Start here: identify the decision before collecting evidence
Mozambique’s Conselho Nacional de Avaliação da Qualidade do Ensino Superior, CNAQ, implements and supervises the national higher-education evaluation, accreditation and quality-assurance system. Its public material distinguishes self-evaluation, external evaluation and accreditation. Accreditation is the certification step that follows external evaluation and can concern an institution, a course or a programme. Those scopes cannot be exchanged simply because the same provider name appears on each document.
A dependable check therefore matches the institution’s exact legal identity, the named course or programme, whether the decision concerns a new course or one already operating, the recorded outcome and the certificate’s validity. CNAQ’s external-evaluation manual distinguishes non-accreditation, conditional accreditation and full accreditation, with stated periods. A 2023 results release, a 2024 evaluation map and a 2026 call each describe a different stage and date; none is a timeless list of every course currently authorised.
This guide was checked on 27 October 2026 against current primary guidance. The official CNAQ sources were checked on 27 October 2026. The clearest public consolidated results located were for evaluations conducted in 2023 and released in 2024. The site also carried 2024 instruments and 2026 calls for institutional, operating-course and prior-accreditation processes. These sources prove the process and the dated decisions they contain, but current authority for a particular course requires the newest certificate, decision or written CNAQ confirmation.
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 the institution-course pair
- Map the SINAQES sequence
- Confirm the legal institution
- Match the exact course
- Read the accreditation outcome
- Check the validity period
- Work an expired-certificate case
- Separate prior and operating-course routes
- Check site and study mode
- Diagnose common Mozambique mistakes
- Carry evidence to work or further study
- Complete the verification sequence
1. Begin with the institution-course pair
CNAQ can assess institutions and courses, so identify both before reading a result.
Write the legal provider, faculty and exact course title.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Mozambican higher-education institution, faculty, campus, course, programme, accreditation certificate or quality decision before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CNAQ, the higher-education institution, its organic unit or faculty, course owner, campus or delivery site, learner, awarding body, employer, professional order and receiving institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CNAQ institution and course records, external-evaluation result, accreditation certificate, validity period, applicable 2026 process notice, provider evidence, learner offer, transcript, award and written 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.
2. Map the SINAQES sequence
Self-evaluation, external evaluation and accreditation are connected stages, not synonyms.
Record the stage reached and the document that proves it.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Mozambican higher-education institution, faculty, campus, course, programme, accreditation certificate or quality decision before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CNAQ, the higher-education institution, its organic unit or faculty, course owner, campus or delivery site, learner, awarding body, employer, professional order and receiving institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CNAQ institution and course records, external-evaluation result, accreditation certificate, validity period, applicable 2026 process notice, provider evidence, learner offer, transcript, award and written 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.
3. Confirm the legal institution
Match the official name, category and organic unit.
Branding or a faculty nickname is not enough.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Mozambican higher-education institution, faculty, campus, course, programme, accreditation certificate or quality decision before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CNAQ, the higher-education institution, its organic unit or faculty, course owner, campus or delivery site, learner, awarding body, employer, professional order and receiving institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CNAQ institution and course records, external-evaluation result, accreditation certificate, validity period, applicable 2026 process notice, provider evidence, learner offer, transcript, award and written 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.
4. Match the exact course
Course title, level and operating status must agree with the certificate or decision.
Do not transfer approval to a near-named programme.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Mozambican higher-education institution, faculty, campus, course, programme, accreditation certificate or quality decision before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CNAQ, the higher-education institution, its organic unit or faculty, course owner, campus or delivery site, learner, awarding body, employer, professional order and receiving institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CNAQ institution and course records, external-evaluation result, accreditation certificate, validity period, applicable 2026 process notice, provider evidence, learner offer, transcript, award and written 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.
5. Read the accreditation outcome
The manuals distinguish non-accredited, conditionally accredited and fully accredited results.
Preserve the exact label and any conditions.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Mozambican higher-education institution, faculty, campus, course, programme, accreditation certificate or quality decision before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CNAQ, the higher-education institution, its organic unit or faculty, course owner, campus or delivery site, learner, awarding body, employer, professional order and receiving institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CNAQ institution and course records, external-evaluation result, accreditation certificate, validity period, applicable 2026 process notice, provider evidence, learner offer, transcript, award and written 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.
6. Check the validity period
Conditional and full decisions carry different periods in the published methodology.
A past decision is not proof of current validity.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Mozambican higher-education institution, faculty, campus, course, programme, accreditation certificate or quality decision before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CNAQ, the higher-education institution, its organic unit or faculty, course owner, campus or delivery site, learner, awarding body, employer, professional order and receiving institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CNAQ institution and course records, external-evaluation result, accreditation certificate, validity period, applicable 2026 process notice, provider evidence, learner offer, transcript, award and written 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.
7. Work an expired-certificate case
Suppose the institution appears in a dated results table but the course certificate period has ended.
Pause and obtain the newest CNAQ decision before payment.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Mozambican higher-education institution, faculty, campus, course, programme, accreditation certificate or quality decision before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CNAQ, the higher-education institution, its organic unit or faculty, course owner, campus or delivery site, learner, awarding body, employer, professional order and receiving institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CNAQ institution and course records, external-evaluation result, accreditation certificate, validity period, applicable 2026 process notice, provider evidence, learner offer, transcript, award and written 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.
8. Separate prior and operating-course routes
A new course and a course already being delivered can enter different evaluation paths.
Match the learner’s intake to the applicable route.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Mozambican higher-education institution, faculty, campus, course, programme, accreditation certificate or quality decision before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CNAQ, the higher-education institution, its organic unit or faculty, course owner, campus or delivery site, learner, awarding body, employer, professional order and receiving institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CNAQ institution and course records, external-evaluation result, accreditation certificate, validity period, applicable 2026 process notice, provider evidence, learner offer, transcript, award and written 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.
9. Check site and study mode
The campus, organic unit and delivery mode must belong to the evaluated offering.
A main-site decision does not automatically travel.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Mozambican higher-education institution, faculty, campus, course, programme, accreditation certificate or quality decision before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CNAQ, the higher-education institution, its organic unit or faculty, course owner, campus or delivery site, learner, awarding body, employer, professional order and receiving institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CNAQ institution and course records, external-evaluation result, accreditation certificate, validity period, applicable 2026 process notice, provider evidence, learner offer, transcript, award and written 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.
10. Diagnose common Mozambique mistakes
Typical errors include quoting aggregate counts, dropping certificate dates and confusing conditional with full accreditation.
Repair the chain from certificate to learner file.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Mozambican higher-education institution, faculty, campus, course, programme, accreditation certificate or quality decision before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CNAQ, the higher-education institution, its organic unit or faculty, course owner, campus or delivery site, learner, awarding body, employer, professional order and receiving institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CNAQ institution and course records, external-evaluation result, accreditation certificate, validity period, applicable 2026 process notice, provider evidence, learner offer, transcript, award and written 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.
11. Carry evidence to work or further study
CNAQ accreditation is important but does not compel every professional or foreign receiver.
Ask the responsible body in writing.
Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer
Turn this chapter into a live file. The learner or family checking a Mozambican higher-education institution, faculty, campus, course, programme, accreditation certificate or quality decision before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CNAQ, the higher-education institution, its organic unit or faculty, course owner, campus or delivery site, learner, awarding body, employer, professional order and receiving institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CNAQ institution and course records, external-evaluation result, accreditation certificate, validity period, applicable 2026 process notice, provider evidence, learner offer, transcript, award and written 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.
12. Complete the verification sequence
Confirm institution, unit, course, route, outcome, certificate, validity, site, mode 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 Mozambican higher-education institution, faculty, campus, course, programme, accreditation certificate or quality decision before application, payment, enrolment, transfer, graduation, employment or professional use states the present decision in one sentence. CNAQ, the higher-education institution, its organic unit or faculty, course owner, campus or delivery site, learner, awarding body, employer, professional order and receiving institution supplies only the evidence it owns. the CNAQ institution and course records, external-evaluation result, accreditation certificate, validity period, applicable 2026 process notice, provider evidence, learner offer, transcript, award and written 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.
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.
- Mozambique CNAQ official portal
- CNAQ explanation of accreditation and its public purpose
- CNAQ statutory competencies for institutions, courses and programmes
- CNAQ dated release of 2023 institution and course evaluation results
- CNAQ accreditation and external-evaluation manuals
- CNAQ course and programme external-evaluation manual with outcomes and validity periods
- CNAQ evaluation maps and 2024 instruments
- CNAQ 2026 institutional, operating-course and prior-accreditation calls
- CNAQ 2024 statistics booklet and SINAQES overview
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
- Organic unit or faculty
- Course or programme title
- Academic level
- New or operating course
- Evaluation route
- Accreditation outcome
- Certificate number
- Issue date
- Validity period
- Conditions
- Campus or site
- Study mode
- Newest CNAQ notice
- Learner start date
- Learner completion date
- Offer
- Transcript
- Award
- Professional order
- Written receiving decision
Build an auditable decision file
Open with the exact decision and its deadline. Attach the current the newest CNAQ decision or certificate for the exact institution-course-site combination, read with its result, conditions and 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, public or private category, organic unit, course title, academic level, new or operating-course status, accreditation outcome, certificate number, issue date, validity period, conditions, campus, study mode, learner start and completion 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, unit, course, level, evaluation route, result, certificate, validity, conditions, campus, mode, 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. CNAQ owns evaluation and accreditation within SINAQES; institutions decide admission and delivery; awarding bodies issue academic records; professional orders, employers and receiving institutions 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, public or private category, organic unit, course title, academic level, new or operating-course status, accreditation outcome, certificate number, issue date, validity period, conditions, campus, study mode, learner start and completion 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 Mozambican higher-education institution, faculty, campus, course, programme, accreditation certificate or quality decision 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 institution is accredited but the course certificate has expired, a conditional result is quoted as full accreditation, a prior-accreditation decision is applied to another campus or an older 2023 table is treated as a current national register 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 CNAQ accreditation certify?
It certifies the quality outcome reached after external evaluation for the stated institution, course or programme.
Is institutional accreditation enough for every course?
No. Match the exact course or programme evidence.
What is conditional accreditation?
It is the published outcome for a course that reaches the conditional range and carries the stated shorter validity.
Can a 2023 results table prove current status?
Not by itself. It is dated evidence.
Why does the certificate period matter?
Because accreditation authority is tied to the displayed validity and later decisions.
Does prior accreditation prove the same thing as evaluation of an operating course?
No. Preserve the route identified in the decision.
Does CNAQ status guarantee professional registration?
No. The professional order decides within its remit.
What should a learner retain?
The current certificate or decision, conditions, validity, 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 Mozambique 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.