The TEQSA policies and procedures a provider must have follow the seven domains of the Threshold Standards: admissions and credit, assessment and academic integrity, student grievances and wellbeing, staffing, course approval and review, corporate and academic governance, and records and information. That is roughly two dozen documents for a small provider. TEQSA does not prescribe the list, but it assesses against the standards those documents give effect to, and each one has to be shown operating, not merely adopted.
This article sets out the suite by domain, explains what each policy is for in the regulator's eyes, and describes how each is evidenced, because in fifteen years of TEQSA registration work the gap I see most often is not a missing policy but a policy with nothing behind it.
Why TEQSA reads policies as a system, not a shelf
The Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021 rarely uses the word "policy". It describes what must be the case: admissions are transparent, assessment is valid, grievances are resolved, staff are qualified. A policy is the provider's mechanism for making those things the case, and a procedure is the mechanism for making the policy happen in practice. Assessors therefore read the suite as a system and test it at the joins: does the assessment policy refer to the academic integrity policy, does the grievance procedure name a real officer, does the course approval procedure route through the academic board the governance policy describes.
A suite bought as a template set and lightly edited tends to fail at exactly those joins, because the documents were not written to fit each other or the provider. Practical drafting guidance is in creating TEQSA-ready academic policies. What follows is the list itself.
Domain 1: admissions, credit, assessment and certification
Standard 1.1 requires an admissions policy that states entry requirements, how they are applied, and how prospective students are informed. Standard 1.2 requires a credit and recognition of prior learning policy setting out how credit is assessed and its limits. Standard 1.3 needs a progression policy covering monitoring, identification of students at risk and the support offered. Standard 1.4 requires an assessment policy and a moderation procedure that together secure valid, reliable assessment against the learning outcomes. Standard 1.5 requires a certification and graduation policy governing testamurs, records of results and the Australian Higher Education Graduation Statement.
Each is evidenced by its operation: admissions by a sample of application decisions against the stated criteria, credit by a register of credit decisions and the mapping used, and progression by at-risk reports to the academic board and the interventions recorded. Assessment is evidenced by moderation records and marked samples, and certification by a testamur register that reconciles to the student management system.
Domain 2: the learning environment, wellbeing and grievances
Standard 2.1 expects a facilities and learning resources policy, and for online delivery a statement of the technology and support students can rely on. Standard 2.2 requires diversity and equity arrangements, usually an equity and inclusion policy with reasonable adjustment procedures. Standard 2.3 requires wellbeing and safety policies covering critical incidents, sexual harm, mental health support and, for international students, the additional obligations under the ESOS framework. Standard 2.4 requires a student grievances and complaints policy with an internal process and access to an external body.
Assessors test these by asking for records: a critical incident register with entries, a complaints register showing complaints received, time taken and outcomes, and evidence that students were told how to complain. A grievance policy with an empty register at a provider that has been operating for two years reads as a policy students do not know about.
Domain 3: course design, staffing and learning resources
Standard 3.1 requires a course design policy that ties learning outcomes to the AQF level and specifies how the volume of learning is set. Standard 3.2 requires an academic staffing policy covering qualification requirements at least one AQF level above the course, or equivalence, together with a professional development and scholarship policy, and a procedure for assessing equivalence. Standard 3.3 requires a learning resources and educational support policy describing what students receive and how it is reviewed.
The staffing policy is evidenced by the staff register, the equivalence assessments on file, and the scholarship records. In my experience it is the policy most often found to be operating differently from how it is written, because the staff actually teaching were recruited before the policy was adopted.
Domain 5: course approval, integrity, review and third parties
Standard 5.1 requires a course approval and accreditation policy that routes every new course, and every material change to a course, through the academic board with external input. Standard 5.2 requires an academic integrity policy and a research integrity policy where relevant, with procedures for investigating and recording breaches. Standard 5.3 requires a course monitoring and review policy with a schedule, and a procedure for acting on findings. Standard 5.4 requires a third-party delivery policy where any course is delivered with another party, setting out the provider's oversight.
TEQSA reads these against the academic board's minutes. A course approval policy is evidenced by a course that went through it; an integrity policy by a breach register and case files; a review policy by completed reviews and the actions they produced. The wider task of keeping this domain aligned with the standards over time is discussed in aligning with national higher education standards.
Domains 6 and 7: governance, risk, information and records
Domain 6 is where the TEQSA policies and procedures list becomes constitutional. Standard 6.1 requires the constitution, governing body charter, conflicts of interest policy and fit and proper person procedures. Standard 6.2 requires the delegations schedule, risk management policy and register, financial management and compliance policies. Standard 6.3 requires the academic board terms of reference and the academic governance framework that connects the academic board to the governing body. Domain 7 requires a marketing and public information policy under 7.1, a student information and written agreement policy under 7.2, and a records management and privacy policy under 7.3.
These are evidenced by the governing body's own record: conflicts declared and managed at meetings, the risk register revised, delegations exercised by the person they were delegated to, and a records system that can produce a student file on request. TEQSA's guidance notes describe what each area typically looks like in practice, with the caveat that guidance notes are not themselves Threshold Standards. The evidence TEQSA asks for across the full suite is set out in what TEQSA expects: key evidence and documentation.
How the TEQSA policies and procedures suite is evidenced as a whole
Beyond the individual documents, TEQSA looks for three things about the suite. A policy register listing every policy, its approving body, its approval date and its next review date. A version control discipline that shows policies were reviewed and amended, because a suite in which every policy is at version 1.0 dated the month before lodgement tells the assessor exactly how it was produced. And a published location where students and staff can find the policies that affect them, which is itself a requirement under Standard 7.2.
Under self-assurance the provider is asked how it knows each standard is met, and the answer for most standards begins with a policy and ends with a record of that policy operating. Generic templates cannot supply the second half, which is why AI-drafted policy suites, now common, tend to draw more scrutiny rather than less.
My advice: adopt fewer policies and run all of them
A small provider does not need forty policies. It needs the two dozen that give effect to the standards, adopted by the right body, cross-referenced to each other, published, reviewed on a cycle and generating records. The providers that struggle at registration and renewal are rarely those with a missing policy. They are the ones whose policies describe an institution that does not quite exist. Write the suite to describe your provider as it is, then run it, and the evidence takes care of itself.
Download the Darlo Policy Suite Index
— a domain-by-domain index of the policies TEQSA expects, with the evidence each one needs, drawn from our TEQSA registration and governance work with private providers. Get the index
Want the full article?
Enter your email for free access to the rest of this guide and our TEQSA resource library.
Frequently asked questions
Does TEQSA publish a list of required policies?
No. The Threshold Standards describe outcomes rather than documents. The policy suite is the provider's mechanism for meeting them, and TEQSA assesses whether each standard is met, using the policies and their operating records as evidence.
Who should approve academic policies at a private provider?
Academic policies, such as assessment, academic integrity, admissions and course approval, should be approved by the academic board. Corporate policies, such as risk, delegations and conflicts of interest, are approved by the governing body.
How often should TEQSA policies and procedures be reviewed?
The standards do not set a period. In my experience a three-year cycle, with earlier review when a standard, law or the provider's operations change, is what assessors expect to see in a policy register.
Are template policy suites acceptable to TEQSA?
A template can be a starting point, but TEQSA reads policies against the provider's actual operations and records. A suite that has not been adapted to the provider, or that has no operating evidence behind it, will draw requests for further information.
Dr Brendan Moloney is CEO of Darlo Higher Education, Australia's largest specialist TEQSA consultancy. He holds a PhD from the University of Melbourne, is a Cambridge University Press author on governance in higher education, and has advised private providers on registration and course accreditation for more than fifteen years.