For placement offices and reviewers

How Ethos lines up with the Standards of Good Practice.

If your office works to The Forum on Education Abroad's Standards of Good Practice (Enhanced Sixth Edition), this page shows where Ethos helps you meet them — clause by clause, in the Forum's own numbering. It's a map, not a certificate: Ethos is a pilot, and where it only partly meets a clause, the table says so.

4. Guiding principles

clausethe standard sayswhat Ethos doeswhere
4.2Collaboration and transparency — collaborations shall be equitable and transparent; responsibilities communicated to each responsible party and formalised in writing.Three parties with explicit, enforced roles. A review has no provider field; what universities receive, what companies can answer, and what the public sees are fixed by the system, not by policy. Rules are published with a changelog.Reviews, placement office, /about
4.3Ethics — operate in accordance with ethical principles; promote respect for all communities involved.Harm never publishes verbatim. A named company gets a count after a reply window, and a process status, never an allegation. Concerns are adjudicated by the placement office with the company's response on record.Company page, concerns
4.4 · 4.4.1 · 4.4.5Equity, diversity and inclusion — prioritise EDI; establish equitable and inclusive policies; foster inclusive communities.Reviewer-reported inclusion signals across the identities named in 6.1.9.2, shown once independently corroborated. Shortfalls route privately as discrimination concerns — never as a public badge.Review form, company page
4.4.7Disaggregate data by student demographics to check for equitable outcomes for all students.Inclusion signals and accommodation outcomes are aggregated per company. Planned: member universities receive disaggregated outcomes for their own students only.Company aggregates (partial)

5. Administrative framework

clausethe standard sayswhat Ethos doeswhere
5.1.4Procedures for collection and analysis of program evaluations; distribution of results; regular review of ongoing programs.Structured five-dimension evaluation of every host by the intern who was there, verified by a human, aggregated and published above an independence threshold.Reviews, company page
5.1.6Policies governing student matters including sexual misconduct, mental health and well-being, disciplinary and appeal processes.Harassment, exploitation, discrimination and safety are named categories on every review and in the Pulse tripwire. Each becomes a concern with an adjudication status the placement office owns.Review form, Pulse, concerns
5.1.7Tracking, responding to, and reporting critical incidents.A flagged Pulse note or a harm review creates a concern, emails the student's placement officers, and tells the student it happened. Status, notes, company response and outcome are kept on the record.Pulse, concerns
5.1.8Guidelines governing partnerships: privacy, confidentiality and disclosure practices.Pulse check-ins are private to the student by policy — no officer or moderator can read them. An uploaded agreement is read by one person and then deleted.Pulse, evidence
5.2.5 · 6.2.9Facilitate reasonable accommodations for students of varying needs and disability status; support accommodation needs during the program.Reviewers report whether they asked for an accommodation and whether it was met; the rate is published per company.Review form, company page
5.2.7Provide a safe environment that supports learning for all students.“I felt safe” is one of the five dimensions on every review and every company page.Reviews

6. Student learning and development

clausethe standard sayswhat Ethos doeswhere
6.1.9.2 · 6.2.6Communicate the significance of identities — racial, ethnic, sexual, gender, religious, ability, citizenship, socioeconomic — and support students navigating them in the local context.The inclusion signal set is drawn directly from this list.Inclusion signals
6.1.11 · 6.2.8Prepare and support students to manage safety, including sexual misconduct and identity-based discrimination.Two-layer detection (rules plus classifier) on every Pulse note; discrimination and harassment are named harm categories on every review; both reach a human. The model's only job is deciding when a person needs to be involved.Pulse, review routing
6.2.2Communicate expectations for conduct, consequences, and appeals processes.Every reviewer attests to truthfulness. Companies are notified before a concern counts and can respond; a placement office adjudicates and the outcome is recorded.Attestation, concerns
6.2.7Support students in accessing physical, mental, and emotional health and well-being services.Pulse asks about energy, stress and belonging weekly. A crisis signal in the note goes to a human immediately.Pulse
6.3.1Create opportunities for reflection after the program.Weekly Pulse during; a structured review after. The same student, the same questions, two moments — and the pulses become the evidence behind the review.Pulse, review form

Forum Guidelines drawn on

  • Guidelines for Internships Abroad (3rd ed., 2022)

    Managing expectations and relationships among the student, the internship site, the coordinating organisation and the home institution. Ethos makes those relationships explicit: the site is reviewed by the student, the coordinating organisation is outside the review layer, and the home institution is the member who receives what the student routes to it.

  • Guidelines for Best Practices in Responding to Sexual and Gender-Based Misconduct (2020)

    Pre-departure policy, student awareness of rights, consistent application, and constructive dialogue among home institution, provider and host site. A report reaches the placement office, which notifies the company, records its response and adjudicates.

  • Guidelines for Supporting Student Mental Health and Wellness (2025)

    Pulse's weekly check-in — energy, stress, belonging — is a private pulse rather than a transcript. “Supportive of mental health and wellbeing” is an inclusion signal interns can report.

Beyond the Forum

EU Quality Framework for Traineeships (Council Recommendation, 2024)

Written agreement, clear learning objectives, a named mentor, fair pay, and channels for trainees to report malpractice. Ethos verifies placements against the written agreement, scores supervision and hours against what was agreed, publishes whether costs were covered, and is itself a reporting channel that reaches someone who can act.

NACE definition of an internship

An extension of the classroom, for the student's benefit, with defined learning objectives, supervision by a professional, and routine feedback — not work a regular employee would routinely perform. “The work was substantive” and “a supervisor was present” test this on every review.

Inclusion signals

Reviewers may tag where a company stood out. Signals are positive only and appear once two or more independent reviewers report the same one. A shortfall is a concern, and concerns route privately — a company is never publicly tagged as failing on identity.

  • LGBTQ+ inclusive 6.2.6
  • Gender-equitable treatment 6.2.6
  • Racially and ethnically inclusive 6.2.6
  • Religious practice respected 6.2.6
  • Made disability accommodations 5.2.5, 6.2.9
  • Neurodiversity-aware 5.2.5, 6.2.9
  • Fair to international and visa-holding interns 6.2.10
  • Supportive of non-native speakers 6.1.7
  • Paid, or costs covered 4.4.4, 6.1.13
  • Supportive of mental health and wellbeing 6.2.7

What this page does not claim

That Ethos is compliant, complete, or a substitute for an organisation's own policies. The Standards are for organisations; this is a tool they can use to meet some of them with evidence rather than assurance. Clauses about finances, credit, visas and pre-departure logistics are out of scope and not listed.

Pilot findings, once there are any, go here. How Ethos is run.