ICEQC-CER-002 — Remote Evidence Assessment and Verification Procedure

This Procedure is ICEQC-CER-002, Remote Evidence Assessment and Verification Procedure.

The purpose of this Procedure is to establish a consistent, proportionate and verifiable method for conducting an ICEQC certification assessment entirely through remote evidence activities.

This Procedure provides for:

This Procedure is a controlled ICEQC certification procedure and applies to persons performing, supporting, reviewing or making use of remote evidence assessment activities on behalf of ICEQC.

An applicant participating in an assessment under this Procedure shall comply with the provisions expressly applying to applicants and shall provide the access, information and cooperation reasonably required for the assessment.

Compliance with this Procedure supports an evidence assessment and does not of itself establish conformity of the certification object.

A conclusion prepared under this Procedure is an input to the applicable ICEQC certification decision process. The person authorized to make the certification decision retains responsibility for determining whether the evidence and assessment record are sufficient for that decision.

Nothing in this Procedure authorizes an assessment team to grant a licence, approve an organization to provide education, recognize a programme or qualification, determine legal compliance for a public authority or make a representation outside the stated ICEQC certification scope.

This Procedure applies to initial certification, extension or reduction of scope, renewal, surveillance, change review, corrective-action verification and other certification activities for which ICEQC requires evidence.

This Procedure may be applied to an organization, service, process, digital service, product, defined claim or person within an ICEQC certification scheme.

Remote evidence may relate to one or more of the following:

ICEQC shall not require or perform an on-site visit under this Procedure.

Where a requirement cannot be verified remotely with sufficient confidence, ICEQC shall apply clause 102 and Schedule 4 and shall not treat the inability to verify as evidence of conformity.

A remote evidence assessment shall be governed by the following principles:

Commercial urgency, cost, client importance, intended publicity or a desired certification date shall not reduce the evidence required for a reliable conclusion.

A different operating model, record format, technology or organizational structure shall not be treated adversely solely because it differs from a customary form.

This Procedure shall be applied with:

This Procedure governs the remote selection, acquisition, verification and evaluation of evidence. The applicable requirement document governs what shall be fulfilled, and the applicable decision procedure governs findings, corrective action and the certification decision.

A more specific ICEQC document may require an additional method or control where the certification object presents a particular risk. It shall not reduce the evidence sufficiency, integrity, impartiality or protection requirements established by this Procedure.

Where two applicable provisions appear inconsistent, the matter shall be referred to the ICEQC Certification Scheme Committee before the affected assessment conclusion is finalized.

The ICEQC Certification Scheme Committee owns this Procedure and shall control its interpretation, maintenance and authorized use.

Only a person authorized for the relevant certification scheme and assessment function may approve an evidence assessment plan, lead a remote assessment or issue an assessment conclusion under this Procedure.

A technical expert, interpreter, remote witness facilitator or technology support person may support an assessment only within an assigned role and shall not exercise an assessment authority for which that person has not been authorized.

A departure from an approved evidence assessment plan shall be recorded, justified and approved under clause 53 before it is relied upon for a certification conclusion.

In this Procedure:

applicant — an organization or person that applies for certification and accepts responsibility for the certification object, certification scope, submitted information and continuing conformity.

assessment conclusion — the documented conclusion of an assessment team concerning whether verified evidence supports C, NC or confirmed NA for an applicable assessment unit.

assessment team — one or more persons assigned by ICEQC to conduct an assessment, including a team leader where appointed, but excluding a person providing solely administrative or technical support.

authenticity — the extent to which evidence is established as originating from the represented person, system, event, object or source.

certification object — an organization, service, process, programme, digital service, product, defined claim, person or defined combination evaluated under an applicable ICEQC certification scheme.

certification scope — the exact boundary of certification, including the certification object, responsible client, activities, learner groups, locations, delivery modes, platforms, versions, models, jurisdictions, roles and stated exclusions.

corroboration — confirmation of a material fact through another reliable source, method or item of evidence.

currency — the extent to which evidence relates to the current certification object and the period relevant to the assessment.

direct evidence — evidence obtained by the assessment team through direct access, live interaction, live observation or a record generated by the activity or system being verified.

evidence — verifiable information relevant to determining whether a specified requirement is fulfilled.

evidence assessment plan — the controlled plan defining the requirements, evidence sources, methods, samples, responsibilities, safeguards and contingencies for a remote assessment.

evidence index — the controlled list that identifies submitted or accessed evidence and connects it to the relevant requirement, source, date, version and access condition.

evidence limitation — a condition that restricts the relevance, authenticity, integrity, completeness, currency, representativeness or traceability of evidence.

indirect evidence — evidence that supports a conclusion through report, representation, analysis or inference but is not obtained directly from the activity, system, person or object being verified.

integrity — the extent to which evidence is complete and protected from unauthorized alteration, substitution, omission or destruction.

learner — a person who participates in, uses or directly receives an educational provision.

recognized external evidence — evidence produced outside ICEQC and the applicant by a provider whose identity, competence, authority, independence, method and reported scope have been found suitable for the matter for which the evidence is used.

remote assessment — an assessment conducted without an ICEQC on-site visit through secure documentary, data, communication, demonstration, observation or recognized external evidence methods.

remote witness facilitator — a person at or able to access the relevant location, system or activity who follows the assessment team's directions for a remote view or demonstration and does not make an ICEQC assessment conclusion.

representativeness — the extent to which selected evidence reflects the relevant population, period, locations, delivery modes, variations and operating conditions.

traceability — the ability to connect evidence to its source, time, version, certification scope, requirement and assessment conclusion.

The word shall states a requirement. The word may states a permission. The word including introduces a non-exhaustive list and does not enlarge or restrict a requirement.

A reference to a record includes reliable information maintained in any medium.

A reference to viewing evidence includes controlled live access where ICEQC does not retain a copy.

ICEQC retains responsibility for each assessment activity performed under this Procedure, including an activity performed with external personnel, technology or evidence.

ICEQC shall:

ICEQC shall not transfer responsibility for evidence selection or assessment conclusion to the applicant, a technology provider, an external evidence provider or an automated system.

ICEQC shall not direct the applicant to create a record retrospectively in a manner that misrepresents past operation. A current statement prepared to explain earlier operation shall be identified as such and shall not be treated as a contemporaneous record.

The applicant is responsible for the truthfulness, completeness and authorized submission of information supplied for an assessment.

The applicant shall:

The applicant shall not determine the final sample, restrict access to unfavourable evidence or present an exception as representative of routine operation.

An applicant may identify a confidentiality, safety, legal, accessibility or operational concern and propose an alternative means of verification. ICEQC shall consider the alternative under clauses 20 and 43 but is not required to accept a method that cannot produce sufficient evidence.

The assessment team shall conduct the assessment with professional judgement, procedural discipline and respect for affected persons.

The team leader, where appointed, shall be responsible for:

An assessor shall evaluate only matters within that assessor's competence and assignment.

A person providing technical, administrative or interpretation support shall not prompt a conclusion, filter material information or communicate privately with the applicant about the likely result.

Every person assigned to an assessment shall disclose an actual, potential or perceived conflict of interest before receiving applicant evidence.

A person shall not participate in an assessment activity where prior employment, consulting, financial interest, close relationship, advocacy, competition or another circumstance could reasonably impair impartiality, unless the conflict has been evaluated and an effective safeguard has been approved.

A person who designed, implemented or sold a material part of the certification object shall not evaluate that part for ICEQC.

Fees, referral arrangements, future work, commercial targets or the applicant's desired outcome shall not influence evidence selection, sample size, assessment conclusion or reporting.

A disagreement between the applicant and assessment team concerning evidence shall be resolved through the applicable ICEQC process and shall not be resolved by negotiation of a favourable conclusion.

Evidence shall be treated according to its sensitivity and the access conditions established by ICEQC and the applicant.

Before access is granted, ICEQC shall identify persons authorized to receive the evidence, the assessment purpose and the intended form of access or retention.

Restricted evidence shall be accessible only to persons whose assigned function requires it.

The assessment team shall not disclose personal, commercial, security, assessment-item or other restricted information in the assessment report beyond what is necessary to support the conclusion.

Where reporting a fact is necessary without reproducing restricted content, the report shall identify the evidence reference, method of verification and relevant conclusion in a form that preserves confidentiality and remains reviewable by an authorized decision maker.

An obligation of confidentiality continues after the assessment assignment ends.

ICEQC shall obtain, view, copy and retain only information reasonably necessary for the assessment purpose.

The assessment plan shall prefer, in descending order where equally effective:

The selected method shall preserve the ability to establish authenticity, integrity, relevance and traceability.

ICEQC shall use approved systems, access controls and transfer methods for assessment information.

An assessor shall not request or accept an applicant's personal password, authentication secret or unrestricted administrator credential. Where system access is required, the applicant shall provide a temporary, role-limited or supervised access method.

Evidence shall not be placed in an unapproved personal account, device, messaging channel or storage location.

Access shall be withdrawn when no longer required, and retained evidence shall be disposed of in accordance with the applicable ICEQC retention rule.

Remote assessment activity shall be arranged so that participation does not expose a learner, employee or other person to avoidable harm, intimidation, retaliation, loss of service or improper disclosure.

Participation by a learner shall be voluntary unless the applicable relationship lawfully requires participation and appropriate safeguards are in place.

A participant shall be informed, in a form appropriate to the person, of:

The assessment team shall not seek personal educational, health, family, financial or disciplinary information unless it is necessary to verify an applicable requirement and an appropriate protection method has been established.

A person's refusal to participate shall not, by itself, be treated as adverse evidence. ICEQC may require an alternative source where the underlying matter remains material.

Direct interaction with a minor or another person requiring additional protection shall be used only where the assessment purpose cannot be achieved by a less intrusive method.

Before the interaction, ICEQC shall confirm:

A minor shall not be interviewed privately in a manner that prevents appropriate safeguarding oversight.

Recording of a minor shall not be the default method and shall require a recorded necessity, authorization and retention basis.

Remote observation shall not intrude into a private home space beyond what is necessary and voluntarily made available for the assessment purpose.

Where safe and reliable participation cannot be arranged, ICEQC shall use another evidence source or record an evidence limitation.

ICEQC shall provide a reasonably accessible route for submitting evidence, participating in meetings and requesting an adjustment.

A reasonable arrangement may include:

An arrangement shall not alter the applicable requirement or direct the assessment conclusion.

The assessment team shall record an arrangement that materially changes the planned method and shall evaluate whether it affects evidence reliability.

The following conduct is prohibited:

Suspected prohibited conduct shall be preserved, reported and addressed under clause 61 and the applicable ICEQC decision procedure.

Evidence shall be obtained for the purpose of determining whether a defined requirement is fulfilled within the certification scope and relevant period.

An assessment conclusion shall distinguish:

A policy, intention, contract or representation does not alone establish effective implementation where the requirement concerns actual operation or result.

An isolated operational record does not alone establish a controlled and consistently implemented arrangement where the requirement concerns continuing capability.

The quantity of evidence shall not substitute for its relevance or reliability.

Evidence relied upon for an assessment conclusion shall be evaluated for:

An assessment team shall not apply the attributes as a numerical score or average.

A material weakness in one attribute shall be addressed by corroboration, an alternative method, an expanded sample, a limitation or a conclusion that evidence is insufficient.

Evidence is sufficient where its combined quality and extent permit a competent and impartial person to reach the assessment conclusion with reasonable confidence.

Sufficiency shall be determined according to:

A fixed document count, interview count or sample size shall not be used as a substitute for the sufficiency determination unless expressly prescribed by the applicable ICEQC scheme.

The least burdensome combination of evidence that achieves sufficiency shall be used.

A material fact shall be corroborated where:

Corroboration may be obtained through a different record, person, system, time period, method or recognized external source.

Consistency among several items does not establish reliability where the items originate from the same unverified source or depend on the same underlying assertion.

Where evidence converges, the assessment record shall identify the material facts confirmed rather than reproduce unnecessary duplicate material.

Direct evidence shall normally be preferred where reasonably available and proportionate.

Indirect evidence may support an assessment conclusion where its origin, method, limitation and relationship to the requirement are established.

An applicant's self-evaluation may organize and explain evidence but shall not replace verification of the underlying facts.

Marketing material, testimonial, satisfaction statement, award, membership, badge or unsupported declaration shall not alone establish conformity.

Where direct evidence cannot reasonably be obtained, the assessment team shall record why and determine whether the available indirect evidence is sufficient when corroborated.

One item or sample may support more than one requirement where its relevance to each requirement is clear and traceable.

ICEQC shall not request duplicate documents, repeated explanations or separate uploads solely because the applicable requirements are stated in different clauses.

Evidence already held by ICEQC may be reused where:

The assessment team may accept a reliable applicant index, cross-reference or controlled link instead of another copy of the same evidence.

Bulk transfer of a record population shall not be required where assessor-selected access, a limited extract, live query or representative sample can achieve the assessment purpose.

The assessment team shall establish authenticity and integrity to a degree proportionate to the ease of manipulation and consequence of error.

Controls may include:

A screenshot, export, scan, recording or copied record shall be treated according to its verifiable origin and integrity, not according to appearance alone.

Where only a copy is available, the assessment team shall determine whether its use requires source confirmation or corroboration.

Evidence shall include the information necessary to understand the relevant event, decision, population, exception, limitation and result.

A summary shall identify its underlying population, period, inclusion rules, exclusions, method and responsible source where these matters affect interpretation.

A redaction or omission shall not conceal information material to the assessment conclusion.

Where a material part cannot be disclosed, ICEQC may use controlled viewing, an authorized intermediary, a narrower extract or another verification method.

If the omitted information remains necessary and cannot be verified, the evidence is insufficient for the affected conclusion.

The evidence assessment plan shall define the period relevant to each material requirement.

Evidence shall reflect current operation and, where the requirement concerns consistency, a period sufficient to demonstrate implementation over time.

An earlier record may be relied upon where it remains relevant and the assessment team confirms that no material change has invalidated it.

A newly implemented arrangement shall not be treated as consistently effective solely because a policy has been issued or one successful record exists.

Where an assessment occurs before sufficient operating history exists, ICEQC shall restrict the conclusion to what can be established, defer the affected requirement or require follow-up evidence under the applicable scheme.

Evidence in a language not understood by the assigned assessor shall be translated or interpreted to the extent necessary for reliable evaluation.

A translation shall identify the source document, language, translator or translation method, date and any material limitation.

Machine-assisted translation may be used for preliminary review. A material statement supporting an assessment conclusion shall be verified by a competent person where mistranslation could affect the result.

A transcript shall be checked against the source recording or confirmed by the relevant participant where it is relied upon for a material conclusion.

The source-language evidence remains the evidence of record unless ICEQC expressly accepts a verified translation as controlling for the assessment purpose.

Evidence produced, summarized, translated, classified or analysed by an automated function shall be identified as such where the function could affect meaning, completeness or result.

The assessment team shall establish, as applicable:

Generated narrative, simulated data, synthetic media or reconstructed records shall not be represented as contemporaneous evidence of actual operation.

Automated analysis may assist evidence navigation, comparison or anomaly detection but shall not make the assessment conclusion or certification decision.

Where manipulation, impersonation or synthetic generation is reasonably suspected, the evidence shall be challenged under clause 25 and Schedule 3 before reliance.

Recognized external evidence may support a matter that requires independent, physical, technical, professional or other specialist verification.

The existence of external evidence does not require ICEQC to accept its conclusion without review.

Reliance shall be limited to the verified identity, competence, authority, independence, method, object, location, version, date and result stated in the evidence.

Recognized external evidence shall not be used to transfer the ICEQC certification decision to an external provider.

Detailed controls for recognized external evidence are established in Part 10.

The assessment team shall record material evidence that is unavailable, contradictory, adverse, restricted or inconsistent with an applicant statement.

The applicant shall be given a reasonable opportunity to identify an error, supply context or provide further relevant evidence.

An explanation shall be evaluated against the evidence and shall not displace an unresolved contradiction merely because it is plausible.

Adverse evidence shall not be excluded solely because it concerns an exception, complaint, failure, former employee, discontinued product or corrected event.

The assessment team shall determine whether the matter:

Each material item relied upon shall have a unique evidence reference.

The assessment record shall enable an authorized reviewer to determine:

A copied extract shall remain traceable to the source population and selection method.

A material change to evidence after submission shall preserve the earlier version and record the reason, date and person making the change.

Traceability information may be consolidated in the evidence index and need not be repeated in every assessment note.

ICEQC remote evidence assessment uses the following methods:

A method identifies how evidence is obtained and verified. It does not identify a certification level, rank, grade, quality category or degree of conformity.

One or more methods may be applied within the same assessment and to the same requirement.

Method selection shall be made requirement by requirement or for a defined group of related requirements. The certification object shall not be assigned one method merely for administrative convenience where different matters require different evidence.

The assessment plan shall state the selected method and the reason it is capable of producing sufficient evidence.

R-A consists principally of asynchronous or controlled remote review of authenticated documents, records, data, system outputs, public information and written clarifications.

R-A may include:

R-A may be selected where:

R-A shall not be used as the sole method where the requirement depends materially on actual behaviour, identity, live system operation, current implementation, environmental condition or another matter that records alone cannot establish.

Where R-A is sufficient, ICEQC shall not require an R-B activity solely to make the assessment appear more extensive.

R-B consists of live remote interaction controlled by the assessment team to verify persons, activities, systems, environments or assessor-selected evidence.

R-B may include:

R-B shall be selected where one or more of the following applies:

R-B shall be planned under Part 5 and conducted under clauses 66 to 73.

A live activity shall be limited to the duration, persons, systems and views reasonably necessary for the assessment purpose.

R-C uses recognized external evidence to verify a matter for which ICEQC remote review does not itself provide the necessary physical, technical, professional or other specialist basis.

R-C may apply to:

R-C ordinarily supplements R-A or R-B and shall not replace ICEQC evaluation of requirements within ICEQC competence.

ICEQC personnel shall not be represented as having performed the physical test, inspection, examination or determination described in recognized external evidence.

R-C evidence shall be evaluated under Part 10 before it is relied upon.

ICEQC shall begin with the least burdensome method reasonably capable of establishing sufficient evidence.

Selection shall consider:

A method shall not be intensified solely because the applicant is small, unfamiliar with certification or unable to produce a particular customary document where another reliable form of evidence exists.

A method shall not be reduced solely because the applicant is well known, commercially significant, previously certified or represented by an experienced adviser.

The reason for selecting R-B or R-C for a matter that could ordinarily be assessed by R-A shall be stated in the assessment plan or assessment record.

The assessment team may combine methods to address different evidence attributes or operating variations.

A change of method is required where the selected method:

A method may be reduced where evidence already obtained makes a planned activity unnecessary and the resulting evidence remains sufficient.

A method change shall identify the affected requirement, reason, revised activity, burden and approval.

A method change shall not alter the applicable conformity threshold.

The use of R-A, R-B or R-C shall not create a different class or public status of ICEQC certification.

A certificate, public register entry or certification mark shall not state or imply that one evidence method represents higher or lower education quality than another.

A remote method may be stated in an assessment record where necessary for transparency, but it shall not be used as a marketing distinction.

Every method shall support the same binary conformity determination for the applicable requirement.

Remote evidence provides a reasoned basis for a conclusion within a defined scope, sample and period. It does not establish that every record, activity, location, product item, system event or person has been examined.

Remote evidence shall not be used to claim direct observation of a matter that was not directly observed.

A remote view may be limited by camera position, bandwidth, system permissions, applicant guidance, time, sensory information or the inability to inspect a physical characteristic.

The assessment team shall identify a material remote limitation and determine whether it can be addressed through another method.

Where a material limitation cannot be resolved, the affected scope or conclusion shall be narrowed, deferred or withheld under clause 102 and Schedule 4.

Before planning the assessment, ICEQC shall obtain information sufficient to understand the certification object and evidence environment.

The information shall include, as applicable:

The applicant shall confirm that the information is current before the plan is approved.

A material omission discovered during assessment shall be treated as a plan change and evaluated under clause 53.

ICEQC shall establish an evidence environment map for the assessment.

The map shall identify:

The map may be maintained as one controlled table and need not duplicate the applicant's current scope or process information.

The assessment team shall use the map to identify uncovered scope elements and prevent a favourable subset from being treated as the whole certification object.

ICEQC shall determine remote feasibility before approving the evidence assessment plan.

Remote assessment is feasible where:

Feasibility may be determined separately for parts of the certification scope.

A conclusion that remote assessment is feasible shall identify any condition on which that conclusion depends.

Feasibility shall be reconsidered when a condition materially changes or an assumed access method fails.

The assessment team shall identify conditions capable of impairing a remote conclusion, including:

The plan shall define a control, alternative method, escalation condition or scope limitation for each material risk.

Remote methods may reduce travel, disruption, personal data transfer and geographic barriers. Such benefits may be used when planning, but shall not be treated as evidence of conformity.

A controlled evidence assessment plan shall be approved before substantive assessment begins.

The plan shall contain the fields specified in Schedule 2 and shall define, at minimum:

Related requirements may be assessed through one integrated activity where the plan preserves requirement-level traceability.

The plan shall not prescribe creation of unnecessary documents or separate evidence packages for each clause.

The plan shall include a requirement-to-evidence matrix or equivalent controlled mapping.

The mapping shall identify for each applicable assessment unit:

A single evidence source may be mapped to multiple assessment units.

The mapping shall be updated where evidence or method changes materially during assessment.

Where a requirement concerns a population of records, persons, activities, locations, versions or events, the assessment plan shall include a sampling approach.

The plan shall identify:

The plan may use a staged approach under which an initial sample is enlarged only where a defined trigger occurs.

Detailed sampling requirements are established in Part 8.

Before a material live activity, ICEQC and the applicant shall confirm that the proposed technology is fit for the activity.

Readiness shall address, as applicable:

A short technology test may be conducted before the assessment and shall not be used to obtain substantive evidence unless participants are informed and the activity is recorded in the assessment file.

The applicant shall not be required to acquire a particular commercial technology where an approved alternative can meet the assessment need.

The assessment plan shall identify necessary participants by role rather than require attendance by every person connected with the certification object.

The schedule shall provide reasonable notice and shall account for operating hours, time zones, teaching commitments, accessibility needs, protected breaks and participant availability.

Interviews with different roles may be combined where independent responses and confidentiality are not impaired.

The applicant shall identify an assessment coordinator, but that person shall not control assessor access to other selected participants or records.

The assessment team may change the sequence of activities to protect sampling integrity or respond to evidence obtained.

Before remote access or interaction, ICEQC shall confirm the legal or authorized basis for:

No participant shall make a recording unless the assessment plan or a recorded agreement authorizes it.

A recording shall be made only where necessary and shall have a defined purpose, access restriction and retention period.

Where recording is not authorized, contemporaneous assessment notes and other traceable evidence shall be used.

Withdrawal or limitation of permission shall be recorded and evaluated for its effect on evidence sufficiency.

The evidence assessment plan shall define information-protection controls proportionate to the evidence involved.

The controls shall address:

Where applicant restrictions prevent copying, the plan shall state how ICEQC will create a reviewable verification record without reproducing protected content.

The plan shall define reasonable contingencies for a material failure of technology, access, attendance, evidence availability, confidentiality protection or participant safety.

A contingency may include:

The contingency shall preserve identity, confidentiality, sampling control and evidence traceability.

An improvised method that cannot meet these conditions shall not be used merely to complete the assessment on schedule.

The team leader or other authorized person shall approve the evidence assessment plan after confirming feasibility, competence, impartiality, proportionality and coverage.

The applicant shall receive the parts of the plan necessary to prepare and participate, except information withheld to preserve sampling integrity, investigation integrity or security.

A material plan change shall record:

A change shall be communicated promptly to affected participants unless delayed disclosure is necessary to preserve legitimate selection or investigation control.

A retrospective plan change shall not be used to legitimize evidence obtained through an unauthorized or unreliable method.

ICEQC shall issue a clear and proportionate evidence request linked to the applicable requirement or assessment purpose.

The request shall state, as applicable:

The request shall distinguish required evidence from an optional example.

Where one item already provided is sufficient, ICEQC shall close the duplicate request or explain the additional fact that remains to be verified.

A consolidated evidence request shall be preferred to repeated uncoordinated requests.

The assessment file shall include an evidence index.

The index shall record, as applicable:

The applicant may maintain the initial index using an ICEQC-compatible format. ICEQC remains responsible for confirming its completeness and assessment links.

A hyperlink alone is not a sufficient index entry where content may change without trace.

Evidence shall be submitted or accessed through an approved method stated in the plan.

ICEQC may use:

The selected method shall maintain availability to authorized reviewers for the period required to complete the assessment and decision.

Where evidence is viewed but not retained, the assessor shall create a verification record sufficient to identify what was viewed, how authenticity was established and what fact was confirmed.

ICEQC shall not require an applicant to surrender control of its operational system or disclose unrestricted credentials.

A submitted file or record shall remain identifiable and linked to its source.

The assessment team shall obtain metadata proportionate to the evidence risk, which may include creator, issuer, creation or issue date, modification date, version, source system, record identifier, extraction parameters and verification status.

Conversion to another file format shall preserve the relevant content and record the conversion where meaning, layout, formula, signature, metadata or functionality could be affected.

A compressed archive, embedded object, macro, executable file or active link shall be handled through an approved security process before access.

A data extract shall identify the originating system, query or selection rule, extraction date and responsible person.

The applicant may redact, de-identify or pseudonymize information that is not necessary for the assessment.

The method shall not remove or obscure a fact material to the requirement, sample, source, chronology or assessment conclusion.

Where identity is necessary for continuity across records, a stable pseudonymous reference may be used.

The assessment team may require controlled confirmation of a redacted fact without retaining the underlying personal or confidential information.

A redaction that prevents sufficient verification shall be addressed by another protection method or recorded as an evidence limitation.

Evidence received after the stated deadline may be accepted where there is sufficient time and authority to evaluate it without impairing the assessment or decision process.

A replacement shall identify the earlier evidence, reason for replacement, nature of change and person authorizing the replacement.

The earlier item shall remain traceable and shall not be deleted from the assessment history where it influenced an activity or conclusion.

An applicant may withdraw evidence that it was not authorized to provide. Withdrawal does not require ICEQC to disregard a material fact already lawfully established.

Where late, replaced or withdrawn evidence changes a material conclusion, the affected assessment work shall be reviewed again by a competent person.

Assessment evidence and verification records shall be retained only for the controlled period applicable to the certification activity, decision, complaint, appeal, surveillance or other legitimate ICEQC purpose.

The assessment file shall identify evidence retained by ICEQC, evidence held by the applicant under controlled access and evidence confirmed without retention.

Access rights, temporary accounts and controlled links shall be revoked promptly when no longer required.

Disposal shall be secure, authorized and recorded where the evidence classification or applicable retention rule requires a disposal record.

Evidence subject to an unresolved decision, complaint, appeal, investigation or preservation requirement shall not be disposed of until the hold is released.

A material integrity event includes suspected falsification, alteration, deletion, substitution, unauthorized disclosure, account compromise, concealed limitation, interference or loss of evidence.

Upon becoming aware of an integrity event, ICEQC shall:

An access failure shall be distinguished from deliberate obstruction.

Repeated unexplained failure to provide planned access, restriction of assessor-selected evidence or interference with participants shall be recorded as an assessment limitation and referred under the applicable ICEQC decision procedure.

An applicant shall be informed of the factual basis of an alleged integrity event unless disclosure would compromise a lawful investigation, participant protection or evidence preservation.

A controlled document shall be evaluated for approval, authority, scope, version, availability and consistency with actual operation.

An operational record shall be evaluated for source, chronology, completeness, routine use and connection to the activity or decision it purports to record.

Where a document describes a control, the assessment team shall obtain evidence that the control has been communicated and implemented to the extent required by the applicable requirement.

Where practice differs from a documented arrangement, the assessment team shall determine whether:

A missing formal document shall not alone establish nonconformity where the requirement does not prescribe that document and another controlled method demonstrably fulfils the requirement.

Where a conclusion depends on data, the assessment team shall establish the relationship between source data, processing, output and reported result.

Evaluation shall address, as applicable:

A spreadsheet or manually compiled report may be accepted where its source, formula, controls and reconciliation are sufficient for the assessment purpose.

A system-generated label or timestamp shall not be assumed reliable where users can alter it without trace.

Live querying may be used to confirm population size, selection, exception or reported output without transferring the whole dataset.

The assessment team may compare submitted evidence with the applicant's current public information.

Public information may include websites, applications, catalogues, enrolment pages, terms, product information, credential verification pages, public notices and authorized communications.

A material public representation shall be captured or otherwise recorded with its location, date and relevant version because public content may change.

A conflict between controlled information and a public representation shall be evaluated for scope accuracy, learner impact and truthfulness.

Anonymous commentary, unverified social media content or a search-result extract shall not alone establish nonconformity but may identify a matter requiring verification.

A metric, dashboard, report or analytical result shall be evaluated in relation to its defined purpose and method.

The assessment team shall establish, where material:

A total, average or favourable trend shall not conceal a materially affected subgroup, location, programme, version or exception.

Satisfaction, attendance, activity, completion, score or sales data shall not be treated as proof of an educational result beyond what the data validly establish.

At the beginning of a planned R-B activity, the assessment team shall confirm:

A late or unannounced attendee shall be identified and the person's role approved before participation.

The opening confirmation may cover several related activities and need not be repeated in full where conditions remain unchanged.

An interview shall be used to obtain factual evidence concerning assigned responsibility, knowledge, experience, implementation or an event relevant to an applicable requirement.

The assessment team shall select interviewees according to role, involvement, sample need and risk. The applicant may assist scheduling but shall not limit selection to nominated spokespersons.

Questions shall be clear, relevant and neutral and shall distinguish personal knowledge from assumption or organizational representation.

An interviewee shall be permitted to consult a record where accurate detail reasonably requires it. A rehearsed script shall not replace the person's own account.

The assessment team shall seek corroboration where an interview statement is material, disputed, outside the participant's direct knowledge or inconsistent with another source.

An applicant representative shall not answer for another interviewee, coach a response or prevent a participant from raising a concern.

A confidential interview may be arranged where necessary to protect independence or prevent retaliation, subject to safeguarding and information-protection controls.

An interpreter or support person may participate where necessary for reliable and equitable communication.

The person shall:

A family member, manager, sales representative or consultant shall not act as interpreter where the relationship could reasonably inhibit or influence the participant and a suitable alternative is available.

Where interpretation quality is materially uncertain, the assessment team shall verify the affected statement through another interpreter or evidence source.

A live system demonstration shall be planned around a defined function, control, record or user journey.

The assessment team shall control the item, account, scenario, search criterion or sample to the extent necessary to prevent a prepared demonstration from being treated as representative operation.

The demonstrator shall identify the system, environment, version, user role and whether data are live, test, simulated or copied.

The assessment team may request navigation from an earlier step, a different record, an exception path, an audit history or another permitted user role where relevant.

A demonstration shall not require exposure of passwords, unrestricted personal data, source code or unrelated confidential information.

A test environment may demonstrate design or functionality but shall not alone establish operation in the production environment unless equivalence is verified.

A material discrepancy between the demonstration and submitted documentation shall be recorded and followed up.

Live remote observation may be used to verify an educational activity, support process, assessment administration, product use or another operation within the certification scope.

Before observation, the assessment team shall define:

A specially arranged activity shall be identified as such and corroborated before it is treated as evidence of routine operation.

The assessment team shall avoid disrupting learning, assessment, care, safety or the dignity of participants.

Observation of one activity shall not be generalized to the whole certification scope without a reasoned basis concerning representativeness.

A guided remote view may be used to verify visible features, arrangement, presence, condition or operation that can be reliably communicated through the selected technology.

The assessment team shall direct the sequence, viewpoint, item selection and requested close or wide view to the extent reasonably necessary.

The remote witness facilitator shall disclose:

The view shall not be treated as verification of a concealed, microscopic, sensory, structural, chemical, electrical, mechanical or other specialist characteristic that the technology and assessment competence cannot establish.

Where such a characteristic is material, R-C shall be applied or the affected conclusion shall be limited.

A photograph, audio record, video record, screen recording or prerecorded demonstration may support an assessment where origin, date, scope and integrity are established.

The applicant shall identify whether recorded media were edited, selected from a larger recording, scripted, simulated or specially produced for the assessment.

Material editing, omitted sequence, missing metadata or applicant-controlled framing shall be evaluated as a limitation.

ICEQC may request an assessor-selected additional view, original file, surrounding sequence, live confirmation or corroborating record.

Recorded media shall not be retained where a verification note or controlled viewing can achieve the same purpose with materially lower privacy or security impact.

At the close of a substantive R-B activity, the assessment team shall confirm, as applicable:

A provisional observation communicated at closing shall not be represented as a certification decision.

The applicant may identify a factual error in the assessment team's understanding. The team shall evaluate the correction against evidence.

The absence of immediate applicant disagreement does not establish acceptance of an assessment conclusion.

Sampling shall be used where examination of the whole relevant population is unnecessary, impracticable or disproportionate.

Before selecting a sample, the assessment team shall define the population by:

Where the population cannot be defined with reasonable confidence, a sample from that population shall not be treated as representative.

Population information supplied by the applicant may be verified through totals, listings, system queries, reconciliations or another reliable source.

ICEQC shall retain control over final sample selection.

The applicant may identify logistical restrictions and may supply a population list, but shall not substitute a favourable sample for the sample selected by ICEQC.

Sample identifiers may be withheld until access is required where advance notice could enable alteration, coaching or substitution.

Where direct ICEQC selection is not technically possible, the assessment team shall use a controlled selection rule, live query, independent list or corroborating method.

An applicant-nominated example may be reviewed to understand the process but shall be identified as applicant-selected and shall not alone establish representativeness.

Sample design shall be appropriate to the requirement, population and intended conclusion.

The assessment team shall consider:

The planned extent shall be justified in the sampling record and shall not be determined solely by a standard percentage.

A small sample may be sufficient for a stable, low-variability and well-controlled population. A larger or stratified sample may be required where variability or consequence is greater.

A sample may be selected through one or more of the following approaches:

The selection approach shall be stated and applied consistently enough to be reviewable.

Judgement-based selection shall state the characteristic or risk for which the item was selected and shall not be represented as statistical estimation.

A statistical inference shall not be made unless the population, selection and sample design support that inference.

The sample shall address material variations within the certification scope.

Coverage may include:

A central control may be assessed once where its common application is established. Local implementation shall be sampled where it may vary.

A material component shall not be excluded merely because it is smaller, remote, outsourced, newly acquired or operationally inconvenient.

The assessment team shall enlarge or redirect a sample where:

Enlargement shall be directed to resolving the material uncertainty and shall not continue after sufficient evidence has been obtained.

Where no feasible enlargement can resolve the uncertainty, the assessment team shall record an evidence limitation rather than assume the unexamined population conforms.

A sample shall include exception or adverse cases where they are material to the requirement or risk.

An exception may include a complaint, withdrawal, failed assessment, incident, interrupted service, data error, rejected application, accessibility request, disciplinary matter, refund, product defect, system outage or corrective action.

The existence of an exception does not alone establish systemic nonconformity. The assessment team shall evaluate cause, handling, recurrence, affected extent and corrective action.

An exception shall not be excluded solely because it has been closed, resolved or removed from current operation.

The assessment record shall state:

The assessment report shall not imply examination of the whole population where sampling was used.

A sampling limitation shall be evaluated for its effect on each affected assessment conclusion.

For an education service or organization, the assessment team shall trace a representative learner journey through the applicable stages of information, entry, participation, delivery, support, assessment, completion, complaint and record retention.

The trace shall be adapted where a stage does not apply and shall include material transitions between systems, locations, personnel and external providers.

The assessment team shall compare stated arrangements with sampled learner or operational records.

Personal information shall be minimized, and a stable pseudonymous identifier may be used across the trace.

A learner journey is an integrated verification method and shall not require duplication of evidence already assessed under another requirement.

Verification of educational design shall connect stated purpose and intended outcomes to learning activities, resources, delivery, assessment and review.

A design sample shall identify approval, responsible competence, learner needs considered, delivery conditions, assessment method and release status.

Where design varies by programme, age group, language, mode, market or partner, the sample shall cover material variation.

A material change shall be traced from proposal through review, approval, communication, implementation and evaluation.

A catalogue or marketing description shall not alone establish educational design control.

Verification of delivery shall establish whether planned educational and support arrangements operate in practice for the defined learner group.

Evidence may include schedules, attendance or activity records, learning-environment records, delivery samples, learner communications, support cases, progress records and interviews.

The assessment team shall consider cancelled, rescheduled, substitute, high-demand, low-participation and interrupted delivery where material.

A live or recorded delivery sample shall be identified as routine, specially arranged or simulated.

Where an applicant relies principally on a platform or external provider, verification shall include the applicant's continuing control and response to failure.

Personnel evidence shall relate competence and authorization to the actual role performed within the certification scope.

A sample may include qualification, experience, selection, induction, training, observation, review, authorization, workload and continuing-development records.

A credential or résumé shall not alone establish effective performance where the applicable requirement concerns delivery, judgement or continuing competence.

Interviews and delivery or decision records may be used to verify understanding and implementation.

Personal information unrelated to competence, authorization or learner protection shall not be requested.

Where the certification scope includes assessment of learners, the evidence sample shall trace the applicable sequence from assessment design and administration to judgement, feedback, review and final record.

Verification shall address, as applicable:

A participation record shall not be treated as evidence of an assessed learning outcome unless the distinction and supporting assessment are established.

Learner results used to support an effectiveness claim shall also be evaluated under clause 65.

The assessment team shall sample complaints, incidents, concerns, nonconformities and corrective actions relevant to the certification scope.

Verification shall address receipt, protection, classification, investigation, decision, communication, timeliness, remedy, cause, recurrence and effectiveness.

The sample shall not be limited to cases nominated by the applicant as successfully resolved.

A record that no cases occurred may be accepted only where the reporting route, operating context and corroborating evidence make the statement credible.

A pattern of low reporting shall not be treated as proof of absence where access barriers or fear of retaliation may exist.

Where an external provider or partner performs a material part of the certification object, evidence shall establish the applicant's selection, requirements, monitoring, information access, incident response and corrective control.

A contract shall be evaluated with evidence of actual implementation.

The assessment team may require direct remote evidence from the external provider where the applicant's records cannot establish the relevant matter.

Access by an external provider shall not permit disclosure beyond the approved assessment purpose.

If the applicant cannot obtain sufficient evidence for an outsourced or shared-control component, that component shall not be assumed to conform and may require scope limitation.

Verification of a digital system shall identify the purpose, current version, users, operating environment, material integrations and accountable owner.

The assessment shall address applicable functions affecting access, content, recommendation, communication, assessment, feedback, support, safeguarding, data use and human review.

Evidence may include live demonstration, configuration, access matrix, change record, validation result, incident record, monitoring output and sampled human review.

A claimed control shall be verified in the environment and user role relevant to the certification scope where reasonably possible.

An automated educational function shall not be evaluated solely through provider marketing or a prepared output. Its input, operation, limitation, monitoring and accountable human control shall be examined to the extent material to the applicable requirement.

A material difference between product versions, configurations or user groups shall be reflected in the sample and certification scope.

For an educational product or device, the assessment team shall identify the model, hardware or software version, configuration, intended user, educational purpose and conditions of use included in scope.

Evidence shall distinguish a prototype, demonstration unit, current production version, discontinued version and applicant-modified configuration.

Educational functionality may be verified through design records, live demonstration, user instructions, performance data and representative use evidence.

A physical, electrical, mechanical, material, health or other specialist characteristic outside ICEQC remote competence shall require R-C where material to an applicable requirement.

Certification of one model or version shall not be extended to another without evidence that the relevant characteristics and controls remain equivalent.

A material update shall be evaluated under the applicable change process before the earlier evidence is reused.

Verification of safeguarding and accessibility shall include evidence of implementation and not be limited to policy review.

Evidence may include training, configuration, communication, risk review, reporting routes, sampled requests or incidents, response records and participant feedback.

A live activity involving learners or a person requiring additional protection shall comply with clauses 15 and 16.

Accessibility verification shall consider the actual formats, devices, interaction paths and support routes used within the certification scope.

Where a specialist physical or technical accessibility characteristic cannot be established remotely, recognized external evidence may be required.

R-C shall be considered where an applicable conclusion depends on a matter that ICEQC cannot verify with sufficient competence, access or sensory information through R-A or R-B.

The assessment plan shall identify:

R-C shall not be required merely because an external report is customary where ICEQC can establish the applicable matter reliably through a less burdensome method.

R-C shall not be omitted where a reliable conclusion requires a physical or specialist determination beyond the assigned assessment competence.

Before relying on external evidence, ICEQC shall establish the provider's suitability for the specific matter.

Suitability shall be evaluated through available evidence of:

Provider suitability may be established through an ICEQC-controlled register or case-specific review.

Inclusion in a register does not require acceptance of every report issued by the provider.

The assessment team shall confirm that external evidence identifies:

A report shall be used only for the matter it actually covers.

Evidence relating to a different location, model, configuration, sample, period or legal entity shall not be transferred without verified equivalence relevant to the conclusion.

A summary, certificate image or screenshot shall not replace the underlying report or direct issuer confirmation where material detail is required.

ICEQC shall verify the authenticity of external evidence to a degree proportionate to the consequence of reliance and risk of alteration.

Verification may include:

Contact information appearing only in the submitted evidence shall not be the sole basis for direct confirmation where fraud risk is material.

A confirmation shall identify the person, date, method and fact confirmed.

The assessment team shall identify financial, ownership, employment, advisory, distribution or other relationships capable of affecting the external provider's independence.

Payment for a properly defined external service does not alone establish a conflict.

Evidence produced by the applicant, its controlled entity or a person responsible for designing the evaluated object shall not be treated as independent external evidence.

Where independence is limited but the evidence remains technically relevant, it may be treated as applicant evidence and shall require appropriate corroboration.

External evidence shall be current for the object and conclusion for which it is used.

The assessment team shall consider:

Evidence without a stated expiry may remain usable only where its subject has not materially changed and the nature of the matter does not require current re-verification.

Continuing certification may require periodic confirmation under clauses 111 and 112.

A discrepancy between external evidence and another reliable source shall be resolved before reliance.

ICEQC shall not rely on external evidence where:

Non-acceptance shall state the factual reason and the alternative evidence, scope limitation or deferral required.

The applicant shall have a reasonable opportunity to obtain clarification or replacement evidence where this can be done without compromising the assessment.

Reliance on recognized external evidence confirms only that ICEQC found the evidence suitable for the stated assessment purpose.

ICEQC does not adopt the external provider's role, assume authorship of the external report or extend its conclusion beyond the reported scope.

The ICEQC assessment record shall distinguish:

The final certification conclusion remains an ICEQC determination under the applicable ICEQC procedure.

The assessment team shall maintain a requirement-level evaluation record for every applicable assessment unit.

The record shall identify:

The record may incorporate the evidence index, sampling record and assessment notes by controlled reference.

The record shall be sufficient for an authorized person who did not perform the activity to understand and review the conclusion without requiring unnecessary reproduction of protected evidence.

A requirement-level assessment conclusion shall use only the following states:

NA is not an evidence conclusion for a requirement that applies but cannot be verified.

Where only part of a requirement is unrelated, the remaining applicable part shall be evaluated and the assessment unit shall not be concluded NA.

A C conclusion requires sufficient evidence and shall not be based on absence of detected failure alone.

The assessment team shall not create or use a score, percentage, weighting, grade, star, tier, award level or relative quality category.

Where a requirement applies but evidence is insufficient, the assessment team shall record an unresolved evidence limitation and shall not conclude C or NA.

The record shall identify:

An unresolved limitation may result in a further evidence request, reassessment, deferral, scope reduction or withholding of a positive decision under the applicable ICEQC procedure.

Cost, deadline, applicant expectation or prior certification shall not convert insufficient evidence into conformity.

Conformity shall not be inferred from reputation, market position, institutional age, enrolment volume, revenue, prior award, membership or absence of a complaint.

Strong evidence for one requirement shall not offset insufficient evidence or nonconformity for another requirement.

A favourable average or majority shall not offset a material failure in an applicable sample item where that failure demonstrates nonfulfilment of the requirement.

An assessment conclusion shall take account of material adverse and contradictory evidence and shall not be formed from a favourable subset.

A correction made during assessment may be evaluated, but the assessment record shall preserve the original condition and determine whether implementation and effectiveness have been established.

A further evidence request shall be limited to the unresolved fact, affected scope and evidence attributes requiring confirmation.

The request shall state what remains unverified and shall not direct the applicant to manufacture a preferred form of evidence.

Evidence of correction shall establish that the detected condition has been addressed.

Evidence of corrective action shall establish, to the extent required by the applicable ICEQC procedure:

The assessor shall determine whether further evidence can be evaluated by targeted R-A, requires R-B, or depends on R-C.

Reassessment shall not repeat unaffected evidence work unless a new fact calls that work into question.

On completion of evidence activities, the assessment team shall prepare a conclusion for the defined certification scope.

The conclusion shall identify:

The assessment team may recommend progression, further evidence, corrective action, scope limitation or deferral, but shall not represent the recommendation as the certification decision.

A difference of professional judgement within the team shall be resolved through evidence and the team leader's controlled process. An unresolved material difference shall be disclosed to the authorized reviewer.

The assessment team shall issue a controlled remote assessment report containing the fields specified in Schedule 5.

The report shall be accurate, concise, evidence-based and sufficient for decision review.

The report shall distinguish:

Restricted personal or commercial information shall not be reproduced where a controlled evidence reference is sufficient.

The report shall not contain comparative praise, ranking, score, marketing language or a statement exceeding the verified scope.

The report shall identify that the assessment was conducted remotely and that ICEQC did not perform an on-site visit.

The applicant may be given an opportunity to identify a factual error in the draft assessment report within a defined period.

Factual-accuracy review may address identity, dates, locations, versions, evidence references, quoted statements, described events and other objectively verifiable facts.

The review is not an opportunity to negotiate the applicable requirement, remove adverse evidence, alter a reasoned conclusion without new evidence or direct the certification decision.

A proposed correction shall be accepted, rejected or modified on the basis of evidence, and the disposition shall be recorded.

New material evidence submitted during factual-accuracy review shall be handled as late evidence under clause 59.

Before the assessment file is released for decision review, the team leader shall confirm that it contains, as applicable:

A missing administrative item may be completed without repeating assessment work where evidence integrity and conclusion are unaffected.

A missing material evidence or evaluation item shall be resolved before the file is treated as decision-ready.

The decision reviewer shall receive access to the assessment record necessary to determine whether the evidence, process and conclusions support the proposed decision.

The handover shall identify:

The assessment team shall respond to a reviewer request for clarification but shall not pressure the reviewer to accept its recommendation.

A reviewer request for additional evidence shall identify the material gap and shall be returned through a controlled assessment activity.

An assessment activity is complete only when planned work has been performed or formally discontinued, evidence has been indexed, conclusions have been recorded and required handover has occurred.

Open temporary accounts, permissions, local copies and access links shall be closed or transferred to controlled retention promptly after completion.

Participants shall be informed of the next procedural stage where appropriate, but shall not be promised an unauthorized certification result or date.

An assessment discontinued because of access, integrity, safety, confidentiality or feasibility concerns shall have a closure record stating the work completed, unresolved matters and permitted next action.

This Procedure applies to continuing certification activities in the same manner as to an initial assessment, subject to proportionate use of prior reliable evidence.

The evidence assessment plan for a continuing activity shall consider:

Continuing assessment shall not repeat the entire initial evidence package by default.

Over the certification cycle, evidence selection shall provide reasonable coverage of material scope components and changes.

Previous evidence may be reused in accordance with clause 24.

Before reuse, the assessment team shall confirm:

A current attestation by the applicant may support change confirmation but shall not alone establish absence of material change where independent or operational evidence is reasonably available.

Reuse shall be recorded so that the current conclusion remains traceable without duplicating the retained evidence.

A material change shall trigger review of remote feasibility, scope, evidence sources, samples and methods.

Material change may include:

The assessment shall be limited to affected and consequential requirements unless the change calls earlier evidence into question more broadly.

Certification scope shall not be extended to a changed object until sufficient evidence has been evaluated and the applicable decision has been made.

ICEQC may initiate targeted remote verification where credible information indicates possible nonfulfilment within a certified scope.

The plan shall define the allegation or risk, information source, affected requirement, evidence preservation need, impartiality safeguards and limits on disclosure.

The assessment team shall distinguish a credible lead from established fact and shall seek corroboration before reaching an adverse conclusion.

Targeted verification may use unannounced sample selection or limited advance disclosure where necessary to protect evidence integrity, provided that legal, safety and access requirements are met.

A person who raises a concern shall be protected from unnecessary disclosure and retaliation.

The applicant shall have an appropriate opportunity to respond to material evidence before the conclusion is finalized.

Remote feasibility shall be re-evaluated where:

Re-evaluation shall result in a revised method, revised scope, revised timing or a determination that the affected conclusion cannot be completed remotely.

A determination that the conclusion cannot be completed remotely shall not authorize an ICEQC on-site visit under this Procedure.

A person performing remote evidence assessment shall have competence appropriate to the assigned certification object, applicable requirements and evidence methods.

Competence shall include, as applicable:

Competence may be held collectively by the assessment team where assignments and interfaces are clear.

ICEQC shall maintain a current record of each person's authorized assessment functions, certification schemes, object areas and remote methods.

Assignment shall consider competence, language, location, time zone, conflicts of interest, access to technology and availability.

A person under supervision may perform a defined activity where the supervising person retains responsibility and the arrangement does not mislead the applicant or impair protection.

Authorization shall be reviewed after material performance concern, method change, extended inactivity or change in assigned scope.

Technology familiarity alone does not establish competence to evaluate education quality, and subject knowledge alone does not establish competence in remote evidence control.

A technology support person may assist platform setup, access, security, troubleshooting and evidence transfer.

The support person shall have no greater access to applicant information than necessary for the assigned task.

A support person shall not select evidence, conduct a substantive interview, interpret an applicable requirement or form an assessment conclusion unless separately authorized for that function.

A technical intervention capable of affecting evidence content, metadata, sequence or availability shall be recorded.

ICEQC shall periodically review the consistent application of this Procedure.

Quality-control activities may include:

Calibration shall address interpretation and evidence sufficiency. It shall not establish quotas, expected pass rates, scoring bands or a predetermined distribution of findings.

A material inconsistency shall result in correction, competence action, procedure clarification or reassessment as appropriate.

ICEQC may use an automated function to support file intake, indexing, transcription, translation, duplicate detection, cross-reference, search, anomaly identification or administrative completeness review.

The function shall operate under defined access, security, validation, human-review and record controls.

The authoritative source evidence shall remain identifiable and available to the authorized human assessor or reviewer.

An automated output shall not independently:

A material automated error or limitation shall be recorded and affected work shall be reviewed.

ICEQC shall monitor whether remote methods remain effective, secure, accessible, proportionate and capable of supporting reliable conclusions.

Monitoring information may include:

Improvement shall preserve the conformity threshold and shall not weaken evidence sufficiency to reduce time or increase certification volume.

An unnecessary burden identified through monitoring shall be removed or consolidated where the same assurance can be retained.

A formal interpretation of this Procedure may be issued only by the ICEQC Certification Scheme Committee or a body to which that authority has been expressly delegated.

An interpretation shall clarify application without creating a new certification requirement, changing the conformity threshold or retrospectively altering a completed decision.

A material interpretation shall be controlled, dated, linked to the relevant provision and made available to affected ICEQC personnel.

A question concerning one assessment shall be resolved through the assessment and decision process and shall not be represented as a general interpretation unless formally issued.

A deviation from this Procedure may be authorized only where:

A deviation shall not permit on-site assessment by ICEQC under this Procedure, numerical quality scoring, applicant control of the final sample, unsupported inference of conformity or sole automated determination.

Repeated use of the same deviation shall trigger review of this Procedure or the applicable certification scheme.

The applicable edition of this Procedure shall be the edition stated in the relevant certification scheme, application confirmation or transition rule.

An assessment file shall identify the edition applied and shall not combine provisions from different editions without an authorized transition arrangement.

A superseded edition may remain applicable to an assessment already in progress only where the transition rule permits and no material public-interest risk requires earlier application.

Forms, system fields and assessment tools shall be reviewed when this Procedure changes.

This Procedure commences only on the effective date assigned through the ICEQC approval and publication process.

Before commencement, ICEQC shall confirm that necessary personnel authorization, secure systems, controlled forms, decision interfaces and training are operational.

A development, consultation or approved-but-not-effective text shall not be used to make a certification decision or support a claim of ICEQC conformity.

This Schedule forms part of the Procedure.

Method selection shall be based on the matter to be established, not on applicant preference or a desired public description.

R-A, R-B and R-C may be combined. None constitutes a certification grade or level.

R-A is ordinarily suitable where:

R-A ordinarily requires escalation where actual behaviour, live operation, identity or an unexplained discrepancy is material.

R-B is ordinarily suitable where:

R-B shall be limited or replaced where live participation cannot be made safe, accessible, secure and reliable.

R-C is ordinarily suitable where:

R-C shall not replace ICEQC assessment of governance, educational operation, evidence integration or another requirement within ICEQC competence.

Where no permitted remote method can produce sufficient evidence, ICEQC shall:

ICEQC shall not infer conformity or perform an on-site visit under this Procedure.

This Schedule forms part of the Procedure. The plan shall identify:

The plan shall state:

The plan shall identify:

The plan shall identify:

The plan shall record:

This Schedule forms part of the Procedure. An authenticity or integrity control shall be proportionate to the ease of manipulation, source independence and consequence of incorrect reliance.

More than one control shall be used where no single control provides reasonable confidence.

Relevant controls may include:

Relevant controls may include:

Relevant controls may include:

Relevant controls may include:

An authenticity challenge shall result in one of the following recorded outcomes:

This Schedule forms part of the Procedure. Escalation from R-A to R-B, or addition of R-B, shall be considered where:

Addition of R-C shall be considered where the remaining matter is physical, technical, professional or otherwise specialist and cannot be established by R-A or R-B.

Sample enlargement or redirection shall be considered where:

The affected activity shall be limited, paused or ended where:

Scope limitation, deferral or withholding shall be considered where:

The selected response shall state the affected scope, fact not established, evidence attempted and condition for further consideration.

This Schedule forms part of the Procedure. The report shall identify:

The report shall state:

The report shall include or control-reference:

The report shall identify:

The report shall state: