Certification Policies
Transparent rules for eligibility, evidence, identity, AI assistance, confidentiality, revision, appeals, renewal, conflicts, and revocation.
Who may apply.
Candidates must be able to submit a working deployment and explain the complete lifecycle. Course completion is not required. An official Deploy to Value mission or an approved real-world project may be used.
Before assessment begins, the candidate receives:
- Credential title and assessed competencies
- Mission and assessment version
- Evidence checklist and scoring rubric
- Submission deadline and live-defense format
- Revision, appeal, privacy, and refund terms
Changes that materially affect requirements do not apply retroactively to an active candidate unless the candidate elects to use the newer version.
The candidate must own and understand the submission.
Reasonable identity verification is required before the live defense. The public credential uses the candidate name approved for publication.
Candidate attestations
- The submitted work accurately represents the candidate’s contribution.
- External code, templates, collaborators, and substantial AI assistance are disclosed.
- Claims about users, deployment status, and measured outcomes are truthful.
- The candidate has authority to submit and publish every artifact or link provided.
Real-world projects must remove confidential, personal, export-controlled, regulated, or proprietary information unless explicit written authorization is provided.
AI tools are permitted. Accountability is not delegated.
Candidates may use code assistants, language models, retrieval tools, or other AI systems. They remain responsible for correctness, security, licensing, originality, and the ability to explain every material decision.
Disclosure is required when AI materially contributes to:
- Architecture or requirements
- Production code or tests
- Data generation or transformation
- Analysis, metrics, or conclusions
- Written artifacts or demonstration scripts
Using AI is not a scoring penalty. Undisclosed material assistance, fabricated evidence, or inability to explain the work may constitute an integrity failure.
Private evidence stays private by default.
Submission files, recordings, reviewer notes, email addresses, and private repository links are not published. Review access is limited to authorized assessors and operational administrators.
The public verification page may include:
- Candidate-approved display name
- Credential title, ID, status, issue date, and expiration date
- Assessment mission and version
- Competencies demonstrated
- Candidate-approved portfolio links
Candidates may request removal of optional public portfolio links. The minimum verification record remains available while the credential is active or revoked, subject to applicable law and documented privacy requests.
One bounded revision opportunity may be offered.
Possible outcomes are Pass, Conditional Pass, Revision Required, and Not Yet Competent. A revision opportunity identifies the specific competency gaps, permitted changes, resubmission evidence, and deadline.
A revision is not a complete second assessment. Major redesign, a different project, a failed live defense, or a critical integrity issue may require a new assessment.
Appeals examine process and scoring consistency.
A candidate may appeal an assessment decision when they believe the published process was not followed, evidence was overlooked, a scoring anchor was applied inconsistently, or a conflict affected the review.
An appeal should identify:
- The decision being challenged
- The relevant rubric or policy provision
- The specific evidence or procedural error
- The requested remedy
An appeal is not granted solely because the candidate disagrees with professional judgment. Where practical, an assessor not involved in the original decision reviews the appeal.
The credential is valid for two years.
Renewal requires evidence of current deployment practice. Payment alone is insufficient.
Eligible renewal routes may include:
- A new or materially updated deployment portfolio
- A shorter continuing-practice assessment
- Recent professional deployment evidence plus technical review
- An updated assessment covering material changes in AI, security, or enterprise delivery
Expired credentials remain verifiable as expired and are not represented as currently active.
Reviewers must be competent and impartial.
Reviewers follow a written handbook, record evidence for every score, protect confidential materials, and disclose relationships that could affect impartiality.
A reviewer must recuse when they have a direct financial, supervisory, familial, or significant personal relationship with the candidate or a material interest in the result. Borderline or disputed assessments may receive a second review.
Credential status can change when the evidence was not trustworthy.
A credential may be suspended during investigation and revoked for material fraud, plagiarism, identity misrepresentation, fabricated deployment evidence, undisclosed prohibited assistance, or other serious integrity violations.
The holder receives notice and an opportunity to respond unless immediate action is necessary to prevent ongoing misrepresentation. The verification page shows the current status without publishing unnecessary private details.