A scheme committee and an impartiality committee, with balanced representation and no single interest in control. Both are being formed, and both are open.
The difference between a certification board and a company selling certificates is entirely in the governance. Everything else — the website, the logo, the examination software — can be bought.
Both committees are being formed and the board is in its formation phase. No scheme has been approved, no examination exists and no certification has been issued. This page describes the structure being built and the seats that are open — not a committee already sitting.
| Seat | Who it is for | What it involves |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioner — envelope and retrofit | Contractors and crew leads who do air sealing, insulation and retrofit work daily | Validating the job task analysis; saying which of it is theory |
| Practitioner — HVAC and heat pumps | Installers and designers doing retrofit heat pump work in Canadian climates | Sizing, commissioning and controls scope |
| Programme administrator | Utility, provincial agency and municipal retrofit programme staff | What a programme would actually need before it could reference a credential |
| Regulator or code authority | Safety authorities, building officials, provincial bodies | The boundary between certification and regulation, kept honest |
| Building owner or user | Owners, property managers, institutional and housing operators | The user interest — the one that is usually missing from these rooms |
| Impartiality committee | Anyone with no commercial interest in CABCEP and a low tolerance for nonsense | Reviewing threats and saying so publicly when we get it wrong |
| Educator | College and training programme staff | Content input — with no preference conferred on any programme, by rule |
Training providers can contribute to scheme content, and doing so confers no advantage on their courses, no preferred status and no mention anywhere. Committee members who train candidates are also bound by the two-year separation between training a candidate and examining them. If that makes a seat unattractive, the policy is working.
Meetings that start on time, a job task analysis to read and argue with, and the willingness to say that a proposed examination item tests something no practitioner does. It is unpaid, as committee work of this kind is, and expenses for in-person meetings are covered. The commitment is real but it is measured in hours a quarter rather than days a month.
Use the form on the home page, select the committee, and tell us what you actually do. We are looking for people who do the work, and for the user and regulatory interests that these committees are usually short of. A committee of enthusiasts for the idea of certification is exactly the wrong committee.
No. Committee work is unpaid; expenses for in-person meetings are covered.
No — it is the design. A balanced committee is one where no single interest can carry a decision, which requires people who disagree to be in the room.
Yes, with the disclosure recorded and the separation rules applied. Your courses gain nothing by it, and you cannot examine candidates you trained for two years.
Hours a quarter rather than days a month, concentrated around the job task analysis and the examination specification.
Related
The registry
Listing is free, verified against the issuing body, and open to practitioners certified by anyone. The registry is only worth anything if it is the whole industry.