FYI - All Canadian Home Inspectors

FYI - All Canadian Home Inspectors

Several years ago, as part of the National Initiative for Canadian Home Inspectors, the National Occupational Standards (NOS) were created. The NOS were the culmination of hundreds of hours of hard work by many volunteers from all sectors of the Canadian Home Inspection industry. The NOS document defines the ‘basket’ of skills, knowledge and experience that competent home and property inspectors should have, and is the standard on which certification and accreditation are based. As with many documents, the NOS need to be reviewed on a regular basis and improved and updated to reflect industry and housing changes. They were reviewed and revised in early 2008, at which time it was decided to revisit them every five years.

National Occupational Standards (NOS)
“NOS and occupational profiles are forms of labour market intelligence that outline the formal and informal skills and knowledge requirements of occupations, and serve as tools for improving the mobility of labour and transferability of skills in unregulated occupations. NOS are developed by industry with a national objective and require pan-Canadian validation and endorsement by industry stakeholders and form the basis of certification and accreditation regimes.

National standards also help managers and educators design informed instructional training programs, and they support skills upgrading and labour mobility.”

Certification and Accreditation
“Certification and accreditation systems are commonly based on NOS. They help education systems develop and maintain suitable standards, as well as provide industry with credible credential recognition of essential occupational requirements. They also facilitate labour mobility and transferability of skills.”
**The above is referenced from the HRSDC (Human Resources and Skills Development Canada) website. **

The NOS Development Process
National Occupational Standards are developed to identify the competencies required by practitioners based on input from experienced industry practitioners. The development process is based on utilizing the classic Canadian Vocational Association (CVA) DACUM methodology. During the workshop, practitioners are guided through a structured process for developing a five level DACUM analysis. -

Standards of Practice

Standards of Practice describe the scope and limitations of a home and/or property inspection. Standards of Practice provide detail as to what a client can expect from a standard home inspection. (For clarification - This is not a call for a common SOP).


The NHICC is inviting all Canadian Associations, Franchises, and other interested parties to participate. Since this is an industry initiative we have announced this publicly on as many forums as possible. Additionally, we have sent out invitations to ALL home inspection associations to consider the opportunity to work collectively together in this process.

The role of the NHICC is mainly as a facilitator to help guide this process with the DACUM team. More importantly is the role of each association, in having the opportunity to participate. The open invitation is particularly aimed at those that claim the lack of cooperation and allegations about previous engagements.

Well - here’s your chance to be part of a cooperative effort to dispel those myths and allegations.

The cost

Certainly the cost may be a major distracter for some to participate. Realistically with budget and funding cutbacks, the funding for this initiative is largely based on very little if any financial support from the government or other stakeholders.

**More information is attached regarding the invitation to participate. **

Wow same tune again .
Now my turn …

Remember Whistler
Bill has a big anouncement comming soon

Roy - no disrespect intended, please put your political beliefs and bias aside.

So - are you against trying to get Canadian inspectors to sit down and agree upon a “national standard for the occupation”? This only requires a simple YES or NO.

Yes .
But I also do not want them spending money on useless things.
I make no money of this industry I sell nothing no courses no products .
I have nothing to gain and have never made any money selling classes, or products.
I have nothing to gain by telling the truth and I show no favoritism.
I do not belong to a secret self appointed group.
I do not have to double talk and try and convince others how great they all can be by taking my course or joining this group.
I am in the open and have no secrets and try to pass on what information I can .

Please Claud try and play fair I have asked and pleaded for this industry to talk to all.
I made arangments for free Boths at the Toronto NACHI Conference and was ridiculed by some in your group.
There was three empty booths that the other associations would not fill .

Do you think many home inspectors have ready spare cash lying around to invest in the secret society .

Claude Good luck with that endeavour but no F in WAY, Will I support it.


There was an awful lot of I in your response to Claude’s suggestion, but what about the we

Do we not count? Just saying…

Looks to me like you are jealous .
I do not see you doing much for the Ontario Home Inspection industry ??
OH! **I **forgot you too where on the executive and a part of the secret self appointed group.

I’m simply putting it out there and for your information. That way the nay sayers cannot complain about the opportunity. This is about an industry held asset.

The other point being why does everything have to turn so personal and end up ugly?

My hope was to have constructive input and discussion.

I guess you will have to ask Marcel he is the expert on attacking me .

FACT: Marcel’s post (#5) clearly states it’s about the “WE” factor. I do not see that as an attack. Perhaps the post offered in #2 could have been a bit more positive, rather than the same old tiring ridicule.

The information provided makes it very clear that “everyone” is on a level field with this project. The assumption that the NHICC and/or I will somehow reap income from this is hilarious. For anyone else who questions the numbers, we can clarify that the **[FONT=Tahoma]cost **to the project will average 1,500 to 2,500 participant. Hopefully funding and volunteer hours can greatly reduce or even eliminate actual cash payments by individuals/associations. [/FONT]

The letter does no say anywhere that each person will be on the hook for a large amount of money. The point being it is and always will be an “industry initiative”. No secret deals or secret handshakes involved. The purpose to prove the process can be “OPEN” and “inclusive”.

We Canadian Home Inspectors can either work for the “COMMON GOOD”, or continue to decide to travel the seperate paths of proving how fragmented the industry is based on past perceptions and bias. So it seems rather ironic that the mere suggestion of studying and reviewing the “occupational skills” required to practice as a threat to anyone is nothing but more nonsense.

What do you think the government bodies considering licensing looks at for credibility?

What does the NOS provide colleges and trainers:

  • bringing a greater degree of consistency to college programming
  • broadening the focus of college programs to ensure graduates have the skills to be flexible and to continue to learn and adapt, and
  • providing public accountability for the quality and relevance of programs.

What does the NOS provide for certification bodies:

  • a measurable assessment yardstick
  • a means to identify gaps in learning
  • identifies competencies

National Occupational Standards are the competencies an individual requires to perform successfully in a particular occupation. They are comprised of a set of statements describing the standard acceptable skills and knowledge requirements of professionals. NOS are considered the benchmarks against which people of a particular profession measure their level of performance and competency.

National Occupational Standards are updated approximately every 5 years to ensure they remain reflective of emerging areas in an ever-changing industry.

Yes and post number one is just trying to get more to join the secret self appointed group.
Why must you constantly come to NACHI and plead on this forum to further your group.

No pleading - you complain about not sharing. Now it’s offered, and open to all. Simply two choices are offered - accept it or ignore it.

(" accept it or ignore it ")
** You got to be kidding** I hope too never ignore you trying to bamboozle the NACHI members .
Call it what you want but you’re trying to sound like a nice guy does not fool me .
You Marcel and Yuri complaining about me and my posts just confirms how nervous you are about my posting the truth, about the self appointed group.
This makes me happy to see how desperate your group is in trying to influence the NACHI members.
You might want to look at how many friends you have at NACHI and have a look at Roy’s .
Somehow you three are slightly out of balance with most other NACHI members .

Hope this made you feel good .I obviously got your attention Thanks … Roy

See post 8

Sorry Roy

I just can’t agree with your responses. Claude’s first post, as I read it, is asking for persons/or associations to come together to discuss updating the NOS for home inspectors in Canada.
Nothing more than that.
I suspect the cost factor mentioned has to do with paying for meeting space and other costs that come up, cause there won’t likely be any money from Government… but maybe that’s where cash should come from.

Maybe the Ministry of industry and trades, or whatever.

Roy I sure hope you don’t perceive my comments as an attack. But…if you do…so be it.


Just my concerns Claude:

Since this is an industry initiative, with limited outside funding, all participating entities or individuals will be asked to help defray the costs, which could average between 1,500. and 2,500 per representative.
It seems to me this could lead to speculation that associations/inspectors that have an in with the nhicc would be the $1500.00 rate and “others” the $2500.00 rate JMO
2)The Dacum survey has been known to be flawed,

[size=2]DACUM is based on these assumptions:
• expert workers can describe and define their job more accurately than anyone else
• any job or outcome can be described in terms of the tasks expert workers perform
• all tasks, in order to be performed correctly, require certain knowledge, skills, tools, and attitudes
• experts are able to identify valid, reliable outcomes and competencies
[size=2]Despite its many advantages, DACUM is not without limitations. The process has been criticized as “very task oriented and is not concerned with the larger humanistic issues of maturation, self-actualization, and democracy”

Other criticisms are that it stifles creativity and there is no evidence that competency based on education serves students/workers better than traditional approaches.
Note that the two-day process can be very draining for committee members and facilitator as each item will be discussed, debated, written, rewritten, revised and revisited. Human error and bias can formulate the decision making process! …just sayin!

Thanks no hard feelings with you .

No I have said this many times .

Both Claude and Bill have not been fair and proper .
I feel they both are a fraud and not out for our industry but strictly out for themselves .
Claude has never been at arm’s length .

He has shaded the truth so often it is sad.
They have used the NACHI site for their own promotions constantly.
Again I say Claude’s first post has been made by me and others,
But he has done nothing to make this happen .
He does not post information on what is going on with the secret self appointed so why should I help him to improve his group .

If the shoe fit, wear it…

If Roy perceives Claude’s post as an attack, then how can we ever agree on anything?:roll: