the exercise of its activities. The committee ensures fair and equal treatment of clients, according to clear and transparent rules.

Members of the Accreditation Award Committee are all actively engaged in healthcare, either as managers or as practitioners. They are selected to ensure representation from all sectors participating in DDKM. A decision concerning any client will always involve at least one committee member from the same sector as the client. The chair and two co-chairs are appointed by the IKAS Board. The chairmanship appoints the remaining members, based on recommendations from stakeholders; once appointed, a member does not represent the recommending organization or his/her daily employer in any committee-related work.

As of June 1st 2019, the number of committee members was 39.

Rating of the indicators is decided by the surveyor team, and will not be changed by the Accreditation Award Committee. However, the committee will review a random sample of client cases annually to ensure that the process from the survey to the final decision on award, including the rating of indicators, has been fair, unbiased and according to prevailing rules. If any concerns are identified, the committee will make pertinent recommendations to IKAS.

The award of accreditation status is governed by the following principles.

If at survey all indicators are rated as Met or Largely Met, the Accreditation Award Committee will award the client status as Accredited. For the out-of-hospital based health practitioners this is an administrative decision, taken by IKAS without any actual review of the case by the committee. Cases of this type are included in the random sample reviewed annually, described above.

If this is not the case, the client will have the opportunity for a new assessment of the indicators rated Partially Met or Not Met within 3-6 months. More serious non-compliances will require a prompter re-assessment than less serious. If the Accreditation Award Committee finds it highly unlikely that a sufficient level of compliance can be reached within the required time frame, it can deny accreditation right away. The client will then have to apply for a new complete survey, when ready. In almost all cases, though, an opportunity for re-assessment is given.

If at the re-assessment all indicators are rated as Met or Largely Met, the Accreditation Award Committee will award the client status as Accredited.

If there are indicators rated as Partially Met or Not Met, the Accreditation Award Committee will have to decide, whether the clients be awarded status as either

Accredited with comments

Or Not accredited

The decision will be based on an assessment of the impact of the non-compliances on the client’s ability to ensure the safety and the statutory rights of its service users. Safety includes both risks from errors of commission and errors of omission.

The time between survey and award of final status is monitored. A target is defined for each programme; it can be six or seven calendar weeks.

The accreditation status for each client is published on IKAS´ website, separately for each accreditation programme; these can be found in the Danish section of the website under the heading “Deltagere i DDKM” (= Participants in DDKM) - look for “Akkrediteringsnævnets afgørelser” (= Accreditation decisions) under each category of healthcare providers. For some, but not all, programmes, the full survey report is also published. However, as IKAS operates according to the rules for public administration, everyone is entitled to request a copy of any survey report from IKAS according to the Danish Open Administration Act.

Accreditation status is awarded for a period of three years and eight weeks. This allows for a three year survey cycle, with no gap between expiration of current status and award of a new status.