Solutions · By role · QA and accreditation
Audit-ready is a state, not a project.
Your institution does not lack evidence. It lacks a system for it, so every few years the same artefacts are hunted down, relabelled and assembled into a submission. Creatrix Campus captures evidence as the work happens, labels it to the standard it proves with a person confirming every label, and keeps coverage visible so a thin area surfaces long before a reviewer finds it.
The problem
Most institutions do not lack evidence. They lack a system for it.
Evidence is created constantly: a lecturer writes a marking scheme, a committee approves a change, a coordinator records an action. Then it lands on a personal drive or in an inbox, unlabelled and invisible to the quality office until someone sends the request everybody dreads.
A tidy folder of files is not evidence. At a review, the only question that matters is which criterion a document satisfies, and if nothing has answered that question along the way, the answer has to be reconstructed under deadline by the people who can least afford the time.
-
Collecting artefacts A request to every department, twiceWeeks of chasing for files that already existed
-
Linking evidence to criteria A mapping spreadsheet, maintained by one personNothing connects a document to what it proves
-
Knowing where the gaps are A gap analysis done once a cycleYou find the thin standard too late to fix it
-
Getting the numbers right Figures retyped into each reportThe report and its proof quietly disagree
-
Knowing which version is final Filenames ending in v3-final-finalYou cannot prove what was true on the day
-
Sharing with a reviewer A folder link and a leap of faithNo record of who saw what, or when
Six workarounds, one consequence: the institution proves itself retrospectively, at the worst possible moment.
The QA desk
Six surfaces, one evidence record underneath.
This is what the quality office actually works in. Each surface is a different job, but they all act on the same governed evidence, which is why filing something in one place makes it count everywhere.
Every approved artefact, findable
The searchable home of evidence that has already been checked.
- Search in plain English, for example final exam question papers for a given course
- Filter by type, label, programme or term
- Open any document, or see its earlier versions
- Select several and bulk-download a whole requirement’s evidence at once
Labels proposed, people decide
The heart of capturing and labelling as it happens.
- Suggested standard, KPI, course and term on every new document
- A confidence indicator on each suggestion
- Add a missing label, remove a wrong one, then approve
- Nothing is filed automatically, a person always makes the final call
Quality control before it counts
Faculty uploads are checked before they enter the library.
- A queue of pending uploads from teaching staff
- Approve into the library, or send back with a note
- Owned by QA directors, evidence reviewers and coordinators
- The decision and the reviewer stay on the record
Gap analysis that is always current
Which standards are well evidenced, and which are thin, right now.
- Each requirement shown with whether evidence exists for it
- Drill into a requirement to see exactly what is backing it
- Direct effort at the thin areas long before a reviewer does it for you
- A live view rather than a reconstruction once a cycle
Authored reports with real numbers
Write judgement, not data entry.
- Start from a template with live institutional figures already in place
- Documents reference calculated values, so a figure always matches its proof
- Review and approval before anything is published
- On publish the document freezes: numbers locked, PDF produced, filed automatically
Templates, types and trusted values
The rules that keep evidence consistent across the institution.
- A pack of accreditation templates, plus any your institution builds
- Document types with the policy that applies to each
- Approved data variables, so authored documents only pull trusted figures
- Access enforced on every document, search and download
A document’s journey
From someone’s laptop to answerable evidence.
Whether an artefact is uploaded by a lecturer or authored by the quality office, it arrives in the same place, labelled to what it proves. Nothing is filed without a person approving it.
-
01
Created where the work happens
A lecturer uploads a marking scheme, question paper or piece of student work inside their own course.
-
02
Labels suggested
The system reads it and proposes the standard, KPI, course, term and, for student work, a performance band, each with a confidence indicator.
-
03
A person confirms
In the tagging queue somebody checks, adjusts and approves the labels. Nothing is filed automatically.
-
04
Reviewed
Faculty uploads pass a quick review: accepted into the library, or sent back with a note explaining what is wrong.
-
05
Filed, and counted
It appears in the library fully labelled and findable, and it counts toward coverage on the standards it supports.
-
06
Published and frozen
An authored report moves through approval and freezes on publish: numbers locked, PDF produced, filed. Its content can never change, only who can see it.
Where the evidence comes from
You do not collect evidence. The institution produces it.
Every lifecycle running in Creatrix leaves a record behind. That record is the evidence, which is why coverage grows while the institution simply works.
Your toolkit
The products behind the QA desk.
Adopt one as the system of record for its function, or connect them. The evidence model underneath is the same either way.
Standards mapped, evidence tagged to the criterion it proves, and coverage visible against every requirement.
CaptureArtefacts captured and labelled as daily work happens, so the library fills itself between visits.
QualityCO and PLO attainment calculated from live performance, so a claim about quality has a cohort behind it.
CurrencyVersioned curriculum and approval history, so what was approved and what is delivered can be compared.
AssessmentQuestion papers, marking schemes, moderation and results: the artefacts a reviewer asks for first.
PeopleQualifications, workload and scholarly activity on one faculty record, evidenced rather than requested.
Supporting accreditation and quality teams at universities across Europe, the Middle East, Southeast Asia and Oceania.
Creatrix provides an excellent platform for timetabling, enabling teaching activities to be planned and coordinated through a clear line of sight to learning outcomes, assessments, professional competency standards and graduate attributes.
It’s convenient to have all academic and administrative activities managed in one system. It helps keep work organized and reduces manual effort.
Frequently asked
Plain answers for the quality office.
Does the system decide what counts as evidence?
No. The system suggests labels, and a person reviews and approves everything before it is filed.
Suggestions arrive with a confidence indicator, and a reviewer can add a missing label or remove a wrong one before approving. Nothing enters the library automatically.
Can it change our KPI numbers?
Never. KPI values are calculated by the system from the source data rather than typed in or invented.
People finalise and submit them, and authored documents only reference them, so the figure in a report always matches the proof sitting behind it.
What happens when we publish a document?
It is frozen permanently: the numbers are locked, a PDF is produced, and it files itself into the library through the same tagging step, so a person confirms which requirements it serves.
A frozen document can never be edited again. Only who can see it may change later.
How do we find the gaps before a reviewer does?
Coverage is a live view of which standards are well evidenced and which are thin, with each requirement showing whether evidence exists for it.
You can drill into a requirement to see exactly what is backing it, and direct effort at the thin areas while there is still time to do something about them.
How much extra work is this for faculty?
Filing evidence becomes a short task inside a lecturer’s own course, rather than a response to repeated last-minute requests from the quality office.
Because labels are proposed automatically, the work is confirmation rather than classification, and the person who knows the artefact best is the one confirming it.
Can people see evidence they should not?
No. Access is enforced on every document, search and download, and each person sees only the slice of the institution their role and scope allow.
Uploads, label changes, approvals, publishes and sharing are all recorded, so who saw what, and when, is answerable rather than assumed.
GET STARTED
The next visit should be a query, not a project.
Tell us which standards you report against and how evidence reaches you today. We will show you what the same cycle looks like when the library is already full.