NEW RICS APC GUIDANCE New Candidate and Counsellor Guides

Jen Lemen

Jen is a partner and co-founder of Property Elite.

RICS Assessor

In this article, Jen takes a look at the updated RICS APC candidate and counsellor guides. These take effect immediately, so be aware of the changes if you are a current candidate or counsellor. 

APC Candidate Guide 

There are a number of important updates made to the RICS APC Candidate Guide, which we have summarised and will then cover in detail below: 

• Backdating 

• Diary and log book 

• Case study validity 

• Word count 

• Access arrangements 

• AI and plagiarism. 

Backdating 

If a candidate is pursuing 12 or 24 months’ structured training (i.e., RICS accredited degree and 0-5 years of experience for 24 months or 5-10 years for 12 months), then they must record a structured training diary. 

A candidate must be enrolled to start recording their structured training diary. Thus, it is imperative that a candidate enrols as soon as they are able to, otherwise their structured training period will not commence. A candidate may, of course, need more than the minimum required structured training period, and can keep recording their diary after the minimum 12 or 24-month period has passed. 

However, if a candidate leaves enrolling too late and is ready at the earliest point possible to submit, then they will be left disappointed. The earliest point at which a candidate can submit is at the end of 11 or 23 months of structured training (for the 12 and 24-month routes respectively). This means that by the time the candidate sits their final assessment interview, they will have completed the minimum 12 or 24 months of structured training. 

RICS permit candidates to backdate their enrolment by up to 6 months, which can be helpful in the event a candidate has forgotten to enrol, or did not enrol at the earliest possible point. There is no leeway on this 6-month duration to backdate by, however. When submitting a request to backdate enrolment for structured training, the candidate will need to send RICS proof of support signed by their counsellor or employer. Without this, RICS will not be able to approve the request. 

RICS has also confirmed that a candidate’s period of structured training does not have to be continuous, accounting for gaps between roles or periods out of work. Furthermore, a candidate’s structured training diary is valid for a period of 5 years rolling back from the candidate’s chosen submission window. 

Special dispensation applies to candidates who have undertaken a placement year within a RICS-accredited sandwich degree programme. In this circumstance, the candidate does not need to enrol during the placement year and simply needs to confirm their position to RICS. RICS will then allow the candidate to backdate their structured training diary to the beginning of the placement year. This means that for 24-month structured training candidates, the second 12 months will be post-graduation when the candidate returns to work (in the same or a different organisation). The candidate will, of course, need formally to enrol at the beginning of this period of employment, post-graduation. 

RICS has also updated its 12 and 24-month structured training plan, which can be found on page 9 of the new Candidate Guide (see https://www.rics.org/content/dam/ricsglobal/documents/join-rics/APC-candidate-guide_June-25.pdf). This provides guidance on when a candidate should undertake certain tasks and meet with their counsellor. 

Diary and log book 

I often see candidates (and counsellors) confused about the difference between the structured training diary and the log book. The existence of the latter is often not known about at all! 

Candidates will no doubt be familiar with the structured training diary. This is a section that needs to be filled out regularly on the RICS Assessment Platform. 

Candidates need to record at least 200 days (12 months’ structured training) or 400 days (24 months’ structured training) of experience in their diary to be eligible to proceed to final assessment. Each diary entry requires a technical competency name, a level (1, 2 or 3) at least a half day recorded and detail of the activities undertaken. 

Candidates can record diary entries in larger blocks with a number of activities in each. This could be recorded on a weekly, fortnightly or monthly basis, accounting for the fact that often surveyors will deal with a number of competencies in one day. It is, therefore, often difficult to record accurate diary entries where a candidate may only spend a few hours each day on each competency. 

Diary entries are only required for the technical, not the mandatory, competencies. We also recommend allocating most days to levels 2 and 3 (whichever is the highest declared), and recording minimal level 1 days. Learning at level 1 will instead primarily be recorded in the CPD record. 

The full, detailed structured training diary is NOT submitted to RICS as part of the final assessment submission. However, the diary days (per level and per technical competency) are drawn out into a summary table, known as the log book. This is included on the Preview Submission that can be generated as a PDF from the RICS Assessment Platform. This will be available to assessors within the first few pages of a candidate’s APC submission and will help them to understand the candidate’s role and technical competencies. 

Candidates must hit the minimum requirements in terms of diary days. It is also sensible to declare a reasonable spread of experience, sufficient level 3 (or level 2, if higher) experience and ideally at least 20-30 days of experience per competency. RICS has no set minimum requirement on the number of diary days per level and per technical competency, so candidates will need to base this upon their experience and ensure any gaps in their experience are filled in good time. 

If a candidate does not include their log book within the work submitted to RICS, then the submission will be rejected as invalid. The candidate will then need to re-submit in the next available interview window. 

Case study validity 

RICS has provided clarity on the validity period for the case study. This is a 2-year period rolling back from the candidate’s submission date. A candidate must only discuss (i.e., in their key issues) activities that they have been involved with during this period). 

The wider project or instruction may have been running for a longer period, however. RICS has also confirmed that case studies will be rejected as invalid where the candidate does not clearly state the start date (and end date, if applicable) of the project or instruction. 

Word count 

First of all, RICS will reject any submissions as invalid if the word count (as calculated on Microsoft Word) for the summary of experience or case study is over the stated limits. The word count limits are therefore absolute – not like at university where there may have been 10% leeway. A candidate can be under the limit, but too far under is not advisable as there will be a missed opportunity to use the extra words to add depth and breadth within the submission. 

In the summary of experience, the word count only includes the text added into each box. It does not include any titles, competency names or levels included in the RICS template. 

In the case study, the word count should be stated at the end of the case study and candidates should state exactly what has been included. The word count should include any content added to the RICS template, starting after the contents page and ending before the appendices. This includes any of the candidate’s own headings and sub-headings. The word count will not include the cover page, contents page, confidentiality statement and all appendices (including the competency table in Appendix A). 

The word count requirements have also been similarly updated in the AssocRICS candidate guide. 

Access arrangements 

RICS commits to preventing discrimination in line with the protected characteristics defined under the Equality Act 2010. 

It will make reasonable adjustments if a candidate is defined as disabled by the Equality Act 2010 and would be disadvantaged in relation to someone who is not disabled (if the adjustments were not made). 

Any reasonable adjustments will be made on a case-by-case basis and tailored to the candidate’s specific needs. A candidate can apply for reasonable adjustments when they submit using the RICS Assessment Platform. 

If a candidate is experiencing a temporary, significant personal difficulty at the time of assessment then they can apply for a special consideration. 

Both types of access arrangement have an accompanying RICS policy document which candidates should read for clarity. We encourage any candidates who require access arrangements to speak up and request this from RICS – there is absolutely no shame and no negative perception of a candidate if they do. Candidates should be treated with respect and dignity by RICS and its assessment panel in all circumstances. 

AI and plagiarism 

RICS now includes guidance on the use of AI, alongside plagiarism, in the new Candidate Guide. RICS states that candidates cannot use AI tools to write their submissions. This includes content generating tools such as ChatGPT. 

However, candidates can use proof reading tools to assist with grammar, spelling and word count reduction. Where a candidate has identified needs and a technological aid or AI is necessary or desirable to use, they will need to submit a reasonable adjustment application for approval from RICS. 

RICS will also continue to undertake plagiarism and AI detection checks as usual. An offence of this nature is extremely serious and the candidate will be subject to investigation and potential disciplinary action by RICS Regulation. 

SPA Candidate Guide 

In the SPA candidate guide, RICS has provided clarification in relation to the competency requirements for the three case studies. 

In particular, case study (technical 1) must focus on a ‘minimum of two core technical competencies, including at least one to Level 3. The competencies must be from the core list in the chosen pathway’. Case study (technical 2) must focus on a ‘minimum of two technical competencies. The competencies must be from the core and/ or optional list in the chosen pathway and must be different to the competencies used for case study (technical 1)’. 

All three case studies should provide evidence of the candidate’s SPA competencies. In addition, each case study must clearly reference the mandatory and technical competencies demonstrated. 

APC Counsellor Guide 

Previously, there were separate counsellor guides for the various APC routes. Now they have been combined into one simple counsellor guide, with separate advice for the structured training, preliminary review, SPA, specialist and academic APC routes and AssocRICS. 

RICS has separately clarified that all counsellors need to have completed the RICS Counsellor Training to be able to sign off candidates on the RICS Assessment Platform. We recommend that all counsellors check on the RICS Assessment Platform if their training is outstanding. If it is, then we recommend undertaking the online module as soon as possible to avoid any issues arising around the sign off of candidates. Leaving it until the last minute is only likely to cause issues and discontent with candidates.