Ombudsperson’s Office for Accreditation

The Ombudsperson’s Office for Accreditation mediates between the Deans’ offices and the Rectorate in the event of conflicts within the internal accreditation process. This may be the case, in particular, if:

• the Rectorate refuses accreditation despite a positive recommendation from the Accreditation Committee,
• conditions are not considered to be criteria-based,
• the Rectorate does not consider conditions to be met.

The ombudsperson’s office must be consulted no later than four weeks after the Rectorate has refused to change its decision. The documents needed to clarify the matter must be submitted within six weeks of consulting the Ombudsperson’s office.

The Ombudsperson’s Office for Accreditation may be referred to within four weeks of the Rectorate’s decision being published in the form of the quality report by the dean's offices, in consultation with the programme coordinators. The Ombudsman’s Office shall inform the Rectorate and the Accreditation Committee of the appeal. Documents required for clarification must be provided to the Ombudsman’s Office by the parties concerned within six weeks of the appeal being lodged. The Ombudsman’s Office shall hear the parties and decide on the further course of action (see the following section).

The Ombudsman’s Office shall finally notify the Accreditation Commission Office of its decision on how to proceed and, for information, the dean's office that made the referral as well as Q³. The Accreditation Commission Office submits the Ombudsman’s decision to the Accreditation Committee for information. The Accreditation Commission Office organises the subsequent referral to the Rectorate. The Rectorate takes a new and final decision after the facts have been clarified and, where applicable, the Ombudsman’s measures have been concluded.

The ombudsperson’s office talks to the parties and decides on further proceedings. The aim is to get those involved to talk to each other and to encourage critical reflection. At the same time, it makes sure that the process is completed quickly. The ombudsperson’s office can choose from the following measures:

1. writing a statement with a request to the Rectorate or the Accreditation Committee for re-evaluation,
2. writing a statement with a recommendation to the Rectorate to (not) grant a certain condition,
3. organizing a round table with the parties involved and, if necessary, other advisory parties,
4. recommending to the Rectorate that a new accreditation procedure be carried out, starting with a further QM dialogue,
5. rejecting the complaint with a written or electronic justification.

The ombudsperson’s office consists of one or more persons appointed by the Senate on the recommendation of the Vice-Dean for Teaching and Studies. They must be members of the faculty of the University of Cologne or another university and should have experience in academic self-administration, if possible as a former vice-dean. The term of office is three years. There is no limit on the number of terms of office.