Learning activity
Show the purpose, topic, timing and format of development during the review period. Records should make the activity understandable without relying on promotional language.
Evidence criteria
Four areas.
One coherent practice.
Criteria are considered together. Review focuses on whether records are current, understandable and connected—not whether an employer has the largest volume of documents.
On this page
Navigate the criteria
Detailed criteria
What each area should explain
Participation
Show intended access and actual involvement. Explain relevant exclusions, incomplete records or differences between teams rather than treating one total as the whole story.
Employee feedback
Show how views were invited, what themes emerged and how limitations were handled. Feedback may be qualitative or quantitative when the method is clear.
Forward plan
Show priorities for the next cycle, ownership and the connection to current evidence. Plans may change, but they should be specific enough to guide action.
Evidence strength
A practical ladder
Asserted
A statement describes practice but has no supporting record.
Recorded
A dated record supports the activity or participation claim.
Connected
Records, employee feedback and decisions reinforce one another.
Applied
Learning from the cycle is visible in the forward plan.
Stronger example
A dated learning log points to participation totals, a summarized feedback source and a named next-cycle response.
Weaker example
An undated statement says training is important but does not identify activity, access, employee voice or action.
Interaction
Criteria work as a system
| Question | Activity | Participation | Feedback | Plan |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| What happened? | Primary | Context | Context | Reference |
| Who experienced it? | Context | Primary | Method | Priority |
| What was learned? | Source | Segment | Primary | Decision |
| What happens next? | Baseline | Access goal | Rationale | Primary |
Judgement
Proportionate and privacy-aware
A small organization may have simpler records than a large employer. The test is whether the evidence is sufficient to understand the practice, not whether every applicant uses the same system.
Share only information necessary for review. Aggregate participation and feedback where practical, remove direct identifiers, and explain the method used to protect confidentiality.
Questions
Criteria FAQs
Must learning be delivered by an external provider?
No. Relevant internal and external learning can be considered when its purpose and evidence are clear.
Does every employee need to participate?
The framework considers access, actual participation and context. It does not turn one participation percentage into a universal rule.
Can narrative explanation replace records?
Explanation provides context, but the review is evidence-led. Use narrative to connect reliable records rather than substitute for them.