For RTOs and assessors

We prepare candidates' RPL evidence portfolios. We do not assess, and we do not issue anything. What arrives with you is a structured submission rather than a shoebox of photos.

What you receive

• An evidence matrix mapping each item to specific performance criteria, unit by unit.
• The candidate's own account of each job, in their words, with the date and context.
• The referees the candidate has named, each with their role, their relationship to the work, the units they can speak to, and their contact details where the candidate has consented to us passing them on.
• A coverage summary: what is evidenced, what is thin, and what is missing.

How we handle authenticity

This is where AI-assisted portfolios usually fail, so it is worth being specific. Evidence is analysed and then confirmed by the candidate as two separate steps: an automated analysis may suggest which criteria a photo relates to, but nothing is mapped until the candidate confirms it is their work and says what they did. The guide is instructed to record the candidate's own words and never to improve a narrative after the fact. Every evidence item carries an authenticity note and, where available, the photo's original capture date.

What we ask of you

• Tell us your currency window and any evidence policies that differ from the defaults, so the guide asks for the right things rather than generating rework for your assessors.
• Review the interview script before we send you candidates. Your assessors' edits change how every candidate is interviewed.
• A data processing agreement, since candidates upload identity documents and worksite photos.

What it arrives as

A single zip, arranged so that the order of the folders is the order to read them:

• 00-START-HERE.html — who the candidate is, what is claimed, and what is still outstanding, listed first. We would rather you saw the gaps on the front page than found them yourself an hour in.
• 01-portfolio/ — the full portfolio as HTML and PDF, unit by unit, in the candidate's own words, plus coverage.json if you want the numbers as data.
• 02-evidence-matrix/ — one row per performance criterion with its status and the evidence offered against it, so it can be sorted, filtered and loaded into your own system rather than read off a PDF and retyped. outstanding.csv is the same file filtered to what is not yet covered.
• 03-evidence/ — the files themselves, foldered into images, documents and licences, each named with the evidence id the matrix refers to, so a row reading E004 resolves to a photograph without a search.
• 04-referees/ — who can speak to which units, and a report form each.
• 05-declaration/ — what the candidate signed, and when.

HTML, PDF and CSV are still available on their own if one of them is all you want. The candidate exports it themselves and sends it to you; nothing reaches you unless they do that.

Where currency is decided

The default window is five years, and it is a default, not a position. Evidence older than the window is not dropped — it is kept and flagged, with the candidate asked for a maintenance statement explaining how the skill has been kept up, because that is the part an assessor needs and the part a candidate never thinks to write down. Your window replaces ours.

Unit currency is separate and we track it: the pack records each unit's status and what superseded it, non-current units are flagged rather than silently interviewed, and which version applies is your call.

Data, and what we ask you to sign

Candidates upload identity documents, payslips and photos of worksites, so a data processing agreement is part of working together rather than paperwork at the end. Every action on a portfolio is recorded with a timestamp and an owner, and deletion reaches that record too — a candidate who asks to be erased is erased, not hidden. The guide is instructed never to ask for third parties' full licence numbers, tax file numbers, Medicare numbers or bank details.

Referees, and what we do not do yet

The candidate names their own referees and records, per referee, which units that person can actually speak to — so what reaches you is "this supervisor can confirm these six units", not a page of general praise. Contact details are passed on only where the candidate has said we may.

We do not contact referees on our own initiative, and we never cold-call one. What runs today is the candidate's own invitation: they generate a link for a named referee, send it themselves, and the referee confirms the specific units that person was named against. The link is single-use and expires once it is spent. Where that has happened, the confirmation arrives with the portfolio, attributed and dated.

What we do not do is chase them, or ask them anything beyond the units the candidate named. If your process needs a different form of words, or needs questions we are not asking, tell us — an assessor telling us what their forms need is the fastest way to get it right.