One contractor.
A clear route from review to handback.

Fictional training exercise. This is not a contractor assessment, a completed method statement or permission to start real work. All names and evidence are invented. Do not copy training approvals into operational records.

The scenario

Northbank wants a contractor to inspect a segregated pedestrian route and report visible defects. Alex owns the client review and engagement; Morgan is the independent reviewer. They use separate authorised accounts.

1. Establish the selection criteria

Alex adds the fictional contractor example in a separate training assessment. Alex records the site, scope, exclusions, interfaces and responsibilities, assigns Morgan as reviewer and saves. The example contains insurance, competence and induction checks awaiting assessment.

2. Complete the evidence checks

For each relevant check, Alex records a fictional evidence reference, the date checked, an appropriate review date and specific findings. Alex explains any Not applicable decision. A gap is followed up with a linked action and a named allocation; both must be Closed before approval.

Attach clearly labelled fictional evidence to Draft records. Keep the verification note meaningful: explain what was reviewed and how it meets the defined requirement.

3. Submit for independent review

Alex submits the saved review. Morgan examines the scope, checks and completed actions, then records a reasoned approval decision. Alex cannot approve Alex’s own submission. If correction is needed, Morgan returns it to Draft with a reason before Alex edits it.

4. Define the engagement

Alex creates TRAINING-ENG-001 under the approved contractor review. It describes the inspection, planned dates, supervision, induction, communication and handback arrangements. Alex links the exact approved revision of the fictional RAMS inspection plan.

Follow the linked RAMS example →

5. Check the people and every requirement

For each fictional worker, add a separate row for each qualification required by the exercise. Identify the role, level, requirement source, issuer, evidence reference, verification method and current dates. Complete every Compulsory row before submission.

The separate multiple-qualifications exercise demonstrates missing and expired evidence. Its CSCS and well control pairing is a software test, not a claim that either is required for this inspection.

6. Approve and start the engagement

Alex saves all prerequisites and submits. Morgan independently approves the saved engagement. On or after the planned start, Alex confirms actual readiness and briefing evidence before changing it to Active. The system checks the current contractor review, linked work plans and compulsory qualifications again.

Software readiness checks rely on the recorded information. Confirm real conditions, competence, permissions and controls separately before real work starts.

7. Respond to change and hand back

If a prerequisite ceases to be current, use the Review required information to assess the effect and record suspension where needed. Do not change earlier evidence to make it appear that the original decision covered different work.

At the end of the exercise, Morgan records the fictional performance review, handback and lessons, adds a closure reason and closes the engagement. The saved record retains its decisions and evidence.

What learners should demonstrate

• Locate the contractor review, its checks and the engagement.
• Explain which scope each approval covers.
• Show the exact linked work-plan revision.
• Explain why separate owner and reviewer accounts are required.
• Find all compulsory qualification rows and identify an expired one.
• Show the handback outcome and retained closure history.

Return to Contractor management → · Read the operating guide →