EWSI Accreditation Procedure

Evaluation Protocol

To insure a consistency of evaluation, each course reviewer must abide by this Protocol for Application Evaluation. While some of the evaluation process must, by its nature, be subjective, this Protocol is designed to offer a step-by-step process by which evaluations will be made on the most objective basis possible.

Courses for the public do not have to meet the more rigorous standards that apply to courses for professionals in estate and wealth strategies planning, such as attendance and instructor requirements. However, these courses have to contain adequate materials and content so that they clearly and accurately address their topics.

Creation of a Standard File

For each Application, a standard file will be established. It will contain the following five named folders.

I. Protocol Checklist and Index of Documents

The Protocol Checklist shall be completed as each task is finished. The Index of Documents will be a running log of all documentation received (including correspondence) and a statement of the folder in which a document was filed. This folder, at a glance, should give an overview of all tasks accomplished and a list of all of the documentation in the file.

II. Application and Required Documentation

The Application requires the applicant to furnish specific information. This information should be filed in Folder II. To the extent materials are bulky and cannot fit into one folder, the materials should be clearly labeled as exhibits to Folder II and filed in proximity to Folder II to allow quick access.

III. Reviewers Notes and Evaluation

The reviewer shall keep all notes of his or her review, as well as comments that he or she has on the materials. All notes shall be filed in this Folder III.

IV. Correspondence

All correspondence with the applicant and third parties must be in this folder, including the acceptance or rejection of the course.

V. Accreditation Agreement

An original, signed Accreditation Agreement shall be kept in this folder.

If a course is reaccredited because significant changes are made, a new Reaccreditation File shall be created following the same standard format.
The Evaluation Protocol

[Comments on the Evaluation Protocol may be mailed to ewsi@msu.edu.]

Once the Application Fee, completed Application, signed Accreditation Agreement, and required documentation are received, the Reviewer shall evaluate the course and course materials under the Protocol. For each question that is relevant to the course, the Reviewer shall make notes that verify his or her conclusion as to whether the course passes or fails.

Is the course related to estate and wealth strategies?

To be related to estate and wealth strategies, the course must address some aspect of wealth accumulation, preservation, and transfer.

The scope of estate and wealth strategies is broad and encompasses business and financial planning, investments and investment strategy, retirement strategies, charitable planning, and investments, and will and trust planning. In addition, courses that deal with estate and wealth strategies professional-client relationships, communication by estate and wealth planning professionals to others, family issues in the transfer of wealth or values, and related topics all encompass estate and wealth strategies.

Courses that deal with such topics as time management, organization, or skill sets not related to the actual accumulation, preservation, or transfer of wealth shall not qualify for accreditation.

Is the target audience and course level clearly defined in the course materials?

Some courses will specifically designate their audience; others will likely be self evident. As part of defining the course's audience, especially if offered to professionals, the level of expertise should be addressed.

Some courses are for entry level professionals, others are for those who have some experience, and others are for those who are clearly experts in their fields. Courses that lack specificity as to audience and to level (if appropriate) shall not be accredited.

Are the course objectives clearly defined in the course and promotional materials?

Defining a course's objectives is important in determining the quality of a course. Preferably, a course will set forth its objectives at the beginning of the course materials and in the promotional materials.

Courses that do not describe their objectives or that do so in an unclear and inadequate manner will not receive accreditation.

Does the course explain how the course will meet its objectives?

A course should have an explanation in its materials as to the scope of the course and its content either in a course summary or by a Table of Contents. Courses that fail to state how the course will meet its objectives will not be accredited.

Do the course materials define with specificity the knowledge, skills, and abilities participants will receive?

The knowledge, skills, and abilities that a participant will receive from a course may be contained in the course objectives or descriptions. They may also be found in other areas of the course materials.

For accreditation purposes, courses should address the knowledge, skills, and abilities that a participant will receive. Accreditation shall not be granted if a course fails to do so.

If the course requires prerequisites or supplemental study, are these prerequisites or supplemental study materials clearly delineated in the course materials and are they meaningful?

To receive the highest rating, a course that has prerequisites or supplemental study should list such items and should explain their relationship to the course materials.

There should be real evidence that the materials are relevant and meaningful. Courses that require prerequisites but do not explain their relevance, and courses that require supplemental materials but do not describe them in detail and their relevance shall not receive accreditation.

Is there evidence that the course is current in its content?

The course or promotional materials should demonstrate when the course was last revised if the course contains time sensitive material.

Evidence of timeliness can include supplements or materials that would lead a potential participant to believe that the instructor will offer up-to-date information. If there is no evidence that the course is current, then the course shall not be accredited.

Is there evidence that the course materials are technically accurate?

It is fundamental that the course be materials be technically accurate. The Reviewer should be familiar enough with the subject matter of the course to make this determination.

A course can be technically accurate even if it offers information or techniques that may be controversial and innovative as long as the ideas expressed have some objective, factual or experiential basis, and it is noted that there are other viewpoints.

The Reviewer is to be objective as to his or her own personal views. Actual examples of technical inaccuracy should be contained in the notes of the Reviewer and should be concrete enough so that they can be disclosed to the Applicant.

Does the author of the course have sufficient credentials to be able to hold himself or herself as an expert in the course material?

The author of the course must have some recognized credentials in the subject matter of the course. It is not necessary that the author be a nationally or globally recognized authority, but the author should have a demonstrated background in the subject matter.

Experience is one factor that should be considered, but the experience should be coupled with education or accolade that would show that the ideas expressed have merit in their own right and that the course materials are credible.

Do the instructor requirements as set forth in the course materials assure that the course will be taught by a qualified instructor?

The course materials should include the credentials of the instructors.

Instructors should have a background in the subject matter or the materials should contain sufficient supplemental information, so that if the audience has questions, the instructor has the ability to give accurate answers, or the ability to find those answers and later contact the audience member with the answers.

If it is unclear as to who the instructors are or if the instructors do not have credentials that would reasonably lead one to believe that they are not qualified to teach the course, the course shall not be accredited.

If the course has been reviewed by an independent source, did the review find the course satisfactory?

It is preferable that a course submitted have some indication that it has been reviewed by an independent, credentialed individual or body. If a course does not have such evidence, then the quality of the materials, the stature of the author, and the credentials of the Applicant must be well above average in order to grant accreditation.

Has the course been qualified for continuing education credit?

Qualification by a course for continuing education by the American Bar Association, a State Bar Association, the American Society of Certified Public Accountants, a State Society of Certified Public Accountants, or by any other widely recognized professional governing body is prima facie evidence that a course is adequate for accreditation. However, if the course fails in any of the other elements of this protocol in a substantial manner, it cannot be accredited.

Is there a course evaluation and a procedure for the review of evaluations?

A course must have an evaluation form in order to receive accreditation. In addition, there must be some evidence that the evaluations are reviewed by the Applicant, the author, or the instructors.

Are there attendance requirements and a procedure to monitor them?

If there are no attendance standards and no procedure in place to monitor those standards, the course cannot be accredited. If the course has been approved for continuing education, then it meets this standard.

Is the course primarily education oriented?

The Institute recognizes that courses that are offered by for-profit companies may have product or service sales as part of a course. Having either of these elements does not disqualify the course for accreditation.

However, the primary focus of the course must be for the education of the participant, with the sale of a product or service as ancillary to the course. If the course is merely a shell used to sell a product or service, it shall not be accredited. If the course is associated with a product or service, it can be accredited as long as the product or service is either intrinsic to the course or is ancillary to it.

Does the course meet the criteria of The Institute's standards?

The Reviewer must be able to certify that in the Reviewer's opinion, the course meets the criteria set forth in The Institute's standards.

The Post-Evaluation Protocol

If the course qualifies for accreditation, the Applicant shall be sent a letter informing the Applicant of accreditation, as well as a signed copy of the Accreditation Agreement.

If the course does not qualify, The Institute will send a letter to the Applicant informing the Applicant of the deficiencies found.

The Applicant may reapply. Reapplication shall require a fee equal to one-half of the original fee to cover the costs of reviewing the course. Upon reapplication, the Applicant must furnish a written summary of the changes made that address the deficiencies. In addition, the Applicant must resubmit all materials, highlighting the changes made.

The Reviewer shall then evaluate the revised Course and determine if it meets the requirements for accreditation.