ARB COV RC5 - Architects Registration Board

Architects
Registration
Board
Annual Report
2008
Contents
01
Chairman’s foreword
02
Registrar’s report
03
2008 at a glance
04
Spotlight on Registration
06
Architects
Registration
Board
Annual Report
2008
Regulation matters
Qualifications
08
Financial statements
ARB’s Board 2009
Feedback form
We’re here to help...
ARB’s Staff Team 2009
Have you got a query about your registration?
Do you want to know whether a particular
qualification is prescribed by ARB, or what the
outcome of a PCC Hearing was? The following
contact details will help you to direct your
query to the correct department of ARB.
Alison Carr
Karen Holmes
Vicky Aitchison
Jamie Bloxam
Ed Crowe
Grant Dyble
Simon Egan
Teresa Graham
Tanya Grundy
Leonie
Hamilton-Sayer
Kristen Hewett
Anna Hoskyn
Simon Howard
Alice Hutcheson
Sarah Ison
Emma Matthews
Tony Robbins
Mike Saunders
Elisa Simeoni
Elaine Stowell
Rob Wilson
Sue Young
Telephone:
Fax:
Website:
020 7580 5861
020 7436 5269
www.arb.org.uk
8 Weymouth Street
London W1W 5BU
[email protected]
Use of the title “architect”
Complaints about an architect’s conduct
or competence
Professional Conduct Committee
Hearings
Code of Conduct and Professional
Standards
Registering as a company
[email protected]
All registration enquiries
Prescribed examination procedure
Retention and other fees
European registration
[email protected]
Schools of architecture/institutions
Prescription of qualifications
Listing qualifications in Europe
University liaison
[email protected]
General information
Information leaflets
Publications
Registrar and Chief Executive
Deputy Registrar and Head of Registration
Team Secretary
Registration Administrator
Qualifications Executive
Qualifications Administrator
Registration Manager
Registration Executive
Professional Standards Officer
Receptionist/Administrator
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Professional Standards Officer
Finance Administrator
Professional Standards Manager
Receptionist/Administrator
Professional Standards Officer
Head of Qualifications and Prescription
Finance Manager
Registration Administrator
European Affairs Executive
University Liaison Officer
Registration Executive
Human Resources and
Communications Coordinator
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Going green
We have been publicising our secure
Registrants’ Services facility for architects
on our website for a number of years now.
This is the section of our website where
you can – among other things – sign up
to receive electronic communications
from us.With more and more emphasis
on adopting “green” policies and
practices, we’d like to encourage a much
higher take-up from architects for our
electronic version of the annual report
and other communications.
Wherever possible, we use email in an
attempt to cut down the volume of paper
communications we send. We have
streamlined our process for paying the
retention fee online, and we are looking
to enhance it further during 2009.
Registrants’ Services also lets you update
your personal details online, at a time and
place that is convenient to you.
All these facilities are available 24 hours
a day, seven days a week. If you haven’t
already used this service, take a look
today to see what it offers. You will need
your registration number and unique
password to enter – if you’ve lost or
mislaid yours, you can reset it online.
Help us to be a greener ARB – visit the
Registrants’ Services section of our
website (www.arb.org.uk) to see the
ways you can help us to cut down on
unnecessary paper use.
Chairman’s
foreword
I am pleased to introduce the Annual Report
for the year 2008, the last period of my
chairmanship. The Registrar and her team
have done an excellent job of presenting the
year’s facts and figures and so I will provide
more of a commentary on the highlights and
summarise what I think are the notable trends
the Report contains.
I think the most significant element during
the past year has been the work which has
arisen from changes in European legislation,
in particular, the Mutual Recognition of
Professional Qualifications Directive – the
Qualifications Directive – which was finally
introduced in June 2009. Our role as the UK
competent authority – and therefore the contact
point in the UK for matters of registration in the
EU – has come into sharper focus with the
introduction of this Directive.
The competent authority in each member
state is progressively being required to provide
access to common data in a common form
and ARB’s own systems and procedures now
include new methods of liaising easily and
effectively with many of our European
counterparts through a system set up by the
Commission, the Internal Market Information
system, known as the “IMI”. We have also
considered carefully the impact of the mutual
recognition of qualifications – note the increase
in EU applicants to the Register – and what
we can do to assist the freedom of movement
of UK architects across the Community. We
meet regularly with our sponsoring government
department, Communities and Local
Government, to discuss our European
obligations – not necessarily foreseen when
the original Act was drafted.
Turning to the year’s developments in
education, universities continue to seek
prescription for new courses, demonstrating
that the popularity of architecture is
undiminished. Good progress has been made
on reviewing the criteria for Parts 1, 2 and 3, the
three key stages in establishing the competence
of an architect, with the Royal Institute of British
Architects (RIBA), the Standing Conference of
Heads of Schools of Architecture (SCHOSA)
and the Association of Professional Studies
Advisers in Architecture (APSAA) all being
represented at the relevant discussions.
The Board approved the revised criteria for
consultation at its September 2008 meeting,
and they were subsequently issued to a wide
range of bodies for comment. The Board’s
ambition, established early in the review, is that
the criteria at Parts 1 and 2 can then be aligned
with the Subject Benchmark Statement for
Architecture, the means by which the Quality
Assurance Agency monitors the subject area,
thereby creating a single document which
schools can refer to when designing and
developing their qualifications in architecture.
I would like to express my thanks to all those
who have been involved in this area of work
to date. The revised criteria and Subject
Benchmark Statement should be published
during the latter part of 2009.
The year also saw the final stages of a process
(started the year before) to outsource the
prescribed examination, an examination that
enables individuals with an architectural
qualification not prescribed by ARB to be tested
for equivalence. The original idea behind
outsourcing the exam had been primarily aimed
at providing a more accessible and familiar
environment for the candidate with a possibility
of lowering cost. Although the final parts of the
process involving obtaining feedback from
bidders had not been concluded by the year
end, it was clear that the project became very
resource-intensive, possible bidders found the
brief hard to meet, and the project was not
successfully completed.
Another innovation this year was the audit of
directories and a decision made by the Board
to adopt a systematic approach involving an
audit of the three main telephone directories,
Yellow Pages, BT Phonebook and Thomson.
The exercise was carried out to identify false
listings in the “Architects” category, and an initial
list of 1,500 entries was followed up to establish
whether they were genuine. With the
cooperation of the publishers, entries found
to be incorrect were removed or amended.
Although only a very small number of
prosecutions followed, the standard of the
listings – and our relationship with their
publishers – has been much improved and
in a very cost-effective manner. Initial research
into the working of online directories has made
it clear that a different approach will be needed
to carry out any similar review.
Also worth mentioning is a relatively modest
reference, under the corporate objectives, to
a review of our website and this long-term work
continues to make the website more accessible.
It seems to me that over the last year or so the
range of services that can be accessed via the
web has sufficiently matured to enable it to be
used as a commonplace means of
communication. The ARB website is regularly
updated, but any services introduced tend to
be promoted as an optional alternative. Take-up
has not been significant, and it is worth noting
that only 1,873 retention fees were paid in this
way last year.
Lastly, I am grateful to those who responded
to the feedback questionnaire attached to
last year’s Report. During my time on the
Board I found that responses from architects
are invaluable and help ensure that ARB
understands the issues facing those on
the Register.
Michael Starling
Chairman
February 2007-February 2009
Registrar’s
report
Although ARB’s core work remains the same
year on year, it can be influenced by external
sources, for example, trends in applications
or complaints. It is also subject to the Board’s
strategic direction.
The themes I picked out in my 2007 report
continued to dominate in 2008. Last June
finally saw the amendments to the Architects
Act 1997, reflecting the Mutual Recognition
of Professional Qualifications Directive
(2005/36/EC) – the Qualifications Directive.
Some applicants had been waiting patiently
for Government to implement the changes, and
we therefore saw a mid-year peak in European
registration applications. The new legislation
was not without teething troubles, and we are
still looking to streamline our approach to nonUK European applicants who do not quite fit
the model described, either under our Act or
the Directive itself.
To help us with the rise in applications and
complex enquiries, we started to use a new
communication tool, the Internal Market
Information system (IMI). IMI is run by the
European Commission to facilitate quick and
effective communication between competent
authorities, such as ARB. We are encouraging
colleagues from other member states to join,
and we have met with other bodies through
an informal network of European competent
authorities to develop smoother procedures
and forms. This informal contact should help
UK architects wishing to establish themselves
in other member states, as well as those
wishing to register in the UK. The mobility
of architects is an important area of our work
and we do assist architects wanting to work
or establish themselves abroad. We are issuing
an increasing number of certificates and letters
for overseas registration, and we hope that this
work will be significantly helped if the IMI takes
off in more member states.
While we continue to embed changes to
accommodate the Qualifications Directive,
another Directive, the Services Directive
(2006/123/EC), has been coming round
the corner for implementation in the UK at
the end of 2009. We have begun to explore
how we could enhance our processes to
comply with this Directive, and to date, have
made progress on a system for electronic
registration which will be available to
European and UK applicants alike.
Two important consultations were prepared
in 2008, and both generated many detailed
comments. The consultation on the Architects
Code of Conduct and Practice finished first,
followed by the consultation on the current
criteria for prescribing qualifications. The
Board will be considering the responses
to both in 2009.
We also reviewed ARB’s professional indemnity
insurance guidance, leading to an amended
guidance note being issued to all architects late
last year. This work will continue, and the
Board’s approach to monitoring professional
indemnity insurance will be looked at in 2009.
ARB’s own prescribed examination came under
scrutiny in 2008 as the Board decided to invite
interested parties to tender for the outsourcing
of the current process. The examination allows
those individuals who hold an architectural
qualification not prescribed by ARB to have it
tested for equivalence. We received a number
of expressions of interest, following which we
conducted a formal tendering process to
consider the outsourcing. Ultimately, as noted
in the Chairman’s foreword, the Board found
that the outsourcing objectives could not be
fulfilled, and withdrew from the process. We are
nevertheless grateful to those who participated
in this project, and for the feedback we
received.
Behind the scenes, ARB works closely with
a number of stakeholders and partners such
as the RIBA and SCHOSA, as well as many
individual architects and members of the public.
We have regular liaison meetings with various
bodies, including our sponsoring government
department, Communities and Local
Government, to discuss matters of interest.
Much of our work and contact with the public
is facilitated through our website. Because we
want to offer a website that is both accessible
and easy to use, we began a review in 2008
with a view to launching the revised website
in 2009. 2008 also saw us revise many of our
information leaflets, targeted primarily at the
public, and we obtained the Plain English
Campaign’s crystal mark on a substantial
number of these.
The foregoing highlights a range of our work
during 2008, but it is by no means an
exhaustive list. Throughout the year, we
operated from temporary accommodation
whilst our landlords refurbished our permanent
office premises. This has meant that we have
had to use external accommodation to host
more of our meetings than usual, although we
have tried to minimise the inconvenience to our
partners and stakeholders. At the time of going
to print, we have returned to our refurbished
Weymouth Street home, where we can provide
not only a pleasant working environment for our
staff and Board, but also suitable and
accessible facilities for anyone visiting ARB,
either as a member of the public, an architect
or a student.
My thanks, as always, must go to ARB’s staff
team for their cheerful hard work throughout the
year. They have continued to cope extremely
well with the ever-increasing demands on our
resources.
Alison Carr
Registrar and Chief Executive
02
ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION BOARD
ANNUAL REPORT 2008
2008 at a glance
Corporate
Qualifications
• Amended the Electoral Scheme
to include online voting for the
first time
• Held regular liaison meetings
with RIBA and SCHOSA
• Welcomed three new lay
members to the Board
• Began a review of ARB’s criteria
for prescribing qualifications
Professional
Standards
• Published 2 newsletters on
the work of the Qualifications
Department
•
• Reviewed 35 existing
qualifications
•
•
•
•
•
•
• Attended a range of consumer
and trade shows throughout the
year to inform and educate the
Issued revised guidance on
public about the Register
professional indemnity insurance
cover
• Held regular liaison meetings
with our sponsoring government
Issued the draft revised
department, Communities and
Architects Code: Standards
Local Government
of Conduct and Practice for
consultation
• Revised ARB’s information
literature and obtained the Plain
Conducted a wide-ranging audit
English Campaign’s crystal mark
of published telephone
for clarity on our leaflets
directories to reduce mislistings
under the “Architect”
• Attended regular meetings of the
classification
UK Inter-Professional Group to
keep abreast of good practice in
Dealt with 335 company
the regulatory/professional
formations
sector
Handled 399 enquiries on
• Began work to develop a Single
regulation of title
Equality Scheme under the
Referred 78 cases to the
equality legislation
Investigations Committee
• Began a wholesale review of
Successfully prosecuted 3 cases
ARB’s website to ensure that it is
of misuse of the title “architect”
both accessible and easy to use
• Prescribed 8 new qualifications
• Made 49 university liaison
presentations on ARB’s role
to students in 33 schools of
architecture
• Held an annual review of the
process for prescribing
qualifications, and asked
stakeholders for feedback
on its effectiveness
• Attended 2 meetings of the
European Commission’s Coordinators Group (Architecture)
• Met with 9 schools/institutions
that award qualifications to
advise them on submitting
prescription applications to ARB
Most frequently visited pages
on www.arb.org.uk
1. Schools map
Map showing the location
of schools/institutions of
architecture throughout
the UK, with details of the
prescribed qualifications
they award
2. Applying for
registration – rest
of the world (ie. not
UK or Europe)
All the information an
applicant needs about
registering with ARB
Guidance for architects facing
bankruptcy or liquidation
We are conscious of the impact that
the current financial climate is having
on the financial stability of some
architects’ practices, and we have
seen an increase in the number of
enquiries we receive from concerned
architects.Help and advice is available
to architects who are facing financial
3. Code of conduct
The standards of conduct
and practice to guide
architects in their
professional lives
difficulties. This is provided by a
number of sources, including
professional bodies such as the RIBA
and the Insolvency Service.
If you are subject to a bankruptcy
order, or you are a director of a firm
that is wound up, you should notify the
Board of your situation within 28 days.
This will not automatically affect your
registration, although it is likely that
4. ARB criteria
Set out the minimum
levels of awareness,
knowledge, understanding
and ability that students
of architecture must
achieve at key stages
of their education
5. Applying for
registration – Europe
All the information that
European applicants
need about registering
with ARB
we will ask you for further information
to establish your exact circumstances.
Only where our enquiries suggest that
an architect may have wilfully
disregarded their responsibilities, or
demonstrated a lack of integrity, will
there be a need for a more detailed
consideration of the case by ARB’s
Investigations Committee.
ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION BOARD
ANNUAL REPORT 2008
03
At a glance Collected 32,385 retention fees between January
and March 2008 Updated over 6,000 individual architects’
personal details Managed the process for 187 prescribed
examinations Admitted 1,496 newly-qualified architects
to the Register Dealt with 719 resignations from the Register
Reinstated 511 architects to the Register and readmitted
39 architects. There were 83,087 online Register searches.
Spotlight on
registration
European Directives
management and covers, amongst other things,
building regulations, contract administration,
procurement and project management.
Qualifications Directive
Following on from the introduction of the
Qualifications Directive in October 2007, we
finally saw the amendments to our Act take place
in June 2008. The introduction of this piece of
legislation has not been without its challenges.
For example, we have had to deal – and are still
dealing – with applications from individuals who
have qualified in other European member states
but who do not directly meet the routes to
registration set out in the Architects Act.
We looked carefully at a variety of scenarios, and
we are developing new methods for assessing
these “hybrid” applications against the UK
criteria. As well as finding solutions to these
applications, we have also had to develop a new
route under the Directive – the General System.
What this means in practice is that an authorised
or registered architect from another member
state who holds a qualification in architecture
that is not included in the lists of approved EEA
qualifications can apply to ARB to have their
qualification considered. This consideration will
seek to identify whether the 11 learning
outcomes in Article 46 of the Qualifications
Directive have been met, and then consider
additional skills and experience completed by
the applicant towards demonstrating
equivalence to the UK Part 3 criteria. Part 3 tests
an applicant’s skills in project and practice
Where applicants can demonstrate that their
qualifications are equivalent to those recognised
by ARB, we will usually be able to accept them
as such. However, if there are any substantial
differences identified in the length, content or
coverage of a course, ARB is entitled to ask an
applicant to complete a compensation measure.
In the UK, this is an aptitude test which the
applicant must pass before the qualification can
be recognised.
In line with the Directive’s provisions, each
member state designates a competent authority.
Competent authorities have the legallydelegated power to carry out the relevant
functions of the Directive to help appropriately
qualified professionals move between member
states to practise their profession. ARB has
been designated as the UK’s competent
authority.
A forum has been set up – the European
Network of Architects’ Competent Authorities
(ENACA) – which brings representatives of the
member states together three times a year for
a useful exchange of information and practice.
This, it is envisaged, will lead to a more detailed
understanding of each member state’s individual
systems for registration.
Register of architects
Year
Deaths
Resignations
Removals for
non-payment
of retention fee
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
134
132
101
77
121
98
81
100
70
74
85
569
1,112
380
480
657
610
486
472
438
429
719
208
586
727
892
722
585
615
638
651
680
747
Reinstatements
and
Readmissions
New
Admissions
193
149
304
518
412
289
351
425
493
502
550
811
864
980
1,265
1,124
1,128
1,115
1,146
1,285
1,391
1,496
Number on the
Register as at
31 December
30,646
29,829
29,905
30,239
30,275
30,399
30,563
30,924
31,522
32,221
32,713
In addition to the above, one person was reinstated following a period of suspension, and four people were removed from the Register for conduct
issues. Amendments to the Register occur on a daily basis, and this table provides a snapshot of the profession as at 31.12.08.
04
ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION BOARD
ANNUAL REPORT 2008
(+93)
(-817)
(+76)
(+334)
(+36)
(+124)
(+164)
(+361)
(+598)
(+699)
(+492)
Services Directive
As the Registrar mentioned in her report, the
Services Directive will be upon us in December
2009. The intention behind this Directive is to
break down any barriers that might hinder or
prevent cross-border trade in services between
the different EU countries. It will make it easier
for service providers, particularly the smaller and
medium-sized enterprises, to offer their services
to customers or clients in other EU countries.
ARB’s prescribed
examination –
outsourcing
In 2006, the Board agreed that it would start a
process to explore the viability of outsourcing its
prescribed examination. As discussions progressed,
it was agreed that any successful bidder would have
to demonstrate that the process would be run on a
like-for-like basis, ensuring consistency of standards
and at a lower cost to candidates.
The Department for Business, Enterprise and
Regulatory Reform (BERR) is the UK’s lead
government department for implementing this
Directive. We have been working closely with
BERR and will be part of an early pilot scheme
that provides applicants with the facility to
register completely online. We expect to
introduce further developments in the run-up to
implementation, and will keep you up to date
with these through our eBulletin and on our
website, www.arb.org.uk.
The outsourcing project proved to be highly
resource-intensive but the number of returns was
low. At the end of the process, the Board, in
reviewing the tenders, felt that they did not meet the
objectives identified at the outset.
We sought feedback from the potential providers
who took part in the tendering exercise. The Board
will look at this feedback in 2009, and will also
reconsider the future of the prescribed examination
process.
However, just because we were looking at alternative
means for running the examination, didn’t mean that
the entire process ground to a halt. We continued to
receive applications and run the existing process for
candidates with non ARB-prescribed qualifications,
amounting to 187 separate interviews during 2008.
Routes to registration –
admissions to the Register 2008
Breakdown of the Register 2008
Total on the Register: 32,713
UK total = 29,667
Overseas total = 3,046
(Figures for 2007 in brackets)
Prescribed
examinations
27 (42)
Scotland 3,471
Male 82%
Female 18%
UK applicants
883 (872)
Northern
Ireland 980
Male 83%
Female 17%
EU applicants
586 (477)
England 24,356
Male 82%
Female 18%
Male/female admissions 2008
(Figures for 2007 in brackets)
Female
519 – 37.2%
(479 – 34.4%)
Wales 860
Male 89%
Female 11%
Male
877 – 62.8%
(912 – 65.6%)
ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION BOARD
ANNUAL REPORT 2008
05
Regulation
matters
Causes of complaint
Complaints about architects from their clients
often focus on issues that could easily be resolved.
Almost eight out of 10 of all cases referred to the
Investigations Committee include an element
relating to a failure to properly set out terms of
engagement in writing before work is undertaken,
and 90% of allegations include an architect’s failure
to deal appropriately with a dispute or complaint
about their professional work. For some practices,
improving their office procedures might help to
prevent subsequent problems arising.
Other common allegations are that an architect
lacked integrity, or that the work was carried out
without the necessary levels of skill, care and
diligence. Lack of appropriate professional
indemnity insurance was alleged in around half
of the cases considered by the Committee.
Case study one: prosecution for misuse
of the title “architect” under Section 20
of the Architects Act
This investigation began following a complaint
about a practice listed under the “Architects”
heading on a major web directory. Evidence was
gathered which highlighted the misuse, including
a listing under the “Architects” category on a
number of major web directories and websites.
We contacted the practice, both to clarify the
position and to seek changes – if changes were
needed – to correct these breaches of the Act.
The firm indicated that it retained the services of
an architect who was in control and management
of all the architectural work at the practice. Our
records did not, however, support the claim that
the architect was an employee of the firm and we
contacted the architect direct to establish the
actual position. The architect responded, and
indicated that they spent approximately one day
a week on site, although they were available
whenever the respondent needed advice.
We advised the respondent that using the title
“architect” meant that a registered person must
be in control and management of the practice’s
architectural work, and that architect must not act
in the same or similar capacity elsewhere. As the
respondent’s situation did not comply with this
provision of the Act, we asked them to contact the
relevant websites and directories to correct the
mislistings, as well as ensuring that they removed
any reference to the title “architect” from their
business stationery. As is our practice in these
cases, the respondent was asked to sign an
undertaking to confirm that they would not use
the title in future. If they did, they could face a
prosecution.
Despite the firm having changed the wording
in its advertisements and business stationery,
we were contacted by a member of the public
who complained that the practice was still
displaying the title on the signage above its
premises. We subsequently launched a
prosecution against the practice for a breach
of their undertaking. The respondent pleaded
guilty to the offence and was fined a total of
£800, with the magistrates further ordering the
respondent to pay ARB’s costs of £1,262.13.
06
ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION BOARD
ANNUAL REPORT 2008
Case study two: erasure from the Register
We originally received a complaint relating to the
architect’s competence and in the course of the
investigation into that aspect, established that he
had not had any insurance in place for some years.
It also emerged that the architect had been
confirming to ARB that he was in practice and that
he held professional indemnity insurance. He failed
to reply to any of the Board’s correspondence on
the matter, and the Investigations Committee
considered that these issues were sufficiently
serious to warrant a referral to the Professional
Conduct Committee (PCC).
At the PCC hearing, the architect admitted the
facts although he denied that they amounted to
unacceptable professional conduct. He claimed
that he did not purchase insurance because he
undertook only a small amount of work. He also
said that he assumed he would need to be in
practice and hold an appropriate level of insurance
to remain on the Register, and so he made false
declarations in his PII statements. He confirmed
that he would take out appropriate insurance were
he to secure any substantial work.
The PCC rejected the architect’s explanations.
It noted that he had taken a conscious decision
to submit false self-declaration forms for five
consecutive years, and found that this amounted
to dishonesty. The Committee decided that the
only appropriate penalty was to erase the
architect’s name from the Register.
Audit of directories project
In 2008, we carried out an audit of the three
main telephone directories – Yellow Pages,
BT Phonebook and Thomson – to identify
and remove mislistings from the
“Architects” category. Close to 1,500
entries were initially identified as potential
mislistings, and they were case-managed to
establish whether they were indeed genuine
architects. Working with the directories, we
identified and removed 865 incorrect
entries, with a further 559 being amended.
10 individuals subsequently reapplied to
join the Register, and three cases are being
prosecuted through the courts after failing
to cooperate. We will continue to keep this
project under review to assess what future
action – if any – is required.
Following on from the successful paperbased directory audit, we are now building
relationships with a number of online
directories. We are encouraging them to
verify their own information before they add
any entries under the “Architects” listings.
We are also working to persuade them that
they should advise potential clients to
check ARB’s Register before going ahead
and engaging an architect.
Enquiries to ARB’s Professional
Standards Team
Other: 245 (117)
Potential
complaints: 512 (362)
Enquiries
2078
(1505)
Professional
indemnity
insurance: 587 (427)
Regulation
of title: 399 (207)
Company
formations: 335 (392)
Investigations Committee
Cases referred to IC: 78 (89)
The Investigations Committee (IC) made 78 decisions in 2008,
some of which related to cases referred to it in 2007. Similarly, of
those cases referred in 2008, some were not resolved until 2009.
Of the 78 IC decisions, 18 related to professional indemnity
insurance (22 in 2007). There were 39 (21 in 2007) outstanding
cases at the end of 2008. The Committee was reconstituted
during 2008 which led to some delay in progressing cases.
However, the Committee is now working to clear the backlog.
Refer to PCC:
15 (13)
No Further Action:
24 (25)
IC
Decisions
78 (90)
Caution/ recommendation:
39 (52)
Professional Conduct Committee
The PCC heard 15 (11) cases, and acquitted 1 (1) architect of
the charges against them. In 1 (0) case, the Committee found
the charge proved, but decided not to issue any penalty. The
Committee imposed a reprimand on 4 (4) architects, suspended
1 (1) architect from the Register for six months, and ordered
erasure from the Register in 8 (0) cases.
Regulation of title
We received 180 (216) written complaints about misuse
of the title “architect”. Of these, 3 (3) cases resulted in
prosecution under Section 20 of the Architects Act, all of
which were successful. The average fine was £1,150 (£1,000)
and costs awards averaged £2,254 (£1,500). Other cases
were resolved through correspondence, or by obtaining
undertakings from the individuals concerned that they would
not use the title in future.
We also ran an audit of the 360 individuals who had been
removed from the Register in March 2008 for non-payment
of the fee to establish whether any of them were continuing
to use the title “architect” in business or practice. 13 cases
were identified as a result of the audit, leading to four
reinstatements to the Register. This is an ongoing project,
and will be repeated each year after the deadline for paying
the retention fee (31 March) has expired.
Qualifications
The Architects Act requires ARB to prescribe –
or “recognise” – the qualifications needed to
become an architect. The Qualifications team
oversees this process, and works with schools
and institutions of architecture which award
qualifications to ensure that all architects are
equipped with the proper levels of knowledge
and skills they need to practise their profession.
We also oversee the process for notifying UK
qualifications to the European Commission for
listing under Annex V of the Mutual Recognition
of Qualifications Directive. Qualifications listed
in this Annex should receive automatic
recognition by other EEA member states.
Prescription Committee
The Prescription Committee’s role is to oversee the
operation of procedures governing the prescription
of qualifications. It also considers and develops policies
to support prescription. As well as these responsibilities,
the Committee oversees matters relating to the
prescribed examination, Part 3 Oral and the
Competency Standards Group. This latter group looks
at applications from people who have been off the
Register for two years or longer, and who wish to rejoin.
The Committee met 11 times during 2008, with one
meeting held in Newcastle. In a new departure, it also
held two Question and Answer sessions for its key
partners who are involved in applying to have their
institutions’ qualifications prescribed by ARB, along
with people who are involved in the field of architectural
education.
The initiative came about because the Committee felt
this to be an ideal way of engaging with its stakeholders
to give them the opportunity to meet the Committee and
discuss its role. The Committee would also benefit
through feedback from the people it primarily deals with.
Initial feedback was positive and encouraging, and the
Committee gathered some very useful information about
the issues that affect those seeking prescription.
Total number of ARB prescribed
qualifications in architecture: 136
Total number of
Part 1 qualifications
61
Total number of
Part 2 qualifications
Total number of
Part 3 qualifications
47
28
NB. Last year’s figures are in brackets.
ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION BOARD
ANNUAL REPORT 2008
07
Financial
statements
The following is a summary of the last five years of ARB’s income and
expenditure. Please visit our website www.arb.org.uk to view the 2008
financial statements in full, or call us on 020 7580 5861 for a copy.
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
32,713
£78.00
32,221
£78.00
31,522
£76.50
30,924
£74.50
30,563
£70.00
22
19
19
18
19
£,000
£,000
£,000
£,000
£,000
Retention & Other Fees
Other Income
2,798
118
2,916
2,739
141
2,880
2,594
108
2,702
2,419
100
2,519
2,332
69
2,401
Board Costs
Staff Costs
Other Operational Costs
115
1,216
1,623
2,954
106
1,054
1,443
2,603
94
962
1,391
2,447
54
928
1,459
2,441
52
987
1,372
2,411
Deficit/Surplus
Operating Reserves B/F
Accumulated Operating Reserve
-38
1,329
1,291
277
1,052
1,329
255
797
1,052
78
719
797
-10
729
719
Number of Registrants
Annual Retention Fee
Number of Full-time Staff
Income and expenditure 2008 (Figures for 2007 in brackets)
Other administrative
costs 13% (14%)
Retention fees
85% (85%)
Investment income
3% (3%)
Income
£2,924,168
Expenditure
£2,933,403
Legal and other professional
charges (includes Professional
Conduct Committee and
regulation) 21% (18%)
Board expenses 4% (4%)
Computer charges 6% (7%)
Registration and
prescribed fees 12% (12%)
Printing 6% (6%)
Staff 42% (40%)
The annual retention fee for 2009 is £86
08
ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION BOARD
ANNUAL REPORT 2008
Offices 8% (11%)
DETACH AND SEAL
For more biographical details, please visit our website, www.arb.org.uk
Board members are paid £275 per day or part thereof spent on Board business
Agnes Grunwald-Spier
Professor Alan Jago
Alex Galloway CVO
Andrew Mortimer
Beatrice Fraenkel (Chair)
Appointed April 2008
Appointed April 2009
Appointed April 2007
Elected April 2009
Appointed April 2008
A magistrate since 1984, Agnes
was originally a civil servant
dealing with radio frequencies.
She is currently Chair of the
Board of Deputies of British
Jews’ Regional Assembly, as
well as being a trustee of the
Holocaust Memorial Day Trust.
She was the Home Secretary’s
representative on the South
Yorkshire Policy Authority
selection panels from 1999 to
2007, and is a lay member on
the General Social Care Council’s
registration and conduct
committees.
Professor Alan Jago has recently
retired from the University of
Westminster, where he was Pro
Vice Chancellor. Prior to that, he
had been a Dean of one of the
ten Schools of the University.
Earlier in his career he worked
for other Universities, and in local
government both in the UK and
Sweden. He is an auditor with the
Quality Assurance Agency for
Higher Education, and has served
on a number of professional
committees involved in higher
education.
Alex Galloway is a career civil
servant who retired as Clerk of
the Privy Council in December
2006. He is a member of the
Professional Regulation Executive
Committee of the Actuarial
Profession, a Member of the
Council of the Institute of
Directors, Adviser to the
Association of Lord Lieutenants,
a Trustee and former Chair of the
charity Projects in Partnership,
President of the London Branch
of the Oxford University Society,
an Honorary Fellow of the Society
for the Environment and a Fellow
of the Royal Society of Arts.
Andrew qualified as an architect
in 2000. He is passionate about
architecture and sees the key role
of architects as adding value by
improving the built environment.
He has experience across a wide
range of urban design and
architectural projects, and
understands the commercial
realities of development and
regeneration projects. Active in
the day to day practice of
architecture, Andrew understands
the responsibilities and difficulties
faced by small businesses and
young architects.
A qualified industrial design
engineer and ergonomist, Beatrice
has been a Liverpool City
councillor since 1986, specialising
in regeneration, economic growth
across the public/private sector
divide. As independent Chair of the
NW Regional Centre of Excellence,
she helped to develop and deliver
a regional understanding of the
economic impact of design on
developing sustainable
communities. Her work on
improving the built environment led
to a personal award from CABE.
She is Chairman of Mersey Care
NHS Trust and Fellow of the Royal
Society of Arts.
Bernard Wyld
Colin Roy Brock
David Jones
George Oldham
Gordon Gibb
Elected April 2009
Re-elected April 2009
Re-appointed April 2009
Re-elected April 2009
Elected April 2009
Bernard has worked almost
exclusively for the public sector
and has been head of
architecture for both district and
county councils. Over the years,
he has helped to develop links
with many organisations, as well
as private sector consultants,
contractors and suppliers with
the aim of promoting public
sector architecture and
construction. Since 1997, Bernard
has been closely involved with
SCALA, as well as presenting
regular workshops for the CIPFA
Construction and Property
Advisory Service.
Since qualifying in 1973, Colin
became an associate of two
practices, then a board director
of an international practice
managing complex prestige
projects for the Corporation
of London, BAA, NHS as well
as defence, commercial and
residential developments. He
formed his own consultancy in
1995, and in 1996, he conceived
the Home Information Pack. He
is Vice-President of the
Association of Consultant
Architects and serves on working
groups within the Construction
Industry Council.
Currently a consultant in the law
firm Watson Burton LLP, as a
solicitor David specialises in
contentious and non-contentious
construction, engineering and
projects law both nationally and
internationally. He has substantial
expertise in alternate dispute
resolution, and also now sits as
an adjudicator. David co-edited
“Partnering and Collaborative
Working”, selling in over 30
countries worldwide, and has
lectured extensively on
construction law in Europe
and the Far East.
George enjoyed a 25-year career
in the public sector, before
becoming Chief Architect for
Barratt Developments in 1989.
He became a full-time academic
in 1995 when he accepted the
post of Degree Programme
Director of Professional Practice
at Newcastle, before returning to
practice in 2003. George has
written two books on golf course
design, as well as articles on the
arts, architecture and sportsrelated topics. Twice Chairman
of RIBA Northern Region, George
was an RIBA Vice President and
national Honorary Treasurer.
Gordon has returned to the
Mackintosh School of
Architecture as Director of
Professional Studies whilst
running his practice. A RIBA
professional examiner, vice-chair
of APSAA, and co-author of the
Contract Game, Gordon
developed the professional
practice course at the University
of Strathclyde. He holds an LLM
in Construction Law, is a member
of the Chartered Institute of
Arbitrators and acts as an Expert
Witness. In 2005, he gained two
Scottish Design Awards for the
restoration and extension of
“India of Inchinnan”.
Myra Kinghorn
Neil Watts
Peter Coe
Ruth Brennan
Sarah Lupton
Appointed April 2008
Appointed April 2009
Appointed April 2009
Elected April 2009
Re-elected April 2009
Myra is a chartered accountant
and a chartered director. She
spent some 13 years working
in the accountancy profession
before moving to the public
sector, with a focus on financial
services and investor protection.
The first Chief Executive of the
Pension Protection Fund, and
before that Chief Executive of the
Investors Compensation Scheme,
Myra is currently Chair of the
Scheme Management Committee
of the European Payments
Council and a Governor of Morley
College.
With a degree in Economics
from Cambridge University,
Neil declined a career in finance
and trained as a teacher instead,
starting out at King Henry VIII
school in Coventry. He
progressed to Deputy Head of
Northgate High School in Ipswich
– the flagship school of Suffolk
County Council – and after
moving to Sudbury High School
as Headteacher, Neil returned to
Northgate as Head in 1992. Since
2004, Neil has been a Council
member of the Advertising
Standards Authority.
Graduating from York University
in 1970 with a degree in
mediaeval history, Peter started
out as a conservation officer with
the Council for the Care of
Churches. He moved to the NHS,
leaving in 2000 as Chief Executive
of a London health authority. In
2001, Peter was appointed as
Registrar of the General Optical
Council, and oversaw the
introduction of a new regulatory
framework for healthcare
professionals. He is currently
studying for an MA in
archaeology.
After completing her History
of Architecture degree, Ruth
enrolled on a business course.
After numerous temporary jobs,
she joined Feilden & Mawson
as a technologist. In 1992, she
left to run her own practice,
carrying out small domestic
and commercial projects, and
alterations and repairs to listed
buildings. She has been
employed as an associate with
Purcell Miller Tritton LLP since
2008. An accredited conservation
architect, Ruth is a member of
both CIAT and RIBA.
Sarah has degrees in both
architecture and law, and has
over 20 years’ experience as a
partner in Lupton Stellakis. A
member of RIBA and a Fellow of
the Chartered Institute of
Arbitrators, for the past 12 years,
Sarah has combined practice with
an academic post at the Welsh
School of Architecture where she
is now both a Reader and directs
the MA in Professional Studies.
Sarah is a member of the RIBA
President’s Advisory Committee
on Dispute Resolution.
DETACH AND SEAL
Meet the Board 2009
DETACH AND SEAL
Annual Report Feedback Form
We want our communications with architects to be as helpful,
informative and accessible as we can make them. We value your
views on how we are doing in this area, and how we might improve.
This short questionnaire should take you no more than ten minutes
to complete, and your comments will be very much appreciated.
Architects
Registration
Board
Annual Report
Feedback Form
Name:
Did you vote in this year’s election of architects
Address:
to the Board?
■ yes
■ no
Did you receive information about the election:
Registration No:
Postcard from ARB
Completed questionnaires returned by 30 September 2009
will be entered in a prize draw. The sender of the first
completed questionnaire to be drawn will receive a £50
gift voucher.
■ yes
■ no
■ don’t know
Formal Notice announcing the election
■ yes
■ no
■ don’t know
Articles in the architectural press
Overall, did you find the Report useful?
■ yes
■ no
■ no opinion
Which section(s) did you find most interesting?
(please state)
■ yes
■ no
■ don’t know
Ballot material (including voting papers)
■ yes
■ no
■ don’t know
Did you visit the website for information about
the election?
■ yes
■ no
If yes, did you find the information you were looking for?
Do you feel the Report provides sufficient information?
■ yes
■ no
(please state reasons)
■ yes
■ no
How easy was it to find the information?
■ very easy
■ easy
■ not at all easy
Registration card/certificate
Do you receive:
A registration card
A registration certificate
Both
■ yes
■ yes
■ yes
■ no
■ no
■ no
Should ARB continue to send cards/certificates to
architects or should proof of registration be available
Having read the Report, what are your perceptions of ARB?
only as a download from our website?
I want to receive a card
I want to receive a certificate
■
■
I want to receive both a card
and a certificate
■
I want to be able to download
proof of my registration from
DETACH AND SEAL
ARB’s website
■
A letter to architects from
Beatrice Fraenkel, Chair of ARB
the past year.
I hope you have enjoyed reading about ARB’s work and activities over
as
elected
being
my
including
place,
taken
have
changes
Since then, quite a few
you, I thought
to
quantity
n
unknow
an
probably
and
Chair
new
ARB’s
As
ARB.
Chair of
the Board – and
it would be helpful if I were to share my brief thoughts on how I see
year.
ing
indeed, ARB – developing in the forthcom
I will be focusing on:
increased
• creating an environment for the Board to conduct its business with
openness and transparency
on which we
• fostering a culture of mutual respect and creating a strong basis
lders
stakeho
and
partners
our
with
can build effective relationships
lly reviewed
• ensuring that our standards of corporate governance are continua
degree.
highest
the
to
ed
maintain
and
Board’s core
It is my strong belief that in focusing on the effective delivery of the
and respected
trusted
gly
increasin
an
s
business, we will ensure that ARB become
I would
result,
a
As
lders.
stakeho
other
all
by
and
n
organisation by the professio
profession
ts’
architec
the
of
profile
the
g
enhancin
to
te
contribu
to
work
expect ARB’s
as a whole.
we will all seize
This is a unique and exciting opportunity for the Board, and one that
members bring
Board
new
seven
our
that
tive
perspec
with enthusiasm. With the fresh
s, we are
member
existing
our
of
ge
knowled
ced
experien
the
with
to the table, coupled
regulates.
it
n
professio
the
ideally placed to forge ahead as a unified Board, in tune with
forward
I know that I speak on behalf of the Board when I say that we are looking
bring.
will
year
coming
the
that
nities
to the mix of challenges and opportu
way we can and
From a personal point of view, I feel very excited about the positive
e my
recognis
and
Board,
new
a
as
months
twelve
next
the
over
will develop
responsibility as the Chair in helping this happen.
Design: NT&A Print: Rustin Clark Photography: Eric Richmond/Rob Turner
Yours sincerely
Beatrice Fraenkel
Chair, ARB
Architects Registration Board
BUSINESS REPLY SERVICE
Licence No. LON20080
2
Sue Young
Architects Registration Board
8 Weymouth Street
London W1E 5DQ
Architects Registration Board
Architects
Registration
Board
Feedback
questionnaire