You send the evidence. We review it against the right route, confirm any questions and record the decision clearly.
Review process
Asking for evidence is only half the job. The other half, the part that protects the value of a CPD record, is what happens after that evidence arrives for review. This page explains what is checked, in what order and how decisions are normally handled for courses, providers and assessors.
Applications are reviewed by people, not passed automatically from a form submission to an approval badge. The route may be simple or more involved, but the decision should always be based on evidence that can be understood later.
The process in brief
Regardless of whether you are submitting a course, applying as a provider, or registering as an assessor, your submission moves through the same basic shape: it arrives, it is checked, and a decision is made.
What differs between the three is the detail of what we are checking at each stage - a course review looks very different from a background check on a business, which looks different again from confirming someone's professional standing in a technical field.
Your submission and supporting evidence are logged and assigned to a reviewer with relevant knowledge of the area.
The reviewer works through the evidence against our requirements, checking accuracy, completeness, and legitimacy, and follows up directly if anything needs clarifying.
You are approved, sent back with specific feedback, or in rare cases declined, with the reasoning explained rather than left vague.
Courses
When a course is submitted, a reviewer with relevant subject familiarity, or access to someone who has it, goes through the materials directly rather than relying on a summary. The review considers the substance of the learning as well as the way it is presented.
We go through the course materials submitted: slides, workbooks, video scripts, assessment questions and any other material that makes up the learning experience. The review looks at whether the content is coherent, structured logically and supports what the course claims to teach.
Where the course makes specific factual, technical or regulatory claims, we cross-reference the evidence provided, such as citations, references or expert sign-off. If a course touches on a fast-moving or regulated area, we pay particular attention to whether the information is current.
We verify that the person credited with creating or presenting the course has the background they claim to have. This might mean confirming a qualification, checking a professional registration, or reviewing a body of published or industry work. We are checking that the expertise is real and relevant to this specific subject, not adjacent to it.
We look at the account you have given us of how the course was built - researched, drafted, reviewed - to understand whether there was a genuine process behind it, rather than content assembled quickly with no internal check.
If the evidence is sufficient, the course can move to approval. If something is missing or unclear, such as a source that does not support a claim, a credential that needs confirming or a section that needs more development, we set out what needs addressing.
Providers
Provider review happens in two distinct stages, because the two things we are checking - legitimacy and capability - are genuinely different questions, and we do not move to the second until the first is settled.
Provider approval does not automatically approve each course. If individual courses need to carry approved CPD wording, logo use or learner certificates, those course reviews are added separately to the scope and fee.
We start with the fundamentals: confirming the business is registered, trading, and accurately represented in what has been submitted. For established organisations with clear public records, this step tends to move quickly.
Once the business itself is confirmed, we review how the organisation builds and runs training. We go through the process described, including how course content is identified, developed, reviewed and kept current, and how learners are supported once enrolled. The evidence should show a process that is real and repeatable.
Where a provider has courses already in the pipeline, we look at whether those submissions reflect the process described in Step 2. Individual course accreditation is a separate review and fee where named courses need approved CPD wording, course logo use or learner certificates.
Providers with an existing structured training operation, including those with prior accreditation elsewhere, often already hold much of the evidence needed. Where we come back with questions, it is usually to ask for a concrete example of the process in action rather than more description of it.
Assessors
Assessor review is focused and confidential. The central question is whether the applicant has the background to judge CPD evidence in the specific field requested.
We review the qualifications, professional history or industry standing submitted against the field the applicant is applying to assess. A strong background in a related field is not automatically sufficient; the assessor scope should be supported by relevant subject evidence.
Where possible, we verify credentials directly with the issuing body, employer, or professional register, rather than relying solely on the documents provided. This step exists to protect the integrity of every assessment this person will later carry out.
At every stage of this process, the personal and professional information you have submitted is seen only by the reviewer handling your application. It is never shared with providers, learners, or any other party, and it is never used for anything beyond confirming your eligibility to assess. Once you are approved, what is visible on the platform is simply that you are a verified assessor in your field - not the underlying documents that got you there.
Once expertise is confirmed, assessor approval is limited to the relevant field. If something needs clarifying, such as a qualification that cannot be independently verified, we ask directly and confidentially before a decision is made.
After the decision
Every review ends in one of three outcomes. The aim is to make the decision clear enough that the applicant understands the record and any next step.
Approval means the course, provider status or assessor scope has met the relevant review requirements and can be recorded against the confirmed approval route.
This is the usual outcome when a submission is close but something is missing or unclear. The applicant receives specific points to answer or documents to add before the review can be completed.
Declined is used where the evidence does not support the claim being made, such as an unverified credential, an organisation that cannot be confirmed or content that does not meet the required standard. The reason is explained, and resubmission can be considered when the issue has been addressed.
Before you submit
The clearer the evidence is at the start, the smoother the review usually is. Courses, providers and assessors each have different requirements, so it is worth checking the evidence list before sending an application enquiry.
Application enquiry
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.
