Dr. Judit Behovics - Tibor Pásztor: Experiences of the inspections of accredited adult training institutions

    With Act LXXVII/2013 on adult learning  which has entered into force  the legislative environment of the Hungarian adult learning sector went through transformations.

    The official inspection of adult learning institutions was carried out – under legislative authorisation – by the National Office of Vocational Education and Training and Adult Learning (NOVETAL), as the official body for VET and adult learning. During the inspection  beside the sectoral legislation were applied the provisions  of Act CXL/2004 on the general rules of administrative proceedings and services. During the inspection the authorities primarily investigated the compliance (accredited activity, data identical to the public registers, activities carried out under the relevant legislation) of entities falling within the  scope of ratione personae of  the Act on adult learning, involving a total of 240 adult learning experts and programme experts.

    Between 15 January 2015 and 30 June 2016, on-the-spot checks were conducted at 363 institutions, financed by the National Employment Fund's training fund. The inspection involved both private (84%) and public (16%) institutions. The institutions which were the subjects of verification had typically acquired accreditation for adult learning in the first part of 2014. The conditions of the accreditation are training programme, asset based security, quality assurance, data provision.

    During the inspections a total of 745 experts were deployed. The designation of the experts was carried out by the cooperation of the Expert Committee on Adult Learning and the authorities, with regard to professional and geographical aspects as well as the elimination of conflict of interest.

    The two- or three-person expert teams carrying out the on-the-spot checks typically consisted of an adult learning expert (lead expert) and an adult learning programme expert or – in the case of language trainings – two adult learning experts. The IT software supporting the inspections made certain data – from the information system of adult learning, and the resulting documentation of the inspection – accessible to the experts and the institutions – in a selective manner.

    The on-the-spot checks were conducted through sampling, the inspection of training documents, checking of the staff and equipment, and by interviewing the training providers. The expert team investigated the full documentation of at least one ongoing training and one closed training. By taking part as an observer on the actual training class – if there were any – the team applied a new method of inspection as well.

    NOVETAL, as the body of first instance, made a decision in accordance with the number of inspections, in the case of the institutions notified in advance 82% of the inspections resulted in the decision to end the procedure, 18% resulted in a decision to impose a fine.  In the case of institutions not having been noticed in advance the proportion of decisions to impose a fine was higher (27%).


    At training institutions that previously went under external evaluation the amount of infringements was much lower than at the institutions that had not undergone external evaluation prior to the inspection.

     

    The base sum of the fine is defined by the legislation, and it is at least of the amount of the minimal wage. The discretion of the body of first instance is only to set the fine within fixed thresholds, without powers of equity. Taking into account the severity of the infringements the most common fine imposed was the amount of the compulsory  minimal wage, however there were higher fines.



    As a result of the 363 main proceedings, the authorities received 13 appeals against  the decisions of the first instance from the Customers, out of which 4 have been revised and revoked, 9 appeals have been sent to the authorities of the second instance; 8 have been confirmed and 1 has been annulled. One of the appeals confirmed by the authority of the second instance has been contested at the Court of Public Administration and Labour. Overall, serious  infringements only happened in a few cases amongst the training institutions undergoing the inspection.

    H-1085 Baross street 52.
    Budapest, Hungary

    Phone: (+36 1) 477-5600

    Email:  gomorineoj@nive.hu

    © 2016 ReferNet Magyarország

    Main menu en-GB

    Warning: "continue" targeting switch is equivalent to "break". Did you mean to use "continue 2"? in C:\inetpub\wwwroot\nive\site\refernet\modules\mod_menu\helper.php on line 97