Application advice

Submission Guidelines

The following information provides advice regarding evidence that is required for the various prescribed domains of the credentialling standard. When compiling your submission please refer to the information given in the Application Forms to ensure all criteria are met for each section.

Ensure that you observe the maximum word counts for relevant sections.

All applications must be submitted electronically via the links on the application page Credentialling Application 

Relevant Vocation

Applicants must provide documentary evidence of their professional standing within an eligible Relevant Vocation for the particular level of credentialling. Based on the specific level of credentialing for which you are applying and if you practice as a registered clinician you may be required to hold an unrestricted licence as Registered Nurse or Registered Medical Practitioner with the Australian Health Practitioner Regulatory Authority, the Medical Council of New Zealand or the Nursing Council of New Zealand or the relevant agency in the country in which you practice. For more information, please contact the PACS Committee.

Prerequisites

Applicants must be currently financial members of ACIPC to be eligible to apply. The College will provide evidence on this to the PACS Committee on receipt of your application.

Applicants must provide documentary evidence of their employment and experience requirements of the relevant level of credential for which they are applying by being currently employed (full or part-time) or self-employed in a role that is designated as an infection and prevention role or includes a specific element of infection control such as hand hygiene auditing, infection control link nurse or reprocessing reusable equipment part-time. Suitable documentation includes statements of service, official letters from supervisors or employers and other similar documentation attesting to this requirement. This information should be consistent with the curriculum vitae.

Applicants must provide evidence of completion of the prescribed education relevant to the specific credentialing level for which they are applying as outlined in Table 1. Certified copies of certificates and qualifications must be submitted.

How to write a critical reflective narrative

As a general guide each reflective narrative must:

• Be between 500-1500 words long
• Be written in the first person In your narrative, answer the following key questions:
• What was the situation?
• What happened in the situation?
• How did you go about it?
• Why did you go about it that way?
• What was the outcome?
• What did you do well?
• What could you have done better?
• What would you do differently next time?
• What other steps would you take as a result of this reflection?

Describe your actions, thoughts, feelings and observations experienced during the episode. The narrative should include a description of what went well during the episode and why you thought so; a description of what did not go well (i.e. the challenges and barriers you encountered), and why you thought the strategies you had put into place were not successful. Review behaviours, interactions, feelings and thoughts that you identified throughout the event/ activity and consider strategies that may have altered the outcomes. Identify your strengths and limitations. Outline learning objectives from your limitations that identify a skill to be practiced or knowledge to be gained and how you plan to achieve this. Support your narrative with evidence relevant to the chosen activity (copies of peer reviewed publications, conference presentations, education activities, committee activity, other activities). There are specific reflective submission requirements for each level of credential and they are described below

Successful Applications

A certificate will be emailed to you and you will be entitled to use the post-nominal associated with the credential awarded: CICP-P, CICP-A, or CICP-E for three (3) years.

A public database of Credentialled Infection Control professionals (CICP) is maintained by ACIPC on the website. Credentialled Infection Control professionals will be profiled in various ACIPC communications. Names are removed from the database at the end of the three year period of the credential unless the individual has been re-credentialled or credentialled at a higher level.

Unsuccessful Applications

An initial application for credentialing may be unsuccessful for two reasons:

(a) The application requires clarification and resubmission or the revised application is not submitted within a specified time frame. The ACIPC PACS Committee may seek clarification from you regarding one or more aspects of your application. The PACS Committee Chair will notify you in writing if components of your application require clarification. The correspondence will provide feedback detailing the areas of deficit and suggestions for how the application can be improved. You will be required to submit a response and/or revisions within a stated timeframe. If a revised application is not submitted within this timeframe the application will formally lapse and be deemed unsuccessful.

(b) The application is deemed unsuccessful. If the PACS Committee has assessed that the application has not met the requirements for credentialing, the Chair will notify the applicant in writing. The correspondence will provide constructive feedback detailing the areas of deficit. If you wish to resubmit a full application within twelve (12) months there will be a resubmission cost. If you wish to appeal the decision, follow the appeal process outlined below

Procedures for Appeal

Unsuccessful applicants are encouraged to review and reflect on the comments provided by the ACIPC PACS Committee along with their application before commencing an appeal. Applicants may initiate discussion with the PACS Committee Chair, or their delegate, to seek clarification which may aid in understanding why the application was unsuccessful. Such discussions usually provide answers to any questions and resolution to any concerns an applicant may have. Applicants have grounds for appealing the decision of ACIPC to not award a credential if they can demonstrate that:

(a) the process for reviewing the application (as outlined in the marking guidelines) was not correctly followed, or

(b) the applicant is able to provide information indicating that not all the evidence was in line with the application guidelines was considered in the marking process.

In the event that an unsuccessful applicant disagrees with ACIPC’s decision not to credential, the following process must be followed:

1. An appeal must be lodged with supporting evidence to the ACIPC President via the ACIPC Secretariat within fourteen (14) working days of receiving written feedback from ACIPC outlining why the credential was not awarded provided by the ACIPC PACS Committee Chairperson.
2. The ACIPC President shall acknowledge receipt of the appeal in writing, and request relevant documentation from the Chairperson of the ACIPC PACS Committee including the original (unmarked) copy of the application, and any other documents or correspondence with the applicant.
3. The ACIPC President shall convene an Appeal Tribunal comprising four (4) members of the ACIPC Board and the members of the PACS Committee to hear the appeal. This meeting (by teleconference) shall be convened as soon as possible.
4. If the tribunal finds that the appeal does not meet the grounds for appeal the applicant’s objection will be denied and the earlier decision will be upheld.
5. If the tribunal finds that the applicant’s appeal is in accordance with the grounds for appeal the objection will be upheld and the applicant will be invited to resubmit their application to ACIPC at no additional cost.
6. If the applicant is again unsuccessful the applicant and the ACIPC Board will be notified of the decision in writing.
7. The decision of the Appeals Tribunal is final.
8. The applicant will have only one opportunity for appeal. If the applicant is unsuccessful following appeal, the credential will not be awarded and the applicant will be excluded from submitting a new application for a period of twelve (12) months.