The quality agenda in healthcare organizations is too broad to be managed with pre-audit document preparation alone. Patient safety, clinical processes, employee competency, information management, facility security and governance must work within the same system. For this reason, using the expressions "preparing for SKS" and "preparing for TÜSKA accreditation" interchangeably may lead the institution to plan according to the wrong standard.

The most important management need in 2025 and beyond is to distinguish the concepts and verify current obligations by organization type. Quality Standards in Health (SKS) is the Ministry of Health’s quality framework within Türkiye’s Health Quality System. Health Accreditation Standards (SAS) are the standard sets used by TÜSKA in its accreditation programmes. Conducting SKS work does not mean that an organization is automatically accredited by TÜSKA.

Management difference between SKS and SAS/TÜSKA

SKS is related to the standards and evaluation structure developed by the Ministry for health services. Organizations monitor their responsibilities within this framework according to their type and current regulations. SAS defines the standards of the accreditation program. The set to be applied is determined according to the type of institution and TÜSKA's current program guidance.

The two systems may have common topics such as patient and employee safety, process management, risk, documentation and improvement. However, having a common title does not mean that the purpose, application method or evaluation method of the programs are the same. The management team must first confirm in writing which obligation or voluntary target is involved.

Why should December 31, 2026 coverage be considered separately?

The Ministry of Health’s 13 May 2026 announcement states that hospitals, laboratories, medical centers, and dialysis centers holding an International Health Tourism Authorization Certificate must be accredited by TÜSKA by 31 December 2026. The same announcement separately defines the certification pathway administered by Provincial Health Directorates for other healthcare facilities.

This distinction means that organizations holding an authorization certificate do not all follow the same readiness plan. Using the same checklist for a physician practice or outpatient clinic as for a hospital can distort resource, timing, and accountability plans. Preparation should not begin until the organization type, authorization-certificate status, applicable program, and standards set have been verified through official channels.

It is not the number of documents, but the working system that matters

A common mistake in accreditation preparation is to try to cover most of the deficiencies by writing a procedure. However, an evaluable quality system. It requires that the written rule be known in the field, applied in different shifts, recorded reliably and the results reviewed by management.

The initial assessment should answer at least the following questions:

  • Have the current standards set and scope been verified from official sources?
  • Are the process owners and management sponsors of each requirement identified?
  • Are critical applications the same at night, on weekends and during rush hour?
  • Are the logs the natural output of the actual application?
  • Are findings prioritized by risk level?
  • Is the impact of corrective actions remeasured?

Turning corporate readiness into a program

A solid preparation program. It combines scope verification, gap analysis, process improvement, document and evidence layout, role-based training, self-assessment and management review in the same calendar. The quality unit can coordinate, but clinical leaders, human resources, information management, facilities management, purchasing and senior management continue to own their processes.

The internal target date should not be set on the same day as the official deadline. Application steps, evaluation capacity and a realistic buffer to close any gaps found are required. The current announcement and standard version should be re-checked at the publication and application stage.

Related Stratex routes

Official sources

This article is for general information purposes. The current standard set, transitional provision and application steps to be applied to the institution should be confirmed with official institutions.