The accreditation decision is made by the Acredita CI Technology Council and depends on the assessment that this Council makes of each of the evaluation criteria. The assessment is carried out according to the following definitions:

A criterion is met when there is evidence that policies and mechanisms are known and applied systematically showing results that are periodically reviewed.

Otherwise, you are in the presence of a weakness: the criterion is not met and will be valued either as developing or as non-existent. A criterion that is not met is in development when policies and mechanisms are known and applied, with preliminary results, but there is no evidence yet that it is systematic. A criterion that is not met is non-existent when the career presents defects in its design or does not have formal or systematic policies or mechanisms in its training process, or there are only statements, but without evidence of its application.

The accreditation decision is based on the following information:

a. The program self-assessment report,

b. The final report of the peer review committee

c. Program comments and observations (if any)

d. The result of the analysis of the comments and observations of the program in conjunction with the president of the committee of peer reviewers.

When the program is taught in different venues, conferences and face-to-face or blended modalities all of them will be evaluated as a whole. The accreditation decision will consider the weakest assessment, to decide.

The process leads to one of the following results. The program:

a. Accredits

b. Not Accredited

The accredited program and this accreditation will be for the total period of 7 years:

The program demonstrates that you meet the evaluation criteria of Acredita CI. The program contemplates in its design the attributes of the graduate, which are incorporated through their own graduation profile. It has continuous improvement mechanisms for the achievement of committed training having evidence that policies and mechanisms are known and applied systematically showing results that are reviewed periodically.

The program accredits, but presents some weaknesses in quality Does not meet – In Development:

The program will be visited in three years. In this case it meets the evaluation criteria of Acredita CI, being able to present some criteria with weaknesses in the category “does not meet-in development”. The program contemplates in its design the attributes of the graduate, which are incorporated through their own graduation profile. There is evidence that learning outcomes are achieved. However, the evidence is recent, lacking to verify its permanence over time.

The program does not accredit

The program does not accredit when it has one or more evaluation criteria with weaknesses in the category “Does not meet – Non-existent”, because it presents defects in its design, does not contemplate all the attributes of the graduate or does not have formal or systematic policies or mechanisms in its training process, or there are only statements, but without evidence of its application.

More details on the accreditation decision are described in the Manual of Rules and Procedures for the Accreditation of Science-Based Engineering.