It is part of good practice as analysts to reflect on what we do, and have been doing.

Council now asks all members of AJA to undertake re-accreditation on a five yearly basis. This concurrently fulfils the requirement for members who are registered with UKCP/CPJA.  BPC may require something similar of their members in the future.

The primary purpose of re-accreditation is to provide an opportunity to reflect on our growth and maturation as analysts with our colleagues. We ask you to write about your experience and share this with your review group using the headings in Form A.

AJA began implementing this process in 2015 for all members selected alphabetically in groups of ten people per year with completion in 2019. Thereafter the cycle will begin again. New members will participate in re-accreditation on the fifth anniversary of their acceptance of membership by AJA.

The Review Process.

We see this process as an extension of our annual CPD procedure in that it allows you to take a deeper and broader view of your work and to consider both your current and future professional development needs.

The 5 year re-accreditation review is in essence a peer review. You are responsible for forming your own review group consisting of three or more people which could include colleagues from your CPD group, or other analysts / therapists familiar with your work. Please also include one person who is unfamiliar with your clinical work. This person would be the chair of the review meeting and will fill out and sign the review group feedback form on behalf of the entire group. Please ensure that this person is registered with either BPC or UKCP and preferably is an IAAP member.

Once formed the group sets a date for the review to take place. This is a separate meeting to the normal CPD group meetings as its specific purpose is to undertake the 5-year re-accreditation review. The review group meeting, lasting at least an hour can be conducted face to face, by teleconference or by Skype.

The role of the review group is twofold. Firstly to verify that you have fulfilled certain mandatory requirements, and secondly, to critically appreciate and explore your presentation and to make recommendations regarding re-accreditation.

We ask you to send your documentation to the group not less than two weeks prior to the meeting date. The meeting will be an opportunity for the you to present and expand on the written material and for the review group to discuss and raise any questions regarding your work and CPD.

The group gives feedback and makes recommendations, if any to the chair of the professional committee using the review group feedback form (part two of Form B), a copy of which is given to you at the end of the review meeting. If re-accreditation is recommended then the chair of the professional committee will confirm this with you and inform the CPJA that you have been re-accredited for a further five years.

You have the right of appeal and should follow the procedure outlined at the end of this section.



For the review meeting you will need to provide each member of your review group with the following:

  • A completed 5 year re-accreditation application form (Form A).
  • A completed declarations and reviewers’ feedback form (Form B).
  • A statement from your current supervisor, or member of your peer supervision group, verifying your supervision arrangement (Form C).
  • Copies of the past five years CPD returns.


FORM A   The 5 Year Re-Accreditation Application Form

 This form, which is reflective, provides the basis of your presentation and subsequent discussion at the review group meeting. Drawing on your last five year’s CPD returns we ask you to reflect on the following areas:

Clinical Practice.

Here we ask you to consider your practice and describe how it has evolved over the five year period concerned.  Please include the nature and context of your clinical work in all its aspects, whether this is in private practice, working for an organisation or an agency, whether you have developed any specialisms.


Please describe the nature of supervision received over the past five years and reflect on the impact that this has had on both you and your work.


This is an opportunity to reflect on the nature and content of your CPD over the past five years and how your practice has been developed and maintained through your involvement in Continuing Professional Development.

Involvement in the work of AJA and/or other professional organisations

Describe the nature of your participation in AJA or other organizations and what this means to you and how this complements your primary task as an analyst.

Personal Development

Comment on how you feel your involvement in cultural, social, political, literary, philosophical, physical and other activities contributes to your personal development in terms of your physical, emotional, psychological and spiritual health.

Future Aims.

Considering your work in the future what might you consider to be some of your CPD aims and how might these be met?


FORM B   Declarations and Reviewers’ Feedback

 First section: declarations

You are asked to sign a number of declarations that relate to your professional standing as an analyst. These include:

  • A statement that you have read and work within UKCP’s Diversity and Equality Policy. This can be found on the UKCP website.
  • A statement about ethical practice.
  • Confirmation of, and details regarding your professional insurance cover.
  • Confirmation of your appointment of two clinical executors contact details of whom are located with the AJA office.
  • Your supervision arrangements.
  • A declaration regarding any criminal convictions or complaints that may have been made against you.

Second section: reviewers’ feedback

Following the discussion, the chair of the review group, in consultation with the review group members, confirms that the following are satisfactory:

  • Clinical practice and supervision

If there are any problems in these areas the review group will comment and make recommendations.

  • Continuing professional development, professional involvements and personal development

If there are any problems in these areas the review group will comment and make recommendations.


Finally, we ask you to make your own comments on the above if you wish, and participate in the conclusion of the process.



You and the chair of the meeting sign part two (the reviewers’ feedback section) of the declarations form.


Review group members

Here you indicate the names of the members and the chair of the group.



If you wish to appeal against the review group’s decision please write to the chair of the professional committee within thirty days of receiving the decision, stating your reasons. The chair of the professional committee will appoint an AJA supervisor, someone not directly involved with you or your review group, to the role of appeal assessor, to whom you send your submission, together with any other relevant documents. After studying the documents they may make one of two recommendations:

  1.  There are no grounds for the appeal.

The appeal assessor will write a short report, in confidence, to the chair of the professional committee outlining the reasons for the decision. This is final.

       2.  There are grounds for the appeal.

In the event of there being grounds for appeal, the appeal assessor may:

ask to see you to explore and discuss the situation,


appoint a new independent review group to go through the re-accreditation assessment with you and who will report back to the appeal assessor within thirty days of their appointment.


After these interviews the appeal assessor may recommend either the appeal be upheld, or the appeal be rejected. This decision is final. The appeal assessor will write a short report, in confidence, to the chair of the professional committee outlining the reasons for the outcome.


In all cases you will be informed of the decision and reasons for the decision by the chair of the professional committee.


During the appeal proceedings we ask that care is taken by all concerned that it is conducted in a confidential, sensitive and respectful manner in relation to the analyst and any other members involved.



February 2017














Skip to content