The Gold Standard of Education | Lesotho CHE Institutions, Programme Accreditation and Validity Periods

Start here: identify the decision before collecting evidence

Lesotho’s Council on Higher Education, CHE, publishes institution profiles and programme-level accreditation records, and operates the Lesotho Qualifications Management Information System, LQMIS. A programme record can name the exact qualification, decision category and a beginning and ending month. That structure is unusually useful because it makes time part of the claim: an entry that ended in June 2024 or August 2026 cannot simply be described as current in late October 2026.

A dependable check matches the registered institution, exact programme, accreditation decision and displayed validity period, then distinguishes qualification verification from evaluation. LQMIS describes verification and evaluation, institutional audit, programme accreditation and institutional evaluation as separate services. An expired displayed period is evidence of an earlier decision; it requires a newer record or written CHE confirmation before a present enrolment claim is treated as settled.

This guide was checked on 27 October 2026 against current primary guidance. CHE and LQMIS sources were checked on 27 October 2026. LQMIS displayed live institution and accredited-programme lookup routes, but its page also showed a reload error after loading. CHE institution pages contained a mixture of current, future-running and elapsed programme periods. This guide preserves the stated dates and does not infer that an elapsed period is either renewed or withdrawn. Use the newest live entry and written CHE confirmation where the current state is unclear.

This specialist sits under The Gold Standard of Education: Learning That Transfers into Life. The parent framework keeps the purpose visible: understand the system, act on the correct evidence and build independence for the next decision.

Contents and reading routes

Use the quick route for an immediate decision, the complete route for a live case, and the teaching route when helping a learner explain the mechanism.

Quick route: chapters 1, 4, 7, 10 and 12.
Complete route: chapters 1–12, authoritative sources, verification workbook and FAQs.
Teaching route: chapters 2–3, worked case in chapter 7, and failure repair in chapter 10.

Open the chapter index

Begin with institution, programme, decision and dates
Confirm the institution
Match the exact programme
Read the accreditation decision
Read the validity period
Treat elapsed periods honestly
Work a mixed-period case
Prefer live LQMIS to old consolidated files
Separate verification from evaluation
Diagnose common Lesotho mistakes
Carry evidence into professional use
Complete the verification sequence

1. Begin with institution, programme, decision and dates

These four fields form one time-bounded record.

Copy the exact row before interpreting it.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Lesotho higher-education institution, exact programme, accreditation decision, validity period, qualification verification or foreign-qualification evaluation before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CHE, LQMIS, the registered institution, programme owner, campus or delivery site, awarding body, learner, employer, professional regulator and receiving education institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CHE institution profile, LQMIS institution entry, accredited-programme record, decision category, validity start and end, current confirmation where a period has elapsed, verification or evaluation response, learner offer, transcript, award and receiving decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the receiving organisation changes. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Contents · Next chapter

2. Confirm the institution

Use CHE or LQMIS to match the legal provider and category.

Do not rely on a prospectus alone.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Lesotho higher-education institution, exact programme, accreditation decision, validity period, qualification verification or foreign-qualification evaluation before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CHE, LQMIS, the registered institution, programme owner, campus or delivery site, awarding body, learner, employer, professional regulator and receiving education institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CHE institution profile, LQMIS institution entry, accredited-programme record, decision category, validity start and end, current confirmation where a period has elapsed, verification or evaluation response, learner offer, transcript, award and receiving decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the record is older than expected. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

3. Match the exact programme

Find the precise qualification under the correct faculty and institution.

Similar titles can have different decisions.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Lesotho higher-education institution, exact programme, accreditation decision, validity period, qualification verification or foreign-qualification evaluation before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CHE, LQMIS, the registered institution, programme owner, campus or delivery site, awarding body, learner, employer, professional regulator and receiving education institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CHE institution profile, LQMIS institution entry, accredited-programme record, decision category, validity start and end, current confirmation where a period has elapsed, verification or evaluation response, learner offer, transcript, award and receiving decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: a deadline moves forward. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

4. Read the accreditation decision

CHE records categories such as full, probationary or graded accreditation.

Preserve the official wording.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Lesotho higher-education institution, exact programme, accreditation decision, validity period, qualification verification or foreign-qualification evaluation before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CHE, LQMIS, the registered institution, programme owner, campus or delivery site, awarding body, learner, employer, professional regulator and receiving education institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CHE institution profile, LQMIS institution entry, accredited-programme record, decision category, validity start and end, current confirmation where a period has elapsed, verification or evaluation response, learner offer, transcript, award and receiving decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the programme changes after an offer. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

5. Read the validity period

Start and end months make the decision time limited.

Compare the end date with the intended intake and completion.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Lesotho higher-education institution, exact programme, accreditation decision, validity period, qualification verification or foreign-qualification evaluation before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CHE, LQMIS, the registered institution, programme owner, campus or delivery site, awarding body, learner, employer, professional regulator and receiving education institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CHE institution profile, LQMIS institution entry, accredited-programme record, decision category, validity start and end, current confirmation where a period has elapsed, verification or evaluation response, learner offer, transcript, award and receiving decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: one identifier is wrong. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

6. Treat elapsed periods honestly

An ended displayed period is historical evidence, not automatic proof of renewal or closure.

Request the newer decision.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Lesotho higher-education institution, exact programme, accreditation decision, validity period, qualification verification or foreign-qualification evaluation before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CHE, LQMIS, the registered institution, programme owner, campus or delivery site, awarding body, learner, employer, professional regulator and receiving education institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CHE institution profile, LQMIS institution entry, accredited-programme record, decision category, validity start and end, current confirmation where a period has elapsed, verification or evaluation response, learner offer, transcript, award and receiving decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: a listing is current but the intake is not. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

7. Work a mixed-period case

Suppose one programme runs to June 2028 while another at the same institution ended in June 2024.

Do not transfer the current programme’s status to its neighbour.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Lesotho higher-education institution, exact programme, accreditation decision, validity period, qualification verification or foreign-qualification evaluation before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CHE, LQMIS, the registered institution, programme owner, campus or delivery site, awarding body, learner, employer, professional regulator and receiving education institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CHE institution profile, LQMIS institution entry, accredited-programme record, decision category, validity start and end, current confirmation where a period has elapsed, verification or evaluation response, learner offer, transcript, award and receiving decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the learner changes jurisdiction. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

8. Prefer live LQMIS to old consolidated files

The 2018 consolidated programme file can explain history.

Use the current lookup for present action.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Lesotho higher-education institution, exact programme, accreditation decision, validity period, qualification verification or foreign-qualification evaluation before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CHE, LQMIS, the registered institution, programme owner, campus or delivery site, awarding body, learner, employer, professional regulator and receiving education institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CHE institution profile, LQMIS institution entry, accredited-programme record, decision category, validity start and end, current confirmation where a period has elapsed, verification or evaluation response, learner offer, transcript, award and receiving decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: evidence arrives after an internal deadline. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

9. Separate verification from evaluation

Verification checks a credential or award; evaluation assesses a foreign qualification’s comparability.

Choose the service that matches the question.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Lesotho higher-education institution, exact programme, accreditation decision, validity period, qualification verification or foreign-qualification evaluation before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CHE, LQMIS, the registered institution, programme owner, campus or delivery site, awarding body, learner, employer, professional regulator and receiving education institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CHE institution profile, LQMIS institution entry, accredited-programme record, decision category, validity start and end, current confirmation where a period has elapsed, verification or evaluation response, learner offer, transcript, award and receiving decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: a published route disappears. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

10. Diagnose common Lesotho mistakes

Typical errors include ignoring end dates, treating institution status as programme approval and confusing verification with evaluation.

Repair the dated chain.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Lesotho higher-education institution, exact programme, accreditation decision, validity period, qualification verification or foreign-qualification evaluation before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CHE, LQMIS, the registered institution, programme owner, campus or delivery site, awarding body, learner, employer, professional regulator and receiving education institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CHE institution profile, LQMIS institution entry, accredited-programme record, decision category, validity start and end, current confirmation where a period has elapsed, verification or evaluation response, learner offer, transcript, award and receiving decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the decision-maker asks for the original document. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

11. Carry evidence into professional use

CHE evidence does not compel a professional council or foreign receiving institution.

Ask the responsible receiver in writing.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Lesotho higher-education institution, exact programme, accreditation decision, validity period, qualification verification or foreign-qualification evaluation before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CHE, LQMIS, the registered institution, programme owner, campus or delivery site, awarding body, learner, employer, professional regulator and receiving education institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CHE institution profile, LQMIS institution entry, accredited-programme record, decision category, validity start and end, current confirmation where a period has elapsed, verification or evaluation response, learner offer, transcript, award and receiving decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the search result is correct but incomplete. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

12. Complete the verification sequence

Confirm institution, programme, decision, dates, site, LQF level, qualification service and purpose.

Finish with dated copies and a recheck point.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Lesotho higher-education institution, exact programme, accreditation decision, validity period, qualification verification or foreign-qualification evaluation before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CHE, LQMIS, the registered institution, programme owner, campus or delivery site, awarding body, learner, employer, professional regulator and receiving education institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CHE institution profile, LQMIS institution entry, accredited-programme record, decision category, validity start and end, current confirmation where a period has elapsed, verification or evaluation response, learner offer, transcript, award and receiving decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the learner changes goal. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents

Authoritative sources and evidence boundary

These primary sources were checked on 27 October 2026. Reopen the live record near any enrolment, recognition, immigration, transfer, funding or licensing decision because statuses, dates and operating guidance can change.

A source can establish only the fact within its remit. Keep the current authority record beside learner-specific evidence and obtain the responsible organisation’s written decision where acceptance, credit, protection, immigration or eligibility is at stake.

Verification workbook

Complete every line with a dated official page, document, recorded state or named follow-up. A blank is useful because it shows where certainty has not yet been earned.

Present decision
Institution legal name
Public or private category
CHE or LQMIS institution entry
Programme title
Qualification type
Accreditation decision
Decision grade or category
Validity start
Validity end
Current written confirmation
Faculty
Campus or site
Study mode
LQF level
Verification result
Evaluation result
Learner start date
Learner completion date
Offer
Transcript
Award
Professional authority
Written receiving decision

Build an auditable decision file

Open with the exact decision and its deadline. Attach the current the current CHE or LQMIS institution-programme entry read with its exact decision category and full validity period, the learner-specific record and the receiver’s published requirements. A general webpage explains a rule; it does not replace a learner-specific decision from the responsible body.

Create one evidence row for each controlling fact: institution legal name, registration, public or private category, programme title, qualification type, accreditation decision, grade or category, validity start, validity end, faculty, campus, study mode, LQF level, verification result, evaluation result, learner dates, offer, transcript, award, professional authority and receiving decision. Give every row a source, retrieval date, status and owner. Mark a fact confirmed only when the cited source proves it. Use reported, estimated or pending for everything else.

Separate inputs from outputs. Inputs are facts supplied by the learner, provider or authority. Outputs are comparisons, classifications and decisions made from them. If an output looks wrong, check the input, then the dated rule, then any recorded exception.

Keep a change log for institution, registration, programme, decision category, validity period, faculty, campus, mode, LQF alignment, learner dates and receiving purpose. Record the old fact, new fact, date learned, source and every conclusion that must be reopened. Do not silently overwrite the earlier state; the history explains why a reasonable plan changed.

Add a deadline map with the formal deadline, an earlier internal deadline and the recovery route if evidence arrives late. Where no recovery route is published, record that absence rather than inventing one. Reopen the official page near the action date because archived guidance can look authoritative.

Use a responsibility matrix. CHE owns higher-education institution and programme quality assurance and LQF services within its remit; institutions decide admission and delivery; awarding bodies issue records; professional and receiving bodies make their own decisions. If two people assume the other has acted, the file should expose the gap before the deadline.

Keep a contact note for each official enquiry: channel, date, question, answer and reference number. If verbal advice conflicts with a published rule or written decision, ask for clarification in writing before an irreversible action.

Run a source hierarchy check. Put the responsible authority first, current operational guidance second, the learner-specific notice third and informal explanation last. Where two official pages appear inconsistent, record both dates and ask which governs the present case.

Schedule a cold review two working days before any irreversible boundary. Recheck names, identifiers, dates, programme codes, study load and document version. Save the submission acknowledgement without treating receipt as approval.

After the decision, reconcile the notice with the plan line by line. Record what was accepted, refused, limited or deferred and the route for correction, review or appeal. Preserve the original decision when adding later correspondence.

Add a “not yet proved” page. List every conclusion that still depends on institution legal name, registration, public or private category, programme title, qualification type, accreditation decision, grade or category, validity start, validity end, faculty, campus, study mode, LQF level, verification result, evaluation result, learner dates, offer, transcript, award, professional authority and receiving decision. Beside each item, name the smallest official record that would settle it and the person who can obtain that record. This stops a plausible estimate from drifting into the confirmed column merely because it has been repeated.

Rehearse a correction request before one is needed. Identify the learner, present decision, disputed input, supporting document and requested remedy without claiming an entitlement the evidence cannot establish. Address it to the organisation that owns the record or decision, keep a copy, and record the published response or escalation route.

Ask an independent reader to challenge the file. They should identify the weakest assumption, locate the official sentence that controls it and describe what changes if the assumption fails. Record that answer without deleting the earlier reasoning; the audit trail should show learning, not pretend uncertainty never existed.

Build a conservative time and cost plan beside the evidence file. Show what is already confirmed, what is estimated, which payment or enrolment step becomes irreversible and when. Then test a delayed decision and a less favourable outcome. The exercise does not predict the authority’s answer; it prevents an optimistic reading from becoming an unexamined commitment.

Ask The learner or family checking a Lesotho higher-education institution, exact programme, accreditation decision, validity period, qualification verification or foreign-qualification evaluation before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use to narrate the case aloud in under two minutes: “This is my present state; this is the governing source; this is the learner-specific evidence; this is the unresolved boundary; this is my next permitted action.” A listener should be able to distinguish fact, comparison and choice without prompting.

Practise one counterfactual. Change only the programme appears but its displayed period has ended, an older consolidated PDF conflicts with LQMIS, the institution is registered but the programme is absent, verification is mistaken for foreign evaluation or the delivery site changes and trace which conclusions stay valid. The exercise reveals whether the learner understands the dependency chain or has memorised an answer belonging to another case.

Finish with a retention plan. Keep source documents, decisions, receipts and later corrections for as long as they remain useful to explain the education record. Store identifiers securely and share only what the named recipient needs.

Frequently asked questions

What does LQMIS provide?

It provides institution and accredited-programme lookup plus qualification verification and evaluation routes.

Does a registered institution prove every programme?

No. Match the exact programme and decision.

What does an expired validity period mean?

It proves the displayed decision applied for that period; obtain the newer status before present action.

Can an old CHE PDF prove current accreditation?

Not by itself. Use current LQMIS or written CHE confirmation.

Is verification the same as evaluation?

No. Verification checks a credential; evaluation assesses a foreign qualification for comparability.

Does a programme grade apply to the whole institution?

No. Read the exact programme row.

Does CHE status guarantee professional acceptance?

No. The professional or receiving body decides.

What should the learner retain?

Institution and programme records, dates, CHE responses, offer, transcript, award and receiving decisions.

Close the workbook by explaining the process without notes. A dependable explanation names the authority, present state, evidence, deadline and consequence if one assumption fails.

Continue with this Education batch

These companion guides use the same evidence-first method for a different register, framework or recognition decision.

Continue through the Education branch

Return to The Gold Standard of Education. Continue with the Lesotho education-system guide, the accreditation and quality-assurance explainer, the overseas-degree recognition guide. Each guide preserves the specialist owner while showing how records, qualifications and decisions connect.