RIBA's Submission to the Call for Evidence on Architects Regulation and the Architects Registration Board

Royal Institute of British Architects

RIBA's submission to the Call for Evidence on Architects Regulation and the Architects Registration Board

29 May 2014

The Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) champions better buildings, communities and the environment through architecture and its members. It has been promoting architecture and architects since being awarded its Royal Charter in 1837. The 40,000-strong professional institute is committed to serving the public interest through good design and professional standards. The RIBA members represent three quarters of the ARB registered architects in the UK as well as 4,300 chartered architects around the world.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The RIBA supports the continued independent statutory regulation of architects in the UK, in the public interest. This has existed for over 80 years and is well established and valued by UK consumers and by the profession as a way of confirming to clients the professional competency and integrity of fully qualified architects, and of providing safeguards against unlawful or incompetent practice. There is no compelling case to change the current structure, and there would be considerable costs and disruption associated with any major change. The three key reasons for the continuation of the regulation of architects in the UK are: 1. Value of architecture: the importance and public value of architecture to the shared environment, cultural heritage, economic success and well-being of society, with expensive and long term consequences for society if architectural skills and standards are inadequately applied. 2. Importance for consumers: the value and complexity of architectural services to often inexpert consumers, who need to be able to identify and rely upon registered ‘architects’ for major investment in their homes, workplaces and built environment. 3. Role of architects: the unique roles and responsibilities of architects, confirmed by the EU-wide requirement for their registration. However, the RIBA believes that architects’ regulation under the Architects Registration Act Royal Institute of British Architects 1997 could be carried out more effectively and efficiently and at lower cost, with economic benefits for society, consumers and the profession. The RIBA therefore recommends to the 66 Portland Place, London, W1B 1AD, UK Government that the following improvements are made. Tel: +44 (0)20 7580 5533 Fax: +44 (0)20 7255 1541 [email protected] www.architecture.com

Page Incorporated by Royal Charter 1 | No: RC000484 Registered Charity No: 210 566

VAT Registration No: 232 351 891

Recommendation 1: In accordance with the better regulation principles, the ARB should undertake its role in prescribing professional qualifications without duplicating the existing and well-established mechanisms operated by the RIBA and the educational institutions. By prescribing RIBA-validated qualifications (nationally and internationally) the ARB could retain its ultimate responsibility to ensure that prescribed qualifications meet the public interest test, while reducing costs for itself, its registrants, educational institutions and, ultimately, consumers of architectural services.

Recommendation 2: A prompt and independent review with RIBA input of the ARB’s disciplinary rules and disciplinary performance is carried out to identify and implement improvements. This review should include consultation with people who have been representing architects in the ARB disciplinary process.

Recommendation 3: The EU PQD recommendation for CPD should be fulfilled by recommending the use of established CPD systems for architects provided by relevant professional bodies such as the RIBA system, which is already mapped against the agreed prescription/validation criteria, thus avoiding the need for the establishment of a costly additional system.

Recommendation 4: The UK Government gives clear guidance to the ARB to apply a more proportionate amount of its efforts and resources (in the order of one third of the retention fee), to protecting the title ‘architect’ against misuse by unregistered and unqualified persons.

Recommendation 5: The UK Government to give clear guidance to the ARB to focus on the efficient keeping and maintaining of the register of individual architects, as described by the Act and carrying out of the ‘competent authority’ function for the UK within the remit described in the EU Professional Qualifications Directive. The ARB should be advised by the Government not to expand its remit, services or activities beyond its specific statutory roles.

2 | Page

PART ONE – THE CASE FOR ARCHITECTS’ REGULATION

RIBA POLICY

1. The RIBA Council re-affirmed its support for the maintenance of statutory regulation of architects, but in a more efficient and effective way, by adopting the following RIBA Policy at its Council meeting on 19 March 2014: 1. To reaffirm its support for the maintenance of statutory protection of the title ‘architect’ 2. To maintain protection of title through an independent minimal ARB, to protect the interest of consumers, non-members of the RIBA as well as RIBA members, and to accord with UK and EU legislation and directive.

REASONS FOR CONTINUED REGULATION OF ARCHITECTS

2. Architecture is both a creative art and a technical science that defines the cultural values of a community, as well as determining the quality and effectiveness of the shared environment that a community lives, works and thrives in. Architecture forms the built assets and influences the well-being of society, including its economic success. If the complex and expert skills of architects are not properly developed and applied, it can be extremely debilitating and expensive to a national economy, a local community, individual users and clients. 3. As in other areas of professional practice such as medicine and the law, consumers of architectural services – and particularly individual, one-off consumers – are vulnerable to exploitation with potentially serious consequences for themselves, and wider consequences for the built environment and society. Many clients only require architectural services once, or on a few occasions, in their life-times. They will not generally have the necessary expertise to successfully carry out this role themselves, or be able to assess the competency of others to provide this service for them. For consumer and business clients alike, designing and constructing buildings or facilities is a major, or even their largest, investment. This is particularly the case for home owners in the UK, where residential property forms the largest proportion of personal investment and wealth. 4. This is the crux of the case for requiring additional regulation of architects, compared to other built-environment professionals such as engineers and surveyors, in the interests of the consumer, user and public. Architects need to have a complex and unique mix of creative, technical, management and analytical skills, as well as professional standards and behaviours to protect the wider interests of clients and the general public. This is substantiated by the specific regulation of architects under the EU Professional Qualifications Directive and the specific national regulation of architects in other countries, including EU member states. Unlike other construction professionals, statutory regulation of architects in some form is an EU requirement. 5. Because of the reasons set out above, a good case could be put forward for the extension of the regulation of architects to include the protection of the key functions of architects, as well as the title ‘architect’, to better protect the public interest. This is the model used for architects in other EU member states and also for some other regulated professions in the UK. 6. Conversely, some regulated professions rely upon protection of title or – as with doctors and lawyers – a mixture of protection of title and some protection of function. However attractive restriction of architectural function might appear in theory, in practice it is

3 | Page

likely to be fraught and disproportionate in its effects. There would be significant complexities in delineating the specific functions of architects which could be regulated, due to the wide scope and scale of architectural services. 7. Furthermore, certain services provided by architects could be adequately provided by those without the professional qualifications or obligations of regulated architects. But it is useful for the consumer to know that they can expect and rely on a level of competence and professionalism from anyone using the title ‘architect’. Therefore, on balance, the RIBA is only recommending the continuation of the protection of title for architects. 8. The RIBA does not consider that there is a strong case for extending regulation of title to other derivatives of the word ‘architect’, or to other forms of construction services, as there is no EU requirement for such extension, in the public interest, nor do the arguments set out in the paragraphs above apply to other groups or services. 9. In summary, the three key reasons for the continuation of the regulation of architects on broadly the current basis are: 1. Value of architecture: the importance and public value of architecture to the shared environment, cultural heritage, economic success and well-being of society, with expensive and long term consequences for society if architectural skills and standards are inadequately applied. 2. Importance for consumers: the value and complexity of architectural services to often inexpert consumers, who need to be able to identify and rely upon registered ‘architects’ for major investment in their homes, workplaces and built environment. 3. Role of architects: the unique roles and responsibilities of architects, confirmed by the EU-wide requirement for their registration.

4 | Page

PART TWO – MODEL FOR EFFECTIVE REGULATION

REFORM OF CURRENT MODEL OF INDEPENDENT REGULATION

10. To achieve the effective and efficient regulation of the architects’ profession in the UK’s public interest the RIBA recommends that the statutory regulation of architects should be undertaken by an independent registration body which has a focused and clear remit. 11. Although this is in theory the current UK model, the reality is that it is currently not implemented as efficiently or effectively as intended by Parliament (and recorded in Hansard), when Parliament was passing the Architects Registration Act 1997. This is due to the Act’s broad wording, which has unfortunately and unhelpfully led to an expansionist interpretation and inappropriate implementation of the Act by the Architects Registration Board (ARB). The result has been an undermining of the better regulation principles. 12. The Architects Registration Board (ARB) should focus solely on efficiently implementing the six key functions of the registration body as described in the Architects Act 1997 being: 1. Maintain a UK register of suitably qualified architects 2. Prescribe qualifications required for inclusion on the register. 3. Issue a code of standards of conduct and practice 4. Investigate and deal with complaints against Architects 5. Protect the use of the title ‘architect’ against unregistered persons describing themselves as ‘Architects’. 6. Act as the UK’s competent authority for the EU Professional Qualifications Directive 13. The ARB has not been efficiently or effectively carrying out these six functions, and has expanded into areas beyond those ascribed to it by the Act (see section 3 below). The RIBA firmly believes that better and appropriate regulation could be achieved, at reduced cost to the consumer and the profession, and without significant alteration to the current Act, by amending the Framework Agreement between the DCLG and the ARB to prevent the ARB from expanding its activities beyond this defined statutory remit. 14. In Section 3 the RIBA recommends specific areas for reform and improvement to achieve the more effective and efficient implementation of the existing Architects Act 1997.

ALTERNATIVE MODELS OF REGULATION ELSEWHERE IN THE EU

15. There are three different models for the regulation of the architects’ profession across Europe. All of these are recognised as valid ways of implementing the EU Professional Qualification Directive and its specific requirements for architects. 16. These three models are: 1. Integration: a single body with combined regulatory and professional responsibilities. This is the prevailing model across Europe, including France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, and Spain, with differing levels of protection of the functions and the titles of architects and where the statutory regulatory bodies are Government bodies

5 | Page

2. Separation: a separate professional membership body and an independent regulatory/registration body. This is the model currently used in the UK and Netherlands. 3. Non Statutory regulation: no national statutory regulation, instead relying on the national professional body to maintain qualification and standards, and appointing this professional body as competent authority to implement the requirements of EU Professional Qualification Directive. This is the model used in several EU countries including Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. 17. Given the UK context and having carefully considered these options, the RIBA has concluded that retention of the current ‘separation’ model in which there is a statutory regulator separate from the professional body is, on balance, the best option for the UK. 18. However, if contrary to the RIBA’s recommendations the Government were to conclude from this review that an “integrated” or “non-statutory” regulatory model should be adopted for the UK, the RIBA considers that these models could be applied in the following ways. 19. Possible integrated model for the UK: the Architects’ Registration Act 1997 is amended to appoint the RIBA as the registration body and competent authority to implement the EU Professional Qualification Directive and to protect the use of the title of architects. The RIBA would continue to define and maintain the qualification and professional standards of UK architects, in the public interest, as set out in the Royal Charter of the RIBA, which is controlled via the Privy Council. 20. Possible non-statutory model for the UK: the Architects Registration Act 1997 is revoked and the RIBA is appointed as the ‘competent authority’ to implement the EU Directive by keeping the register of suitably qualified EU architects in the UK. The RIBA would continue to define and maintain the qualification and professional standards of UK architects and be able to protect the title ‘Chartered Architect’, in the public interest, as set out in the Royal Charter of the RIBA, which is controlled via the Privy Council. 21. Since neither of these is our preferred model, we have not set out here the practical implications of these approaches. However, the RIBA could provide details of how it would effectively keep a separate register, separate public complaints system and professional standards procedures for the EU recognised architects in the UK from the similar provisions it maintains for the RIBA chartered members in the UK and internationally.

6 | Page

PART THREE – IMPROVING THE CURRENT MODEL OF REGULATION

POOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CURRENT MODEL OF REGULATION

22. Since 1997, the RIBA has made several formal representations to the ARB pointing out inefficiencies, inappropriate activities and actions and lack of effectiveness in the implementation of the Act, and made constructive suggestions for how the ARB could improve the implementation of the current Architects Registration Act. However, very few of these suggestions have been seriously considered or acted upon by the ARB. Therefore, the RIBA welcomes this Periodic Review by the Government as an opportunity for these concerns and recommended improvements to be considered by the Government and, if accepted, for the registration body to implement. 23. Following letters sent by the RIBA raising concerns to the ARB (see appendix A) a joint ARB-RIBA working party was set up in late 2013 to look at these issues, in anticipation of this Periodic Review. This group has met on three occasions, but has not yet been able to resolve any of the key issues which include: a. The need for fairer and more transparent professional conduct rules and processes b. The need for more effective and efficient prescription of qualifications (UK and international), recognising the RIBA’s established and world renowned validation system, rather than duplicating by a separate process thereby adding unnecessary burdens on schools of architecture and students and confusion to the public c. The need for clearer definition of the remit of the registration body that does not expand the regulator’s role beyond the remit of the Act nor duplicate the professional support services that the RIBA and other professional bodies for architects already provide. 24. The RIBA firmly believes that the independent registration body should focus on efficiently discharging the six key functions of the current Architects Registration Act (identified in paragraph 12). It should not expand its activities beyond its stated statutory remit into professional practice support and self-promotion activities. 25. These expansionist and inappropriate activities conducted by the ARB include: 1. Promoting the use of an ‘ARB’ affix by their registrants, a function which is not included or intended by the Act. The effect is that clients can be misled into believing that the ARB registration is in itself a professional qualification. The ARB should adopt the practice of other statutory regulators and simply require registrants to state that they are regulated by the ARB. 2. Encouraging consumers to use the ARB register as a way of finding or selecting an architect’s service and to make contact with architects’ practices, whereas the statutory purpose of the register is for the public to ascertain if a person is an ‘architect’. 3. Providing support services to registered architects and promoting their practices by providing website links, etc. See appendices B to D for evidence of these activities.

7 | Page

VALUE FOR MONEY

26. The RIBA believes that the ARB has become increasingly extravagant in its expenditure, does not currently provide value for money and has not been performing the totality of its duties properly. Its duplicative and expansive approach to the education of architects (see paragraphs 32 to 42), coupled with its sometimes misguided approach to the setting and enforcement of professional code and professional conduct (see paragraphs 43 to 49) have led to substantial cost inflation, while the protection of consumers from unregistered architects has been inadequately targeted. 27. Furthermore, the ARB has gradually expanded its activities to provide services beyond its statutory jurisdiction with the result that the registration retention fee has increased unnecessarily and far more rapidly than the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) or UK architects’ earnings, as illustrated by the following graphs. 28. Since the establishment of ARB, their retention fee has increased from £30 per annum in 1997 to £105 per annum in 2014. This fee represented only 0.12% of UK architects’ median earnings in 1997 but has doubled over the last 17 years to 0.25% of UK architects’ median earnings in 2013, as illustrated in graph 1:

ARB annual fee as a percentage of Architects' median salary

0.30%

0.25%

0.20%

0.15%

0.10%

0.05%

0.00% 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Graph 1 - Source: Architects Earnings Survey 2013/14 edition – The Fees Bureau

29. The rate of increase of the ARB retention fee since 1997 has not only exceeded the rate of increase of UK architects’ median earnings, but also the RIBA’s professional subscriptions for UK chartered architects. The ARB retention fee has also been at variance with the UK CPI, particularly in recent years with the rate of CPI inflation falling whilst the retention fee has continued to increase at over 3% per annum. This is illustrated in graphs 2 and 3 below.

8 | Page

Increase in ARB fees since 1997 compared to CPI; architects' salaries and RIBA's subscription fees (1997=100)

350

300

250

200

150

100

0 CPI Overall Index Architect's median salary RIBA's subscription fees ARB's retention fees

1997 2013

Graph 2

Increase in ARB fees since 1997 compared to CPI; architects' salaries and RIBA's subscription fees (1997=100)

350

325

300

275

250

225

200

175

150

125

100

0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Architect's median salary ARB's retention fees CPI Overall Index RIBA's subscription fees

Graph3

30. The areas of poor value for money, relating to the unnecessary and inefficient activities of the ARB, are described in the sections below.

9 | Page

31. If the following recommendations are put into place the ARB retention fees should be able to be reduced to less than 0.1% per annum of the UK architects’ median earnings (under £40 per annum)

PRESCRIPTION OF QUALIFICATIONS FOR ARCHITECTS

32. The Architects Act 1997 states that the registration body should prescribe qualifications required for inclusion on the register, accounting for the requirements of architects under the EU Professional Qualifications Directive. When implementing the Act, the Government gave clear guidance on how this should be done. The registration body was not to implement its own awards or qualification system1. Speaking for the Government in the House of Lords in 1996, Lord Lucas confirmed this by saying: “We recognise that the RIBA plays a predominant role in architectural education and we do not wish the Board to duplicate that role” (Hansard 23 July 1996; Column 1352). 33. Under its Royal Charter since 1863, the RIBA sets stringent qualification criteria and education standards for architects and education providers. The RIBA’s educational model has evolved into a programme of at least seven years’ duration, including a balance of academic study and professional practical experience. This forms the UK’s recognised qualification system under the Professional Qualifications Directive. The RIBA maintains standards by robust inspection of recognised courses in architecture education, and has been visiting schools of architecture for 90 years. 34. The RIBA’s experience and reputation in the education of architects is recognised worldwide. The RIBA validates 49 schools of architecture in the UK and 29 architecture courses in around 20 countries internationally. The RIBA also manages the UNESCO- UIA validation system for the Union Internationale des Architectes, assisting the validation of more than 30 further courses in architecture in five countries. 35. Against the Government’s expressed intention for the Architects Act, and contrary to the RIBA’s recommendations, the ARB introduced its own, separate assessment and inspection system of UK course criteria and content for architecture education, fundamentally duplicating the established RIBA system. This was instigated without the on-going academic experience and expert professional knowledge required to do this, unlike the RIBA which has developed peer group expertise over many years. 36. Unlike the ARB’s prescription process, the RIBA’s validation process includes a detailed inspection visit of the school of architecture and their students’ outputs, and the RIBA visiting board is composed of educational and professional experts and ‘lay’ co- professionals. This is similar to the standard procedures by the professional bodies in other regulated professions such as in healthcare. 37. Under the legislation and good governance principles for independent regulation of the professions, the ARB must retain the ultimate ability to prescribe architectural qualifications. However, it could do this far more effectively, reducing current costs and wasteful duplication and without undermining standards, by simply performing due diligence on the quality assurance mechanisms of the RIBA (and indeed, any other educational quality assurance system which might emerge for UK architectural qualifications). Subject to its being reasonably satisfied that the RIBA’s validation processes were robust and compliant with the requirements of the EU Directive, the

1 Architect Act 1997 - Section 4-(3) Before prescribing qualification or practical experience … or any examination … the Board shall consult the bodies representative of architects which are incorporated by royal charter (the RIBA) and such other professional and educational bodies as it thinks appropriate.

10 | Page

ARB would simply need to recognise those qualifications which the RIBA had validated, without the onus of performing elaborate and duplicative quality assurance. In this way, the regulator would distance itself appropriately from the detail of delivery, while maintaining its independent public interest role. 38. The RIBA believes that the way the ARB currently prescribes the qualifications for the UK register is a wasteful duplication of functions and processes, increasing the ARB’s expenditure by at least £170k p.a. (and this may well be an underestimate, since the cost breakdown is not available for analysis). It is an unnecessary regulatory burden on UK universities already validated by the RIBA’s established process, and audited through internal quality assurance systems for university awards. If the ARB implemented the Architects Registration Act by adopting the RIBA’s recommendation 1, it could reduce the annual retention fee by at least 5% (the administrative cost of prescription for ARB represents around 6.4% of the annual retention fees). 39. The ARB prescription process also costs UK universities a significant sum in terms of the administrative time and energy devoted to it, but adds no value to recognised professional courses in architecture. A conservative estimate by the RIBA is that this costs the UK prescribed schools at least an additional £8,000 net per annum to conduct a separate ARB prescription in addition to the universities’ own QAA and the RIBA’s validation. If the RIBA’s recommendation 1 was implemented, it would save UK Schools of Architecture at least £100k per annum. These are very conservative estimates and the total on-going additional costs are likely to be significantly higher. 40. The ARB charges £1,671 for its individual prescribed examination for part 1 and 2. The RIBA, using its existing qualification infrastructure, could provide this prescribed examination on the ARB’s behalf at about £1,250, saving the student £421 (25%). If the prescribed examination by the RIBA were for combined part 1 and 2 portfolios the savings could be even greater (over £2,000 or 60%) to the applicant. The RIBA, at the invitation of the ARB in 2008, provided a detailed proposal to provide this service in a more cost effective way, but this was never taken up. The RIBA recommends that this is again investigated to provide this service more efficiently and more economically to architectural students and qualified professionals 41. Additionally, the ARB will not recognise the RIBA’s chartered qualifications of those international schools validated by the RIBA according to the same procedures and criteria as those within the UK. This severely inhibits the UK’s ability to recognise the mobility of those architects’ qualifications awarded by international universities (including UK universities with offshore campuses), working to, and achieving, the same standards as the UK schools. This regulatory approach differs from recognised UK professional qualifications for other disciplines such as medicine and engineering, where the regulator relies on the expertise of the relevant professional chartered body, to provide the qualification expertise, and this is accepted in the EU. The RIBA educational model is a global benchmark for academic quality, more thorough and robust than the minimum requirements of the EU Directive. The reluctance of the ARB to accept the RIBA qualification as an international standard is anomalous. 42. Architecture education, in common with other similar professional services, is an increasingly global commodity, with UK academic standards enjoying an international pre-eminence. Nothing in the Architects Act prevents the registration body from recognising courses as equivalent to UK qualifications, and to accommodate this would make recognised UK architecture courses and the UK qualification system for architects more attractive to a wider audience of students, qualified professionals, and national regulators. It would be in the interests of consumers and the UK economy to recognise

11 | Page

a UK-originated qualification substantially exceeding the EU directive minima, benchmarked by the RIBA’s validation system. Recommendation 1: In accordance with the better regulation principles, the ARB should undertake its role in prescribing professional qualifications without duplicating the existing and well-established mechanisms operated by the RIBA and the educational institutions. By prescribing RIBA-validated qualifications (nationally and internationally) the ARB could retain its ultimate responsibility to ensure that prescribed qualifications meet the public interest test, while reducing costs for itself, its registrants, educational institutions and, ultimately, consumers of architectural services.

PROFESSIONAL CODE AND PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

43. The Act correctly requires the Registration Body to set and maintain the professional standards of the architects on its register, by having a code of professional conduct and investigating any complaints made to it about the registered architects on the UK register. The ARB code of professional conduct is based on a previous version of the RIBA’s code of professional conduct and is appropriate for this purpose as it focuses on competency issues. However, the ARB’s handling of complaints about UK registered architects and its implementation of its professional conduct processes require reform. 44. Concerns have been raised about whether the ARB’s approach to its disciplinary functions is sufficiently flexible, proportionate and risk-based. This approach has led to inconsistent and inappropriate sanctions being made by the ARB, some of which have been successfully contested leading to substantial settlements against the ARB, creating excessive costs for the profession and therefore, ultimately, for consumers. Additionally, public protection has been undermined by the perceived reluctance of the ARB to take sufficient action against people who falsely represent themselves as architects, thus damaging a key element of the regulatory system. 45. In 2012, the ARB spent about £853k (31% of retention fees income) on its professional conduct function. Our understanding is that most of this cost was spent on obtaining external legal advice. With this resource it conducted 23 professional misconduct cases (at an average cost per case of £37,000), which resulted in only three architects being erased from the register. In the RIBA’s opinion this is not cost effective or efficient regulation. 46. By contrast, the RIBA professional conduct function for its 40,000 members, between 2011 and 2013, handled an average of 30 complaints per annum, and conducted about five professional conduct tribunals per annum at an average total cost of around £10,000, or average cost per case considered of c£335 (over 100 times more cost effective than the ARB). In accordance with the principles of good regulation, hearings are undertaken by an independent panel who are appointed according to the Nolan principles of good public governance. The RIBA’s system also provides the right to appeal to an independent third party (the Centre for Dispute Resolution), which is a facility that should also be available in the ARB process. 47. A flowchart depicting the RIBA procedures is provided at appendix E. Particular notice should be taken of the principle of a ‘caution’ where the time and cost of a hearing is not justified by the perceived level of seriousness of the alleged misconduct. Additionally, the use of an independent body to conduct cost effective third party reviews is good practice. The investigatory nature of RIBA hearings is in stark contrast with the adversarial style used by the ARB. Generally, the ARB could provide a far more cost effective, fairer and transparent professional conduct function through adopting some of these principles contained in the RIBA procedures.

12 | Page

48. The RIBA’s view is that there is a strong case for a review of the operation of the ARB’s disciplinary and prosecution process and in particular to consider whether: a. It can be made more flexible and effective (e.g. by the greater use of agreed settlements); b. It can be made more fair (e.g. the ARB is sometimes slow to identify clearly the gravamen of the charge and unreasonably applies Rules 13 to revisit cases which have been dismissed); c. It can be used more effectively against those falsely purporting to be architects (including whether the powers and penalties in this area are sufficient); and d. Its costs can be reduced. 49. The RIBA would be happy to contribute to such a review with more detailed suggestions for improvement. Recommendation 2: A prompt an independent review with RIBA input of the ARB’s disciplinary rules and disciplinary performance is carried out to identify and implement improvements. This review should include consultation with people who have been representing architects in the ARB disciplinary process.

PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS

50. It is essential that, as part of the regulatory regime of a profession, there is a focus not simply on ensuring competence at the point of entry to the register, but on the continuing competence of all registrants. 51. The revised EU Professional Qualification Directive (PQD) in its article 22 requires “Member States, in accordance with the procedures specific to them, to ensure, by encouraging Continuous Professional Development (CPD), that professionals … are able to update their knowledge, skills and competences in order to maintain a safe and effective practice and keep abreast of professional developments”. 52. The EU PQD does not require the competent authority to do any more than encourage the existing national CPD system and the ARB should be advised by government not to expand its activities unnecessarily. 53. The RIBA has developed and delivered over many years a comprehensive CPD system, internationally recognised. The CPD criteria and services are mapped against the current qualification criteria and a comprehensive programme of CPD events is provided by the RIBA to cover these curriculums locally. 54. The RIBA is concerned that this requirement is met in the most effective and efficient way, avoiding duplication. This could be done, in a similar way to the RIBA’s recommendation for prescription, by the ARB recognising the existing RIBA system and encouraging ARB registrants that this is an appropriate way to fulfil the PQD requirements. There is no need for the regulator to develop a separate CPD system or service, given that there is an existing scheme which meets the requirements. The RIBA would be happy to demonstrate to the ARB how this can be done.

13 | Page

PROTECTION OF THE USE OF THE TITLE ‘ARCHITECT’

55. An important part of the registration body’s remit is to protect consumers from the misuse of the title ‘architect’ by those not suitable qualified or registered. It is important to pursue people not qualified as architects but who are practising as such as they undermine consumer protection and damage confidence in the profession. It is also important to ensure that those who are entitled to call themselves architects maintain the standard of the profession. 56. The ARB has focused most of its efforts and its resources on enforcing the professional standards of its registrants, but in an inefficient way. There has been little investment by the ARB in protecting the misuse of the title ‘architect’, which is against the interests of both the public and the profession. This undermines the whole purpose of statutory registration of title, and should be urgently addressed. Recommendation 4: The UK Government gives clear guidance to the ARB to apply a more proportionate amount of its efforts and resources (in the order of one third of the retention fee), to protecting the title ‘architect’ against misuse by unregistered and unqualified persons.

MAINTAINING A UK REGISTER OF QUALIFIED ARCHITECTS AND ACTING AS THE UK’s COMPETENT AUTHORITY FOR EU PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS DIRECTIVE

57. The Act correctly requires the Registration Body to keep a publicly available register of appropriately qualified persons who are then entitled to describe themselves as ‘architects’. It is part of the regulator’s role to publicise the availability of this register and to inform the public about what the title ‘architect’ means, outlining what standard of professionalism to expect from a registered ‘architect’. The register should also contain contact details of the individual architects, which may be their business address. 58. However, it is not within the remit of the ARB to provide practice support services for architects’ businesses (such as links to company web-sites) or to provide and promote the use of ‘ARB’ as a professional affix, implying that it is some form of qualification (such as BSc, RIBA, etc.). Such activities are more appropriately and better provided by professional bodies, educational institutions, and the market. Undertaking commercial services promoting the business of architects is incompatible with an impartial registration role.

59. The ARB has been actively promoting itself to registered architects as a support service and the register as a form of business promotion (see appendices F and C). This has expanded the ARB’s activities and unnecessarily increased its costs which it has to recoup from the registration fees. This also duplicates the roles of, and directly competes with, professional bodies for architects such as the RIBA, RIAS, RSAW, RSUA and ACA. The RIBA is seeking a clear delineation of the duties of the ARB and how it works with the established professional bodies, similar to the working relationships established across other UK professions, such as the GMC and BMA. This would reduce the registration body’s costs, and the confusion of public interest and commercial purposes, and unnecessary competition and tension between the ARB and the professional bodies.

60. The RIBA keeps and promotes a register of its chartered architect members and also a register of accredited ‘RIBA Chartered Practices’ to enable the public to find and select an architect’s practice. The RIBA also provides public information on what an architect does, how to define the architectural services a client may require and also how to select, appoint and brief an architect. The RIBA does this to fulfil its public interest duty under

14 | Page

its charter and also provides support services to its members and chartered practices to provide a reliable quality service to clients. These are matters which are properly left to professional bodies and the market. The ARB does not need to, nor should it, provide these services, but simply provide public links with the professional bodies, which also have a duty to the public. The RIBA can, and does, promote and provide information about the registration and regulation of architects and links to the ARB web-site. Recommendation 5: The UK Government to give clear guidance to the ARB to focus on the efficient keeping and maintaining of the register of individual architects, as described by the Act and carrying out of the ‘competent authority’ function for the UK within the remit described in the EU Professional Qualifications Directive. The ARB should be advised by the Government not to expand its remit, services or activities beyond its specific statutory roles.

APPENDICES

- Appendix A - Correspondence between RIBA and ARB - Appendix B – Promoting the use of ARB affix - Appendix C – Encouraging the use of the register to find an architect - Appendix D – Enhance online architects’ register facility and personalised register webpage - Appendix E - RIBA Disciplinary procedures process chart - Appendix F – ARB Newsletters

15 | Page

Appendix A – Correspondence between RIBA and ARB

APPENDIX A APPENDIX A APPENDIX A

Angela Brady RIBA President 66 Portland Place London Date: 10 January 2013 Ref: BF W1B 1AD

Dear Angela

May I first of all wish you and all at the RIBA a Happy New Year and we look forward to continuing to work with you during 2013.

I thought it might be helpful to write following your letter of 11 December 2012, to confirm that we had a very productive meeting with Stephen Hodder and Richard Brindley in Liverpool on 18 December 2012.

At the meeting, it was agreed that it may not be appropriate for ARB to respond to the letter at it stands, and that Stephen would suggest to the RIBA Board or Advisory Group that a further letter be sent from the RIBA to me, having taken into account our discussions.

I look forward to hearing from you in due course.

Yours sincerely

Beatrice Fraenkel Chair, ARB APPENDIX A APPENDIX A

Sent by email

Angela Brady RIBA President Date: 22 February 2013 Ref: BF 66 Portland Place London W1B 1AD

Dear Angela

Thank you for your letter of 5 February 2013 which was considered by the Board, together with the earlier correspondence dated 11 December 2012.

The Board noted your concerns and wished to stress that ARB is happy to engage with the RIBA and other key stakeholders to ensure that we maintain a regular dialogue and understanding of issues of concern to our organisations, architects and consumers. There are no doubt a number of issues that we can usefully take forward to be actioned, particularly at executive level.

Amongst the issues raised was the use of the term “members” in an ARB ebulletin to describe architects. As we discussed with Stephen Hodder, we have been unable to find any reference to members being used in that way. It is certainly not our intention to refer to architects as such, as we are clear as to the difference between the roles of the ARB and the RIBA. Could you please identify where this occurred so that we can look into this and correct any anomaly?

Turning to ARB’s online Register, it is correct to note that the Register has been enhanced to ensure that it is an accessible and searchable tool. The Register is one of our key obligations under the Architects Act and provides useful statutory and public information. ARB is of the view that its current format serves both the interests of users and potential users of architect services and architects. If the RIBA would like ARB to explain further the functioning and aims of the Register, we would be happy to discuss this further with you. We would also suggest that it would be worth exploring whether there are useful links that can be established between our websites which would be of mutual benefit and provide an even stronger public information source.

The use of the ARB’s logo is also mentioned in your correspondence. The logo can be used to identify the registered status of individuals and does not denote a qualification. It is a useful way for an architect to meet obligations under the Services Directive and the logo can be linked into the ARB Register so that members of the public can check an individual’s registered status.

APPENDIX A

The ARB logo has been available to download from ARB’s website for at least eight years and ARB has been attending a small number of targeted consumer shows for a similar length of time. The Board reviews its policy in this regard at regular intervals and will be considering the effectiveness of attendance at consumer shows later this year. Users and potential users of architects’ services are important stakeholders for ARB and it is therefore essential that we communicate with them, both by providing information and by listening to emerging issues.

It may be that the RIBA’s concerns stem from a misunderstanding as to the aims of the ARB and its work. We would welcome an early exploratory meeting attended me (or someone from our Board) and you (or someone appointed by you from the Trust Board) and our chief executives to consider how our organisations can work better together at all levels. I am always happy to be invited to join any meeting that you feel would enhance our mutual understanding of each other’s organisations and our ability to increase effective collaboration.

Yours sincerely

Beatrice Fraenkel Chair

APPENDIX A

Sent by email

Stephen Hodder Date: 22 April 2013 Ref: BF

Dear Stephen

ARB-RIBA Joint Working Party

It was good talking to you on the phone before your Board meeting the other week when we agreed that you would send me draft Terms of Reference.

We agreed it would be a “light touch” working group which would meet two or three times a year to build up a good working arrangement across our two organisations. We did not discuss further what the meeting agendas might cover, and maybe I should have spoken a bit more about this to ensure the agenda matched what we at ARB as Board members are able to do.

As mentioned at our lunch, your governance and our governance arrangements are different. We are set up by an Act of Parliament as a Regulator, and although 7 Board members are elected by the profession and 8 are appointed on a person specification and job description by the DCLG, ALL our Board members carry the same individual and corporate responsibility for the strategic direction and accountability of ARB as a Regulator and none of us get involved in any delivery. That is a purely executive function. The 7 elected members do not represent an electorate – they were elected to sit on the ARB Board as Board members and fulfil the same role as the appointed members.

The first cut at the Terms of Reference have not reflected this so we have redrafted the Terms of Reference to take account of our governance. I have attached a copy of the revised version where you will see that we do not identify the Directive as a specific focus and our additional working group member(s) would be selected on the basis of best skill fit.

If you are able to accept the attached Terms of Reference perhaps you could suggest what you would like to see on the first agenda and some suggested dates for a meeting? If you could provide secretarial support for the first meeting I am happy to Chair it.

All best wishes

Beatrice Fraenkel Chair, ARB

Appendix B – Promoting the use of ARB affix

Architect Information Public Information Student Information I want to register Registration Concerns about an architect Qualifications

I am an architect You are here: Architect Information > ARB Logo I am a member of the public

I am an architecture student Promote your registered status by displaying ARB’s logo

News Using ARB's logo on your website, business stationery and signage sends out a positive message to members of the public, your clients and potential clients that you are a fully qualified and registered professional.

Option 1 Option 2 Option 3

Displaying tangible evidence of your ARB-registered status gives consumers the confidence to know that they are working with a genuine professional, with high standards of expertise and skill, who will help them to bring their building project to life. Many architects have already taken advantage of this facility - why not join them? Use the links on the right to select the version you wish to use and start displaying your registered status today.

We don't have any strict guidelines about how you use the logo, but we do Downloads ask you not to: alter it in any way, although you can increase or decrease its size Option 01 according to how you plan to use it PNG - Small Medium Large obscure it in any way, for example, by any wording or design reproduce it at an angle. Option 02 PNG - Small Medium Large

Option 03 PNG - Small Medium Large

All downloadable logos are on transparent backgrounds

We also ask you to bear in mind the terms of Section 20 of the Architects Act 1997 about use of title, and in particular the requirement that where business relating to architecture is carried out, it must be under the management or supervision of an Address 8 Weymouth Street, London, W1W 5BU architect. Telephone Top +44 (0) 20 7580 5861 Fax +44 (0) 20 7436 5269 Email [email protected]

9am - 5pm Monday to Friday. Closed Bank Holidays

Appendix C – Encouraging the use of the register as a way of finding or selecting an architect

APPENDIX C

ARB would like to place cookies on your device to help us make this web site better. To find out more about ARB's use of cookies, please see our Data Protection and Privacy Policy. I consent to the use of cookies

Architect Information Public Information Student Information I want to register Registration Concerns about an architect Qualifications

Welcome to ARB

Find an Architect

Joining and Rejoining the Register

The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) have announced their call for evidence for people's views on the regulation of architects, to have your say click here

To read more about the government's periodic review into whether architects should be regulated, please click here

Are you an applicant looking at taking the ARB Prescribed Examination in July?

The deadline for receiving applications will be the 20 May 2014.

Quick Links: I want to Register Change your details Resigning from the ARB Register

I am an I am a I am an ARB's latest architect member of the architecture news public student more more more more

Architect Information Public Information Student Information I want to register Registration Concerns about an architect Qualifications

Information for Public You are here: Public Information What is the Architects Registration Board? Information for members of the public You and your architect

Concerns about an architect Welcome to the section of our website that contains information that you might Professional Conduct Committee find helpful as a member of the public. For example, you might want to find an decisions architect in your area, check to see whether someone is registered, or find out what to expect when you use an architect, as well as information on what you European Legislation should do if you want to complain about an architect’s conduct or competence. You can also find out about what ARB does and how we work. Legislation

If you can’t find what you’re looking for either by following the links on the left or in the Periodic Review main menu tabs, try using the search facility or contact us direct.

Find an Architect

About Us Customer feedback Compliments If you have experienced particularly good service from ARB and would like the member of staff or Department to be Read our publications recognised, please let us know by contacting:

(It would be helpful if you could include some details on the name/department and nature of the contact you had with us, and what impressed you about the way we dealt with you.)

Complaints We are committed to providing a high quality, professional service to everybody who contacts us. If something goes wrong we need you to let us know. You can find out more in our customer service complaints leaflet. Top Address 8 Weymouth Street, London, W1W 5BU Telephone +44 (0) 20 7580 5861 Fax +44 (0) 20 7436 5269 Email [email protected]

9am - 5pm Monday to Friday. Closed Bank Holidays

Prescription of Qualifications

As part of the regular cycle of reviews, the Board Oxford Brookes University considered applications from Higher Education Diploma in Architecture institutions which wished their qualifications to remain prescribed by the Board under the Architects Act 1997. The Board decided that prescription of the following qualification should continue until The Board decided that prescription of the January 2017: following qualifications should continue until September 2016: University of Ulster Master of Architecture University College London BSc (Hons) in Architecture MArch Architecture (ARB/RIBA Part 2) For further details, please see the Qualifications section of ARB’s website. Manchester Metropolitan University/ University of Manchester BA (Hons) Architecture Board meetings Master of Architecture All Board meetings are open to anyone who would like to attend, and the agenda for each of these The Board decided that prescription of the open sessions is published on our website. Board following qualifications should continue until meetings for the remainder of 2012 will be held on: September 2014: Thursday 20 September University of East London Thursday 22 November BSc (Hons) Architecture Professional Diploma in Architecture All meetings are held in our offices at 8 Weymouth Street. Please let us know in advance if you would like to come along as space for observers is The Board decided that prescription of the limited. following qualification should continue until September 2013:

Enhance your registered status

You may recall that we recently wrote to every accessible to anyone who may be looking to architect on the Register to announce our new, engage an architect. To make sure that we have enhanced online Register. The ARB Register is your correct contact details, please click here. used by many members of the public when they You will need your unique ID number to complete are making important decisions about who to the upload, which you can find on your 2012 approach or use to carry out their building retention fee invoice. If you no longer have this, projects. We believe, like you, that the public you can get in touch with us by emailing info@ needs to be aware of the value that an architect arb.org.uk. can bring to a building project, and we are To further enhance your registered status and therefore working hard to create a Register of to demonstrate to clients and potential clients Architects that is the primary reference source that you are a fully qualified and competent for anyone who is looking for an architect. professional, you might also like to consider You can help us to raise the profile of the Register, adding ARB’s logo to your website and business and at the same time improve the opportunities stationery. Again, this is a very simple operation. for members of the public to find a genuine By clicking here, you can download the logo, architect for their building project, by adding your which comes in a variety of styles and sizes. up to date contact details to your unique ARB There are no restrictions on how you use the webpage, if you haven’t already done so. It is very logo, but we do ask that you follow the simple easy and straightforward to update the contact guidelines we have developed for its use. details we hold for you so that they are readily

Appendix D – Enhance online architects’ register facility and personalised register webpage

APPENDIX D Can't read this email properly?

Dear You can make use of the following online services: We are pleased to announce a new service for architects and members of the public. We have enhanced our online “Architects’ Register” facility to give every architect on the Register their own webpage, helping you to promote your registered status to Download a copy of members of the public, your clients and potential clients. Read ARB's Logo on to find out more.

All you need do to view your ARB webpage is click onto your unique URL: Your unique identification code http://www.architects-register.org.uk/architect/041725D KQ LS AU 5825 3483

You can copy this link to your own website, and use it on your electronic business stationery to advertise your status as an architect. As an added advantage, we have developed a downloadable logo that you can use on your website and Update your details stationery to further enhance your registered status. Click on the box on the right to download the logo and to view some guidelines for its use.

Once on your webpage, please check that your details are Or for contact numbers correct. If you need to change them, click on the "Update your click here details" box on the right of this email and enter your unique and further information. identification code, also shown on the right. You need to make a note of this unique code for any future updates you may wish to make.

These can be made through our website, by clicking on the Your unique identification code: "Update your details" box on the home page. Please note that for KQ LS AU 5825 3483 data security reasons, your code will expire in October/November 2012, at which point we will send you a new code.

By taking advantage of this unique service, you can put yourself one step ahead of your unregistered, and in many cases, unqualified competitors because your registered status sets you apart from them. Also, the higher the take-up of this service by architects, the higher the ranking of the Register will be on internet search engines. Not only do you gain from increased exposure on the internet, but it also means that members of the public will have easier access to the Register when they’re searching for an architect.

Members of the public who use our enhanced online service to find an architect can be confident in knowing that by choosing an architect through our website search facility, they will be using a fully qualified and registered professional for their building project. The enhanced search facility will allow them to target their search for an architect more accurately, and will assist them in making an informed choice to engage someone who has the skills, knowledge and expertise to bring their building project to life. APPENDIX D

You have worked long and hard to qualify and use the title "architect". Our new search facility will not only help you to promote your registered status, but will also ensure that you comply with the Services Directive. The Services Directive is a piece of European legislation that requires professionals - not just architects - to provide information about their services to clients at the outset of a contract.

As ever, we are conscious of being prudent with our financial resources. The search facility has been delivered in a way that is both cost-effective and economical to maintain. It also helps to raise the profile of the Register.

We would encourage you to take full advantage of this unique and free facility. Don’t leave it to chance - use our free service today to promote your registered status and gain an advantage in an increasingly competitive marketplace.

Karen Holmes Deputy Registrar & Head of Registration

PS. Reach your potential clients by adding your own website address to your ARB webpage. Update your details here.

8 Weymouth Street London W1W 5BU Telephone. 020 7580 5861 Facsimile. 020 7436 5269 Email. [email protected] www.arb.org.uk

Want to unsubscribe or change your details? APPENDIX D

Update your details May 2014

Latest news Chair's Message Update your details

Can consumers find you?

These are the contact details that clients and potential clients see when they view your personalised Register web page. See below for details of how to update.

Address Registration Number Contact Details

ARB XXXXXXI T: 01234 567 890 Addressline1 F: 01234 567 890 Addressline2 E: [email protected]

Addressline3 W: http://www.arb.org.uk Addressline4 Addressline5 Postcode

Why is this important?

The ARB online register allows you to amend your contact details, email and web address, so consumers can find you more easily. It’s important we hold your current details to ensure our mailings reach you and are kept up to date with ARB news. It’s also beneficial to display your current email and phone numbers so consumers can get in touch with you.

If you would like to change or update these details please copy your unique code below:

AW SQ YB 6794 5798

Appendix E – RIBA Disciplinary procedures process chart

APPENDIX E

RIBA Disciplinary Procedures – Process Chart (Stage A)

Approach to RIBA

Query logged

Query answered / guidance notes sent

Approach to Professional Standards Department

Query answered Guidance notes sent Referred to Alternative Resolved Dispute Resolution (ADR)

No resolution Go to Stage B

APPENDIX E RIBA Disciplinary Procedures – Process Chart (Stage B)

Formal written complaint against an individual RIBA member

Also referred to Architects Registration Board, litigation or Alternative Dispute Resolution

Investigation suspended

Architects Registration Board decision, or Resolved litigation/ADR concluded

Complaint & response referred to appraisal team (2 RIBA members and 1 lay person)

Possible breach of Code of Non-code issue. Complaint not justified Complaint does not warrant Conduct. Resolution methods referral to hearing – caution recommended. issued

Hearings Panel convened

Right by complainant or member to independent review of process No breach of Code found

Right to independent review

Breach of Code found and sanction imposed.

Appendix F – ARB Newsletters

APPENDIX F

Chair's Message May 2014

Latest news Chair's Message Update your details

Chair's Message from ARB

Chair's Message

Welcome to the May e-bulletin update, following the latest Board meeting.

It’s been a busy Spring, with the launch of the government’s Periodic Review consultation. We have been hard at work preparing our submission. Board members and the staff team have all contributed to this process. We’ve also been raising awareness that the Periodic Review is underway via our website and posts on social media to ensure that as many people as possible know about the review and how to contribute. As a Board, we are extremely keen to ensure the government debate on the future of the regulation of architects receives wide participation.

Senior members of the staff team attended the RIBA’s Council meeting on the 19th March 2014. At this meeting, the RIBA Council decided to approve a change to its policy on the regulation of architects. The RIBA motion supported maintaining statutory protection of the title 'architect' by an independent registration body. We welcome this decision which paves the way for constructive debate around the on-going need for regulation of the architects' profession.

Over the coming months, we will finalise the ARB's submission to the Periodic Review. We will also continue to work hard to undertake our regulatory function effectively. The review is extremely important, but we must also deliver our day job. Budget and business planning for the year ahead is already underway with our focus on fulfilling our statutory duty, whilst also maintaining

a culture of continuous improvement.

As previously reported, the tenure of all Board members has been extended by government to provide consistency for the organisation during the Periodic Review process. This means that the Architects Election planned for 2015 will not take place until 2016 (dependent on the outcome of the Periodic Review). Board members who have been appointed by government have also had their tenure terms extended. Stability is very important during this period and consequently it was also felt prudent that no major changes should be made to the membership of the Board’s Committees until the Periodic Review is complete later this year.

Our next communication is likely to be our annual report which will go out in the summer. If you have any feedback on our work or this ebulletin please get in touch at [email protected].

With all good wishes,

Beatrice Fraenkel, Chair, ARB For more information about our work, please visit our website, www.arb.org.uk