And good and valid questions they are. I waded through the first seven but had to get to bed late last night. I have a busy inspection day today, but rest assured, I will return to the rest of the questions later today or tonight.
Bill Mullen
George - so tickle me - who or whom is in the best position to define an unbias accreditation for home inspectors?
Remember we are talking about “accreditation” not “certification”.
Currently we have home inspectors - practicing and retired, a home inspector/construction project manager, an educator/university professor - that has a background in engineering and “accrediatation”, a realtor that has background with CREA in education.
BTW: Accreditation is both a status and a process. As a status, accreditation provides public notification that an institution or program meets standards of quality set forth by an accrediting agency. As a process, accreditation reflects the fact that in achieving recognition by the accrediting agency, the institution or program is committed to self-study and external review by one’s peers in seeking not only to meet standards but to continuously seek ways in which to enhance the quality of education and training provided.
Accreditation is a means of self-regulation and peer review adopted by the educational community. The accrediting process is intended to strengthen and sustain the quality and integrity of higher education, making it worthy of public confidence. The extent to which each educational institution accepts and fulfills the responsibilities inherent in this process is a measure of its concern for freedom and quality in higher education and of its commitment to strive for and achieve excellence in its endeavors.
Accreditation is a voluntary process. Institutions choose to apply for accredited status. Once accredited, they agree to abide by the standards of their accrediting organization and to regulate themselves by taking responsibility for their own improvement. In addition, an institution must be accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting organization in order for its students to be eligible to participate in the “certification” process.
Example: http://www.oacett.org/page.asp?P_ID=336
or http://www.workdestinations.org/view_profile.jsp?occupationUserDatumId=12726&profileUserDatumId=12882&lang=en
or for Vern’s neighbourhood
http://www.aset.ab.ca/accreditation.htm
Hi Bill,
Question regarding insurance. Will the National be requiring inspectors to carry mandatory E&O?
Thanks,
Bill
Another question, and pardon me, maybe I have asked this before or was told the answer, but… If an inspector outside of CAHPI applies and is granted Certification, does that inspector become a member of CAHPI, or can he remain unaffiliated association wise?
Thanks.
Ray I believe that there is no mandatory E&O insurance requirement and I believe that the requirement to join CAHPI exists, albeit camoflauged, via a fee structure which makes it financially sensible to join. Maybe the MICB should double the fees for non-NACHI members and then tell everyone that they* don’t* have to join NACHI to be a Certified Master Inspector :roll: ;-).
The NCA considers insurance to be an association matter. (The NCA is not an association, it is a Certification and Accreditation body) If the association you belong to requires it, so be it. If not, that’s okay with the NCA.
However, that could change if and when any provinces get licensing. Insurance always seems to be a requirement when there is licensing.
Bill Mullen
Nick:
As I explained before, part of the differential is to recognize the investment of CAHPI members over the years. It’s a simple matter of partial cost recovery. CAHPI members have already paid hundreds into this, so why should non-CAHPI inspectors be subsidized by us? It will also be more costly to evaluate applicants who are not CAHPI members until their associations have had their equivalency evaluation.
We aren’t even trying to camoflauge it. Like you and your association, we would like to have more members. If this is an incentive, so be it.
As for the MCI thing, it cost next to nothing for you and a couple friends to decide arbitrarily what the requirements would be. Heck, why are even charging for it?
Bill Mullen
Obviously if someone has been a carpenter, electrican, plumber or contractor for several years, he/she knows something about houses and should get some credit for that. However, that would not even be nearly close enough to become certifified. The application for background review asks you to provide details of anything and everything you have ever done that could help you know houses better and inspect them.
All items that are submitted are given a weighted score. The formula is involved and it would take me pages to do it justice, but that is one thing in my presentation.
I will add, however, that it is not grandfathering because no matter what credentials or background anyone brings to the table, they still have to pass a TIPR. That will prove whether or not they know how to inspect and report, and that’s what we are looking for.
We have already had some very experienced inspectors fail to pass the TIPR. Under many schemes they would have been ‘grandfathered’ without blinking an eye. Under this system they will now have to improve in some areas and try again.
Bill Mullen
Bill
These quotes below were sent to me.
There seems to be a nagging problem with the Editor of the Canadian Home Inspector Magazine. I think you know who I mean, but he is not helping things here or over in OAHI and it might behoove someone to tell him to stop abusing Nachi members and me and Nick and our discussions on the CAFE. He is undermining what we are trying to achieve here in harmony considering he is breaching the Forum rules. If this is OAHI is going to apply the rules for one person and not another then there remains suspicion. That is why you are seeing the apprehension of memebers here.
It seems to be a spat between you and Dave Bottoms. I don’t see anything against NACHI or anyone else in those quotes.
As you know, Raymond, I am not held in much more esteem by OAHI than you are, so they wouldn’t listen to me if I yelled.
This thread really has nothing to do with OAHI or a fight between you and anyone else.
Bill Mullen
I want to thank Dave Bottoms for sending OAHI members to the Nachi site.
Dave is a big booster for Nachi. Thanks for the hits.
At least Oahi members can get the answers here first hand!
Thanks again Dave! All the best and Merry Christmas!
Bill,
Does any of this include Quebec?
Bill
I think it does, if the Editor in Chief carries on this way and Oahi is a signatory to CAHPI then I think it would behoove Mr. Bottoms to stop showing that there are two rules applied. Unfortunately this leaves very serious concerns about CAHI ensuring its signatories are administering the rules fairly. You can’t have accreditation without good governance.
Yes. It includes all provinces.
Bill Mullen
Raymond:
I’m afraid just because you believe that Dave Bottoms is doing something wrong doesn’t make it so. The NCA and CAHPI will not get invlolved in disagreements between two individuals. You are both members of a provincial association and if there are problems, take it up with them, not me.
I am not here to debate this or anything else. I’m here to provide information about the present and future of the Certification program, and nothing more.
Bill Mullen
Well I think Mr. Bottoms as Editor in Chief of CAHPI’s Canadian Home Inspector Magazine and as a Associate Member should be striving to set an example. His opinions and misuse are not different then a judge running around outside of the courtroom after hours and making disparging racial remarks, only to be sitting in judgement of others. Mr. Bottoms is no different and if CAHPI absolves itself then it shows to me CAHPI and possibly the rest are not prepared to tow the line. No one in the National who resides in Ontario can be assured of fair and equal treatment to ignore it and deny it is to foster it.
But that could quickly change depending on size of heard…
That may be why Oahi is looking at self insurance, licencing. If licencing comes to Ontario, I believe Oahi is now in the midst of setting the stage as it sees things playing out. If licencing should happen that will extinguish the need for National Certification. Licencing if and when should be an opportunity to address the insurance issue once and for all. I favour having our liability capped to offset insurance premiums.
Will it be in both official languages?
Sorry, but it seems to be just the opposite. Any licensing has to look at a level of competence to use. So far the three provinces seriously looking into licensing are very interested in using the National Certification Program as their standard. They like it because it is strong enough to defend, it’s fairly rigorous and fair, and mostly what the provinces like is that the Feds helped pay for it. The government people I have met with see no reason to ‘reinvent the wheel’.
Therefore, the National Certification will be very helpful to all provinces because it puts them all at a consistent level.
Bill Mullen