An NZQA IQA and an Australian Skills Assessment Answer Different Questions, and Neither Country Accepts the Other's

The single most useful sentence for anyone holding one document and being asked for the other sits on NZQA’s own page:

“We cannot accept recognition evaluations from other countries because our evaluation compares an overseas qualification to a level or a qualification on the NZQCF.”

An Australian skills assessment is not a substitute for a New Zealand IQA. The reverse is also true, for the same structural reason: an Australian assessing authority assesses against Australian criteria for an Australian occupation. The two documents are not degraded versions of each other. They answer different questions, ask for different evidence, and are read by different people.

This page sets out what each one actually is. It does not predict any outcome, and it is not an immigration service in either country.

What an NZQA IQA is

NZQA’s qualification recognition service “evaluates overseas qualifications to see where they would be on the New Zealand Qualifications and Credentials Framework (NZQCF)” — specifically “Level 1 to 10” and “Type of qualification”. That evaluation is the International Qualification Assessment. NZQA says it “allows individuals, employers and organisations to see how qualified a person is for work and immigration purposes.”

The output is a recognition statement. NZQA: “Your recognition statement will contain a statement that compares the overseas qualification to the NZQCF.” And crucially: “Your recognition statement is valid indefinitely.” A separate practical note — “we only retain documents for 10 years”, so keep your own copy.

Anyone can check it is genuine: “Potential employers, education providers and organisations such as Immigration New Zealand can verify the authenticity of your NZQA recognition statement online.” NZQA adds the limit in the next sentence: “This is not a verification of the qualification you were awarded.”

The difference that trips people: an IQA does not look at your work

NZQA’s list of what it cannot evaluate is explicit, and one entry carries an instruction rather than a mere exclusion:

• “letters or certificates of work experience – do not submit evidence of work experience with your IQA application”
• “professional registration, permits, licenses or certifications”
• “membership certificates issued by chartered bodies, unless they are formally recognised by the relevant government or government-mandated education bodies in the country of award, at the time of award”
• “professional or specialist training certificates (for example, CISCO or Microsoft expert awards)”
• “secondary school qualifications”
• “incomplete programmes of study”
• “programmes of study not leading to the award of a qualification”
• “certificates of attendance”
• “certificates of proficiency (if they do not include formal learning programmes)”
• “apprenticeships without formal training programmes”

An Australian professional skills assessment does the opposite. VETASSESS: “You need a suitable assessment of both your qualifications and your employment for your skills assessment to be successful”, and its FAQ answers the obvious follow-up directly — “All full skills assessments require both qualifications and employment experience.” ACS likewise assesses qualifications and then “the amount of relevant work experience required to meet the suitability criteria.”

So the two processes want opposite envelopes. Sending an Australian-style employment dossier to NZQA delays your application; sending an NZQA-style qualification-only file to VETASSESS produces an incomplete one.

What NZQA will evaluate, and the size floor

NZQA can evaluate “a tertiary or vocational upper-secondary qualification”, “qualifications awarded by a provider that is recognised nationally and accredited by the relevant government authority in the country of award and country of delivery”, and requires “a minimum of 400 notional learning hours (approximately 10 weeks of full time academic study).”

That second condition — recognised in the country of award and the country of delivery — is the one that catches transnational programmes, where the awarding institution and the teaching campus are in different countries. The distinction is worked through in awarding country versus study country.

How NZQA reaches its answer

NZQA publishes a two-stage method.

Stage 1, checking the qualification. “NZQA checks the qualification within the education system in which it was gained. We try to establish that the qualification: was formally issued by a recognised awarding body, and met the regulations which applied within the relevant education system at the time.”

Stage 2, evaluating the qualification. “We then look at how the qualification works within its own country”, drawing on “the country’s qualifications framework, if it has one” and “any existing recognition arrangement we may have with the country”. The stated factors are “entrance requirements for the qualification”, “the duration of the learning programme and volume of study”, and “the quality assurance system that underpins the education system and the specific qualification.”

Note what is absent from that list: subject content, unit-by-unit matching, and occupational relevance. That is precisely what an Australian occupational assessment is built around — ACS runs a percentage test on ICT units and then a second test of whether those units are closely related to the nominated occupation, as set out in what ACS counts as an ICT major. An IQA is a placement exercise. An ACS or VETASSESS assessment is a fit-to-occupation exercise.

The Australian side has no single equivalent of the IQA

New Zealand has one credentialing agency for this purpose — NZQA says so: “In New Zealand, NZQA is the credentialing agency.” Australia does not concentrate the function the same way. What exists instead:

• The Department of Education’s general-purpose assessment, which is the closest structural match to an IQA — “a guide to the level of an overseas postsecondary qualification in terms of a qualification on the Australian Qualifications Framework”. But it comes with a disclaimer no IQA carries: “Our assessments serve as advice only and are not legally binding. They do not allow you to: work; get registration, licensing, professional membership or meet industry requirements; migrate to Australia; study at an Australian university or other education provider.” It is also gated — you can apply only if referred by a state or territory Overseas Qualifications Unit, or you live in New South Wales, or your occupation has no registration, licensing, professional membership or industry requirements.
• State and territory Overseas Qualifications Units, free for Australian citizens and permanent residents, which the department describes as “usually faster and for a lower cost than ours”.
• Occupation-specific assessing authorities — ACS, VETASSESS, Engineers Australia and others — which assess against one nominated occupation and not against the framework in general.

Which of those an individual can use, and when, is mapped in the free official sources an individual can actually use.

Validity, appeals and the fact that practice moves

The two systems handle time very differently.

NZQA. The recognition statement “is valid indefinitely”. But NZQA warns that indefinite does not mean frozen: “Our recognition practice is updated regularly to reflect international benchmarks and good practice. This may result in a different recognition outcome.” Appeals run on a short clock — “You can appeal the outcome of your evaluation within 20 working days from the date your recognition outcome statement was issued”, with a transitional rule that “Applications submitted before 30 July 2026 may apply for a review within 3 months of the published date on the recognition statement.” Outside that window, “You cannot appeal”, and the remedy is to apply and pay for a fresh IQA.

ACS. “Suitable outcomes are valid for 2 years”, and ACS “does not currently support Outcome Reassessment nor Outcome Renewals”. It makes the same warning about moving criteria: “it is sometimes possible for returning applicants to receive an outcome not in line with their previous assessment outcomes.”

VETASSESS. Review within 90 days of the original decision, appeal within 90 days of the review outcome, with “The appeal outcome is final, and there is no opportunity to re-appeal”; reassessment within 12 months; reissue of the letter available for seven years.

Same family of documents, three different clocks. Do not carry an assumption from one authority to another.

What an IQA costs

NZQA publishes its fees, and states “All fees include GST (where applicable) and are subject to change.” As published on 3 September 2026, in New Zealand dollars:

Service	Fee
Standard IQA (one qualification)	445
Skill Shortage List IQA	610
Teaching IQA (includes two further Standard IQAs)	746
Teaching assessment add-on to an existing Standard IQA	301
Skill Shortage List assessment add-on	165
Pre-1998 qualification surcharge	275
Appeal	765
Overseas Study Assessment	165

Two of those product names matter for understanding the design. The Teaching IQA exists “for the purpose of registering as a teacher with the Teaching Council, or for teacher salary assessment purposes” — that is, NZQA sells a version of the evaluation shaped for a registration body, which is itself evidence that a plain IQA is not a registration decision. The Skill Shortage List IQA adds “assessment under one occupation on an Immigration New Zealand Skill Shortage List”. Anything about immigration itself belongs to Immigration New Zealand, and anything about Australian visas to the Department of Home Affairs — not to this site and not to NZQA.

NZQA also states “There is no refund if you choose to cancel your application”, and add-ons “can be added to your application up to 12 months after completion of your IQA.”

Choosing between them

The question is not which document is stronger. It is which country’s decision-maker you are writing to.

1. A New Zealand employer, education provider or registration body asking about an overseas qualification wants an NZQA recognition statement. Nothing from Australia substitutes; NZQA says so.
2. An Australian occupational process wants that occupation’s assessing authority. An IQA maps onto the NZQCF and says nothing about an ANZSCO occupation.
3. Check before you buy either. NZQA’s own advice: “Before applying for an IQA you could ask the person or organisation you are applying to whether they will accept a qualification evaluation from another country.”
4. If you are moving between the two countries as an already-registered practitioner, neither of these documents is the mechanism — trans-Tasman mutual recognition is a separate statutory route that works off your registration, not your degree.

For the framework question underneath all of this — whether NZQCF level 7 and AQF level 7 mean the same thing — see New Zealand and Australian framework levels.

This site summarises published rules. It is not NZQA, not an Australian assessing authority, and it does not evaluate qualifications or predict outcomes.