Your training records answer a question regulators stopped asking.
Completion percentages answer ‘was training assigned and clicked’ — and every serious regulator has moved on to ‘did the workforce understand’. This platform answers the current question: verified comprehension per person per mandate, maintained between audits, evidenced on demand.
The attestation stack, and the incident that tests it
The compliance training file is a stack of attestations: assigned, completed, signed. It survives routine audits and collapses at the first serious test — the incident review, the regulator’s deep-dive, the litigation discovery that asks what the employee actually knew. The stack was never evidence of knowledge; it was evidence of process, and everyone examining it now knows the difference.
The verified layer rebuilds the file’s foundation. Each mandate’s material verifies through scenario questioning per person; currency maintains on decay-aware cycles; policy revisions trigger targeted re-verification with lineage; and exceptions live in a ledger with reasons and approvers. When the serious test comes, the file answers it — which is the only moment compliance files exist for.
Mandates as living coverage, not annual events
POSH, ABC, AML, data protection — each mandate’s verified coverage lives on one screen, current any month the question arrives.
Policy changes that provably propagate
The revision re-queues affected roles automatically; the dashboard shows old-rule risk dying by team — the propagation curve is itself audit evidence.
The exception ledger that survives scrutiny
Extensions and exemptions with reasons, approvers and dates — the second thing serious examiners ask for, kept properly the first time.
Always-on audit readiness
Every requirement’s coverage, every person’s record, every version’s trail — the compliance view, permanently current.
| Scope | Requirement | Metric | Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| All staff | POSH awareness | coverage | 99% |
| Front office | AML refresher | coverage | 97% |
| Handlers | DPDP duties | coverage | 95% |
| New joiners | Code of conduct | coverage | 91% |
Interface shown as an illustration with representative numbers, not a screenshot — the layout is the product’s.
Stress-test one mandate’s file.
Pick the mandate that worries you; we’ll show what its verified version looks like — including the pack you’d hand an examiner.
The evidence this page stands on
Questions buyers ask
Which mandates should move to verified first?
The ones where you’d personally testify: typically POSH, ABC and data protection. High personal stakes, highest evidence upgrade.
Does verified training create new liabilities — knowing about gaps?
It converts unknown gaps into managed ones — which is the defensible posture everywhere in compliance. The gap you found and remediated is a process working; the one discovery finds first is the liability.
How do employees respond to verification versus attestation?
Better than compliance officers expect: short scenario practice reads as more respectful than annual slide marathons, and the completion-versus-verification debate never reaches employees at all.
Can the evidence format follow our regulator’s preferences?
Packs scope by mandate, population and period, in human- and machine-readable forms — shaped from real examination requests rather than a fixed template.
See it on your own content.
Bring one course. We’ll show you the retention curve your current training leaves behind — and what scheduled review does to it.
- 30 minutes, on your calendar — pick a slot here
- Run on your own content wherever possible, not a canned deck
- You see the dashboards, the learner surface and the evidence exports
- No commitment — and pilot data stays yours either way