For individuals
Work out what you already hold, decide what is worth learning next, and check whether a course actually delivers what it advertises before you pay for it. Nothing here costs anything.
Four steps, about an hour
Levels describe how you work. Most people misjudge their level before they misjudge their domain.
If you can point to an instance for all of them, move up a level and repeat.
That list is your learning plan.
Judge yourself against the indicators, one statement at a time
A self-assessment is not a credential
It is a private tool for deciding what to learn. It confers nothing, and cannot be cited on a CV as a framework level.
Does it actually map to the framework?
Anyone may say their course aligns with the framework. What separates a real claim from a marketing line is a coverage map you can read.
Not the syllabus, not the brochure.
If there is no map, there is no checkable claim. Stop here.
The map should list identifiers like D6.L2.01, not domains or level names.
“Covers evaluation and assurance at level 2” is not a mapping.
Assessed means you were judged; taught means it was mentioned in delivery.
A map where everything is “both” has probably not been thought about.
It should name a released version.
“Mapped to the latest framework” means nobody pinned anything.
Every statement referenced but not covered should be listed with a reason.
No exclusions listed at all usually means the referenced set was never checked.
Search it yourself rather than trusting a badge on a web page.
A seal image on a website is not evidence. A register entry is.
Translating the tiers into what you are buying
| If it says | It means | It does not mean |
|---|---|---|
| Aligned | The provider says their course maps to the framework and has published a map. We have not checked it. | That anyone verified it, or that the map is accurate. |
| Tier 0 listed | The declaration is in our register, dated, with a link to their own map. | Any review at all. Tier 0 carries no seal for this reason. |
| Tier I verified | A reviewer checked that the map matches what is taught and assessed. | That the assessment is rigorous. |
| Tier II listed | A reviewer checked the map and the assessment instruments. | Accreditation, endorsement, or a promise about your outcome. |
| Tier III / accredited | The awarding body itself was reviewed: governance, examiners, standard setting, appeals. | It says nothing about a course outside the portfolio reviewed. |
Eight questions to ask a training provider
Ask them by email, so the answers are in writing.
Can you send me the coverage map for this course?
A file or a link, within a day.
Which statements does the assessment actually judge, and how?
A list of identifiers and a method per group.
What proportion of the level you advertise is assessed?
A number, per domain.
What is the pass mark and how was it set?
A method, a panel and a date.
Which framework version is this mapped to?
A released version, not “latest”.
Is the credential listed with AI Certification Standards, and at which tier?
A yes with a register entry you can find, or an honest no.
What does the assessment require me to produce?
Something specific: an artefact, a portfolio, a defended decision.
What is not covered, and what would I still need afterwards?
A straight answer naming gaps.