The phrase "accreditation development" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in contexts related to the process of creating or improving accreditation standards or systems.
Example: "The organization is focused on accreditation development to ensure that all programs meet the highest quality standards."
Alternatives: "accreditation enhancement" or "accreditation improvement".
Publication and discussion of scoring and weighting schemes would be a valuable resource for countries that are in early stages of accreditation development as well as for well-established accreditation programs seeking to improve themselves.
Research by Sax and Marx of accreditation development in one province in Pakistan demonstrated that a major challenge was the establishment of a well-managed, transparent accreditation agency able to lead processes such as training and support for peer surveyors.
After decades of accreditation development in health, and multi-million euro, dollar and pound investments, the extent to which accreditation processes and outcomes accurately reflect and motivate high quality clinical and organisational performance is poorly understood and under-investigated.
A common question at the start of any accreditation development initiative is often, "Can one size really fit all?" In other words, is it possible to develop a single set of standards which apply to a common provider type (e.g., hospital, clinic, clinical laboratory) within a country, ranging from a large tertiary hospital to a small and rural district facility?
In 2000, PRSA and the Institute of Public Relations signed a mutual declaration saying the two would work together in areas like ethics, education, accreditation, professional development and new media.
Of these, 250 NGOs obtained accreditation as Development NGOs from the MFA [ 15, 43].
Secondary document analysis of materials from an accreditation standards development agency.
The generic nature of accreditation standard development and inspection within different sectors enhances the extent to which the findings of in-depth study of accreditation process in one industry can be generalised to other industries.
Through the review and thematic grouping of papers (as described earlier) six distinct governance mechanisms emerged: shared governance, Magnet accreditation, professional development and education, quality-focused initiatives, reorganization of healthcare delivery, and funding schemes.
We identified six governance mechanisms in the empirical literature: shared governance, Magnet accreditation, professional development initiatives, quality-focused initiatives, reorganization of health services (e.g., moves to team-based care, private vs. public organizations), and funding models.
They also include smaller-scale activities focused on (for example) the definition and management of clinical indicators; the conduct of clinical audits and practice accreditation; the development and promotion of clinical practice guidelines; and the institution of continuous quality improvement, risk management and incident management systems.
