To find where an assessment process stalls, map every stage from task release to result release, and record who is responsible, what evidence or decision they need, and what happens next. Pay particular attention to hand-offs: work can wait when the next person is unclear, a check is incomplete or nobody knows that action is needed.
A simple map is a diagnostic, not a new policy. Use it to compare the process your team actually follows with your centre’s requirements and the relevant awarding organisation’s rules. Ofqual’s current handbook sets out requirements in areas such as appeals and certification, while its guidance stresses that qualification-specific arrangements should be checked with the relevant awarding organisation. Requirements vary by qualification and context. Read Ofqual’s handbook section on appeals and certificates and consult the guidance applicable to your provision.
Build the map in four columns
Bring together the people who do the work, such as an assessor, internal quality assurer (IQA) and administrator. Start with one assessment type and one real process—not an idealised version. For each stage, fill in:
- Stage: What happens, from task release through to result release?
- Responsible role: Who must act? Name one accountable role, even if others support them.
- Evidence or decision: What must be received, checked or decided before the process can move on?
- Next step and hand-off: Who receives the work, how do they know it is ready, and what happens if something is missing?
Add a final note for each stage: where does work wait, and how would the team notice? Use actual examples from recent process reviews where appropriate, but avoid putting identifiable learner information on a general workshop map.
Example: a fictional resubmission
Imagine a learner has been invited to resubmit an assessment. This illustrative route shows how to make responsibilities and hand-offs visible; it is not a prescribed sequence for every provider.
| Stage | Responsible role | Evidence or decision needed | Possible hand-off gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resubmission task released | Administrator | Approved resubmission instruction, deadline and correct task version | The assessor’s required changes are not clearly reflected in the instruction. |
| Work received | Administrator | Submission recorded and matched to the correct learner and assessment | The file arrives, but nobody alerts the assessor or confirms it is ready to review. |
| Resubmission assessed | Assessor | Submitted evidence, relevant criteria and previous feedback | The assessor cannot tell which criteria or actions are in scope for this attempt. |
| Internal quality assurance | IQA | Assessment decision and supporting evidence, according to local sampling or review arrangements | The work is sent for review without a clear status, deadline or route back for clarification. |
| Outcome recorded and released | Administrator, following the authorised decision | Confirmed outcome, required checks and any applicable release approval | It is unclear whether the IQA review is complete or who authorises release. |
The map does not say that every resubmission must receive the same type of IQA review. That depends on local arrangements, qualification requirements and awarding organisation rules. The point is to identify the agreed check, the person responsible for it and the evidence that shows it has been completed. Ofqual’s handbook includes requirements for appeals processes, while its 2026 guidance on the period after assessments advises centres to read its guidance alongside relevant awarding organisation or JCQ guidance. Check the scope and guidance for your qualification.
Turn delays into practical questions
For every point where work waits, ask the team:
- Is the next owner named, or does the task sit in a shared inbox?
- Can the recipient tell what they need to review and what counts as complete?
- Is there a way to return incomplete work with a clear reason?
- Does anyone need to notify another role, or is that hand-off automatic in the current process?
- What prevents a result being released before required checks are finished?
Choose one recurring, manageable gap to address first. For example, agree that every IQA hand-off includes the assessment decision, relevant evidence and a recorded review status. Then test the revised process with a few appropriate cases and check whether the hand-off is clearer in practice. Keep a note of exceptions: a process that works for a routine resubmission may need a different route for an appeal, an incomplete file or a potential integrity concern.
Where EduMark Assessment Journeys fits
After the team has agreed its process, EduMark Assessment Journeys can connect assessment checks, staff, routing and result release in a visual journey. Its public product page describes configurable steps and routes to roles such as markers or quality teams, with results released after checks are complete. Use that as a way to represent an agreed workflow—not as a substitute for deciding who is authorised to assess, review or release outcomes.
Start by mapping the process on paper, confirming it against your own procedures and qualification-specific requirements, and then decide whether a connected workflow would help make the agreed hand-offs visible. A good map should let any team member answer the reader’s key question: what is waiting, who acts next, and what do they need to act?
Sources & further reading
See how EduMark connects learning, assessment and your team.
Explore EduMark →
