Question 13: Status of the Appellant while the appeal is being considered
The proposed rules would mean that:
Do you agree with this approach?
Respondents were invited to select one of the following options: Strongly agree, Agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Disagree, Strongly disagree.
Respondents also had the opportunity to explain the rationale for their response in an open text box.
Question 14: Appeal Fee
The proposed rules include that ARB will set a fee that must be paid by an individual before their appeal can be considered. This would be set annually by the Board, on a purely cost recovery basis, and stated on ARB’s website.
Do you agree with this approach?
Respondents were invited to select one of the following options: Strongly agree, Agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Disagree, Strongly disagree.
Respondents also had the opportunity to explain the rationale for their response in an open text box.
Question 15: Is there anything within the proposed rules that could have an impact on ARB’s commitment to equality, diversity, and inclusion, or have a positive or negative impact on anyone with particular protected characteristics?
Question 16: Do you have any other comments about the proposed rules?
We produced an analysis report that summarised responses to the survey. This was discussed at ARB’s Board meeting on 15 February 2023 and approved for publication. This report is available here.
Alongside the consultation, we identified technical changes that would help to clarify the status of Committee members by reflecting developments to the status of ARB’s workers. These changes will also mean a more efficient and transparent approach to membership of ARB’s Professional Conduct Committee and Appeals Committee. These two committees cover separate areas of decision-making.
In line with requirements of the Architects Act 1997, ARB has also consulted the Secretary of State on the Rules regarding the Committee’s composition.
At its meeting on 15 February, ARB’s Board approved the updated Rules for the Committee and its functioning. We will now implement the Rules to establish the Committee and, when the Committee is established, we will begin to inform individuals as part of any decisions we make that are eligible for appeal.
Question 10: Chapter 4 of the discussion paper sets out the evidence we have analysed to date, and the conclusions we’ve reached. Is there anything you believe is missing from these conclusions, that we should also take into account as we start developing the outcomes-based approach?
Respondents were invited to write a response into an open text box.
Question 11: Chapter 5 of the discussion paper sets out the vision for our new regulatory approach. To what extent do you agree with our vision? Please feel free to explain your view, and make any suggestions as to what is missing.
Respondents were invited to select one of the following options for each vision: Strongly agree, Agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Disagree or Strongly disagree. Respondents were also invited to write a response into an open text box.
Question 12: To enable institutions to innovate and to promote diversity, we think that the structure needs to change from the current approach of Parts 1, 2 and 3. What are your views on this?
Respondents were invited to select one of the following options for each vision: Strongly agree, Agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Disagree or Strongly disagree. Respondents were also invited to write a response into an open text box.
Question 13: We believe that the best way to describe the competencies architects need may be to describe what an architect must KNOW, what they must be able to DO, and how they must BEHAVE. To what extent do you agree?
Respondents were invited to select one of the following options for each vision: Strongly agree, Agree, Neither agree nor disagree, Disagree or Strongly disagree. Respondents were also invited to write a response into an open text box.
Question 14: Are there any other views you would like to share with us about this work?
Respondents were invited to write a response into an open text box.
We produced an analysis report of the survey and this is available here: arb.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/ARB-Education-Survey-Report-June-2022.pdf
Question 10: To what extent do you support each of the four proposed principles for our CPD scheme?
Respondents were invited to select one of the following options for each principle: Strongly support, Support, Neither support nor oppose, Oppose or Strongly oppose.
Question 11: Are there any key points missing from the principles?
Question 12: What type of learning and development (this could include formal or informal) have you found most useful in your practice?
Respondents were invited to select one of the following options for each type: Very useful, Somewhat useful, Not so useful, Not applicable
For ‘other’, they were invited to write a response into an open text box.
Question 13: Please tell us about any barriers you have observed that have prevented you or architects you know from undertaking good quality CPD?
Question 14: Do you have any examples of particularly good or innovative CPD?
Question 15: Is there anything further you would like us to bear in mind as we develop the monitoring scheme?
We produced an analysis report of the survey, which has been discussed and approved by our Board. This report is available here: