The actual course materials.
Slide decks, workbooks, video scripts, reading lists, assessment questions and any other material that makes up the learning experience. The review needs to see the substance of the course, not only a syllabus summary.
What we ask for, and why it matters.
Course, provider and assessor applications are reviewed from evidence, not application forms alone. This page explains what we look for and why it matters.
Evidence review
Trust depends on what can be checked.
A CPD claim is only useful when the evidence behind it is clear. The evidence review exists so that course content, provider responsibility and assessor competence can be checked before approval wording or certificate records are issued.
This page sets out, in plain terms, what we require from the three groups involved in the approval process: the courses themselves, the organisations that provide them and the individual assessors who may review work. The requirements differ because the risks differ, but the principle is consistent: the approval record should be supported by evidence.
The short version
We verify before approval is confirmed.
CPD accreditation only means something if the standard behind it is consistent. A course should be checked for accuracy, a provider should demonstrate that it can deliver and support training, and an assessor should have genuine subject expertise. Rather than taking claims at face value, we ask each party to submit evidence before approval is confirmed.
This is not intended to make the application harder than it needs to be. Most submissions move through review smoothly once the right documentation is in place. The sections below explain what useful documentation looks like, so applicants can prepare with less guesswork.
Courses
For courses: show the course, not only the description.
A course listing is a promise — that the content is accurate, that it was built properly, and that whoever wrote it knows the subject well enough to teach it. We ask course creators to back that promise up with material, not marketing copy.
A record of how it was made.
We ask for some insight into your development process: how the content was researched, structured, and reviewed before publication. This might be as simple as a short development note, or as detailed as a full curriculum design document — the level of depth should match the complexity of the course itself.
Fact-checking evidence.
Where a course makes factual, technical, or regulatory claims, we ask to see how those claims were verified — references, source citations, or sign-off from a subject expert. This matters most in fields where information changes quickly or where getting it wrong has real consequences.
Author credentials.
Whoever wrote or presented the course needs to demonstrate they are qualified to speak on the subject. This could be a professional qualification, a role in the relevant industry, published work, or a combination of these. We are not looking for celebrity credentials — we are looking for genuine, relevant expertise.
Providers
For providers: prove the business behind the course.
Providers are the organisations, or individuals operating as a business, that stand behind the courses they deliver. Because provider approval relates to the organisation, we ask for two categories of evidence up front: proof that the business is legitimate, and proof that the organisation has a working process for building and delivering training.
Legitimate business information.
This is the foundation. We ask for standard business verification, such as registration details, trading history and confirmation that the organisation is accurately represented. For a genuine training provider, this is usually straightforward and gives the review a reliable starting point.
A demonstrated training process.
This is the part that separates a serious provider from someone simply uploading a document. We want to understand your end-to-end process: how you identify what a course should cover, how you develop and review content before it is published, how you handle updates when information changes, and how you support learners once they have enrolled. You do not need a polished corporate handbook — a clear, honest walkthrough of your actual process, with examples, is more useful to us than a glossy policy document that does not reflect reality.
Providers who already run structured training internally — with quality checks, review cycles, or an accreditation history elsewhere — typically move through this stage quickly, because that evidence tends to already exist. Newer providers are not disadvantaged; they simply need to show the process exists, even if it is still maturing.
Assessors
For assessors: your expertise, verified and kept confidential.
Assessors carry a particular kind of responsibility: they are the ones confirming that a learner has genuinely met the standard required. That judgement only holds weight if the assessor themselves is demonstrably qualified in the field they are assessing. So before anyone is approved to assess, we ask for evidence of their expertise in that specific subject area — not expertise in general, but relevant, field-specific competence.
What we are really asking is a simple question: if this person tells us someone has met the standard, do they have the standing to know?
Your documents are never shared
This information is used solely to verify assessor eligibility. It is not shared with course providers, learners, or any third party, and it is not used for any purpose beyond confirming that you are qualified to assess in your chosen field.
Evidence of subject expertise
This might include formal qualifications, professional accreditation, a verifiable track record of work in the field, published or peer-reviewed material, or direct industry experience at a level appropriate to the subject being assessed.
Privacy and confidentiality
The documents involved here — qualifications, employment history, professional records — are personal and often sensitive. This information is used solely to verify assessor eligibility.
Verified assessment scope
Once your expertise has been confirmed, you are cleared to take part in the assessment process for courses within your field. You will not be asked to assess outside your verified area.
Once verification is complete, your role on the platform is visible only as an approved assessor in your area of expertise, not the underlying documentation that got you there. If you would like to expand into a related field later, that simply means providing evidence for that additional area when the time comes.
After submission
Our side of the process.
Once evidence is submitted, whether you are a course creator, a provider or an assessor, it goes to review rather than automatic approval. A reviewer checks what has been submitted against the requirements above, and if anything is unclear or incomplete, we come back with specific points to resolve. Most queries at this stage are about clarifying or supplementing what is already there.
Review times vary depending on the complexity of the submission and the field involved. The aim is to keep the process moving while still giving the evidence enough attention to support the final approval record.
- Submit
- Review
- Approved
Ready to submit?
Ready to submit your evidence?
If you are preparing a course, setting up as a provider, or applying to become an assessor, the requirements above should give you a clear picture of what to gather before you start. If anything is unclear for your situation, contact the assessment office before submitting so the route and evidence can be confirmed early.
Application enquiry
Start with the right approval route.
Send a short outline of the course, provider or assessor request. The assessment office will confirm which route applies and what evidence is needed before review begins.