33In this section, any arrangement between a provider in England or Wales and a provider which is not in England or Wales is a “transnational arrangement”. That includes arrangements with providers in Scotland or Northern Ireland, since the OIA’s remit does not extend to providers in those jurisdictions.
Providers in England or Wales with campuses in another jurisdiction
34Some higher education providers in England and Wales operate campuses in another jurisdiction which they wholly own and manage. The principles of the Good Practice Framework: handling complaints and academic appeals, apply equally to students studying at any campus owned and managed by a member of the OIA Scheme. So students studying at a campus which is not in England or Wales will be able to complain to the OIA about acts or omissions of the provider in the same way as students studying at the campus in England or Wales.
Providers in England or Wales which own and manage a campus which is not in England or Wales have the same responsibilities to students at that campus as they do towards students at their domestic campus.
Joint (etc.) awards where one awarding provider is outside England and Wales
35Some higher education providers in England or Wales with UK degree-awarding powers have entered into collaborative arrangements with partners in other jurisdictions (which have degree-awarding powers in their own jurisdictions) to deliver learning opportunities leading, for example, to a joint, multiple, dual or concurrent award. There are other types of arrangement and it is likely that new models of delivery will emerge.
36Broadly, it is a matter for the providers to decide between themselves how to handle student complaints and academic appeals. However, this is subject to the guidance and principles set out below. Any provider in England or Wales with UK degree awarding powers entering into an arrangement with a partner provider in another jurisdiction should meet the “Expectation” of Chapter B10 of the QAA UK Quality Code for Higher Education, and follow the Indicators of Sound Practice. In addition, it is also good practice for the provider in England or Wales to ensure that:
(i) the information given to students clearly sets out how and to whom students should make a complaint or an academic appeal;
(ii) a student should be able to complain to the OIA about any act or omission of a member provider falling within the OIA’s remit; and
(iii) it does not delegate its responsibility for the academic quality and standards of its awards (even if awarded with another overseas provider).
37The providers may agree between themselves that the provider which is not in England or Wales will have responsibility for handling student complaints and/or academic appeals. That provider may be subject to different standards or guidance for handling complaints or academic appeals and so its procedures may not comply with the principles of the Good Practice Framework.
38It may be necessary for the provider in England or Wales to issue a Completion of Procedures Letter at the end of the process even where it has not conducted that process. This will be the case where the complaint or academic appeal relates to a matter that the provider in England or Wales retains ultimate responsibility for, such as the academic quality and standards of learning opportunities leading to one of its awards (even if awarded with another provider).
39In those cases, it will be up to the provider in England or Wales to decide whether to conduct its own review of the matter, or to adopt the decision of its partner provider. If the provider in England and Wales decides to adopt the decision of its partner provider it would need to have confidence in the procedures and decision making process of its partner. This is something to be considered when the partnership is established and can be monitored as part of quality assurance arrangements. As a matter of good practice, the student should not have to wait longer for a decision or go through unnecessary stages because of the involvement of the provider in England or Wales.
Awarding providers in England and Wales may not delegate their responsibility for the academic quality and standards of their awards. Students should be able to complain to the OIA about any act or omission of a member provider falling within its remit.
40The provider which is not in England or Wales may be subject to different quality assurance or student complaints-handling arrangements. This is considered further in paragraphs 47 to 50 below.
Delivery provider(s) in England or Wales with awarding provider(s) outside England and Wales
41Some providers in England or Wales deliver courses leading to the award of a qualification granted by a provider which is not in England or Wales, usually one which has degree-awarding powers in its own jurisdiction. For example, students study at a college in England for a degree awarded by a university in Scotland, Italy or the USA.
42The awarding provider is likely to retain responsibility for the overall academic quality and standards of any learning opportunity leading to the award of one of its qualifications (as a provider with UK degree-awarding powers does). The OIA’s remit extends only to providers in England and Wales and the principles of the Good Practice Framework will not apply to providers which are not in England or Wales. The OIA will have no jurisdiction to consider complaints about issues for which the awarding provider is responsible.
43Where the delivery provider in England or Wales is a member of the OIA Scheme, the Good Practice Framework, including this guidance, applies. The OIA would be able to consider complaints about acts or omissions of the delivery provider in England or Wales, provided that they fall within the OIA’s remit.
 Students studying at providers brought into the OIA Scheme by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 may only complain to the OIA if they are studying on a higher education course. See our glossary.
Awarding provider(s) in England or Wales and delivery provider(s) outside England and Wales
44Some higher education providers in England and Wales have entered into arrangements with a partner provider which is not in England or Wales for the latter to deliver learning opportunities which lead (or contribute) to one of their awards.
45Often, the awarding provider in England or Wales will have UK degree-awarding powers and so will retain responsibility for the overall academic quality and standards of any learning opportunity leading to the award of one of its qualifications. As a provider with UK degree awarding powers, the awarding provider in England or Wales will be a member of the OIA Scheme and the Good Practice Framework, including this guidance, applies. The OIA will be able to consider complaints from students about acts or omissions of the awarding provider, provided that they fall within the OIA’s remit.
46However, the delivery partner will not be a member of the OIA (the OIA’s remit extends only to providers in England and Wales). Therefore, students studying at the delivery partner will have no recourse to the OIA in relation to complaints about issues for which the delivery partner had responsibility under its arrangement with the awarding provider.
 This will also be the case where the delivery provider is in England and Wales but is not a member of the OIA Scheme.
47Other jurisdictions may have their own quality assurance and/or students complaints handling arrangements. UK providers working in partnerships in other jurisdictions should work out together how those requirements fit in with domestic requirements.
48If regulations local to the jurisdiction of the partner provider require that students have access to an external regulator or ombudsman in that jurisdiction, then it is a matter for the providers to determine how those arrangements would fit in with the students’ right to bring a complaint to the OIA about matters which the provider in England or Wales cannot delegate, such as the academic quality and standards of the qualifications that it is awarding.
49It is not in the providers’ or the students’ interests for students to be required to go through – or to be able to go through – several different external bodies in order to obtain satisfactory resolution to their complaint or academic appeal. The providers’ procedures should set out clearly the options available to students in the different jurisdictions.
50One option might be for students to be given the choice of which route of external redress to go down. The OIA can only reject a complaint if it has been considered by a court or by another EU Alternative Dispute Resolution entity (a recognised European complaints handling body), or is otherwise ineligible under the Rules of the OIA Scheme. Therefore, the student may elect to go down the overseas route of external redress but then subsequently complain to the OIA. In reviewing such a complaint, it is likely that the OIA would have regard to the relevant procedures, the fact that the student had been offered a choice of which avenue to pursue, and that the student had already sought redress through another external body.
51The case studies below illustrate some general points to consider. Much will depend upon the way in which the arrangement is structured and the jurisdiction(s) in which the partner(s) is/are based.
CASE STUDY 5
Joint degree – academic appeal
A student is studying for a Masters degree which is awarded jointly by Provider A, a university in England, and Provider B, a university in the Netherlands. Students split their time between the two providers.
Under the terms of the collaborative agreement between the providers, Provider B is responsible for considering academic appeals. The programme regulations and handbook also explain to students that all academic appeals are considered by Provider B, even if the assessment giving rise to the appeal was submitted to and marked by Provider A.
The student’s dissertation is marked by Provider A. She submits an academic appeal to Provider B on the grounds of procedural irregularity in the marking of her dissertation by Provider A. The appeal is considered by Provider B and rejected.
Provider B notifies Provider A of the outcome of the appeal and Provider A issues the student with a Completion of Procedures Letter. This will enable the student to complain to the OIA should she wish to do so.
The student should be able to complain to the OIA about acts or omissions of Provider A, wherever the academic appeals procedure is conducted.
CASE STUDY 6
Joint degree – accommodation complaint
A student is studying for a Masters degree which is awarded jointly by Provider A, a university in England, and Provider B, a university in France. Students split their time between the two providers. Under the agreement between the providers, each provider retains responsibility for service complaints arising while the student is studying at its premises.
Whilst studying at Provider A, the student complains to Provider A about his student accommodation. Provider A attempts to resolve the complaint informally. The student remains dissatisfied and so Provider A considers the complaint under the formal and then the review stages of its complaints procedure.
The complaint is upheld at the review stage. In the outcome letter, Provider A informs the student that it will issue a Completion of Procedures Letter to him if he requests one.
Complaints about the service provided by Provider A should be considered under Provider A’s procedures.
CASE STUDY 7
Joint programme with three awarding providers
A student is studying for a degree awarded jointly by Providers A, B and C. The three providers are in Wales, France and Belgium respectively. The degree programme is structured so that students spend one year studying at each of them.
Under their agreement, Provider B is the “lead” provider, and is responsible for handling all student complaints and academic appeals. The student submits an appeal against her final degree result on grounds of bias in Provider C’s assessment process. Provider B considers the academic appeal and rejects it.
The integrity of the assessment process relates to the academic standards of the qualification for which Provider A is jointly responsible. Therefore, Provider A issues a Completion of Procedures Letter at the conclusion of the academic appeal process even though that process was conducted by Provider B. This will enable the student to complain to the OIA about the outcome of the academic appeal.
The same student complains about the lecture room facilities at Provider A. Provider B is responsible for all complaints under the terms of the agreement and so it considers the complaint. However, this is an issue which arose while the student was studying at Provider A. Provider A should consider the complaint itself and/or issue a Completion of Procedures Letter after Provider B has considered the complaint so that the student can complain to the OIA.
CASE STUDY 8
Provider A, a university in England, and Provider B, a university in the USA, have developed a collaborative programme at the end of which students are awarded a UK degree and a US degree. Students rotate where they study between the UK and the USA.
Under the collaborative agreement, each Provider is responsible for considering complaints or academic appeals from students whilst they are studying at its campus.
A student studying at Provider B complains about the level of teaching at Provider B. That complaint is considered by Provider B. However, since that complaint concerns the academic quality of the learning opportunity, Provider A retains a responsibility for it.
Provider B comes under the jurisdiction of a local ombudsman. At the conclusion of the complaint, Provider B writes to the student offering her the choice of making a complaint to the local ombudsman or to the OIA. If the student chooses to complain to the OIA, Provider A issues a Completion of Procedures Letter.
Provider A should not prevent a student from complaining to the OIA about matters for which it is responsible.