Certification evidence
Certification compliance matrix review
A compliance matrix review checks that an article's compliance matrix actually holds up: that each requirement maps to a means of compliance and to a document that supports the claim made. It is used by certification teams before an authority submittal. It covers requirement coverage, evidence currency, and traceability. You receive a reconciled matrix and a list of requirements whose evidence is missing, stale, or inconsistent.
When this review is needed
- A submission is being prepared and the matrix needs an independent read before it goes out.
- A program changed scope and the matrix has to be reconciled with the current evidence.
- Findings cite the matrix and the team needs to know which entries no longer hold.
The problem
A compliance matrix is the index an authority reviews against, but it is built early and rarely re-checked against the documents it cites. Requirements get added, evidence is revised, and the matrix keeps pointing at the old version. When the cited document no longer says what the matrix claims, the finding is immediate.
What gets reviewed
- Coverage of every requirement in the certification basis
- The means of compliance assigned to each requirement
- The evidence each entry cites and whether it currently supports the claim
- Traceability between requirements, design, and verification
What gets validated
- Every requirement in the basis appears in the matrix with a means of compliance
- Each cited document exists, is current, and supports the entry that points to it
- Verification evidence is present for requirements marked as met by test or analysis
- Derived requirements are captured and traced
- The matrix and the underlying requirements set are consistent
Evidence normally required
- The current compliance matrix
- The certification basis and requirements set
- The cited evidence documents or an index to them
Common discrepancies
- Matrix entries citing superseded document revisions
- Requirements with no verification evidence behind a met status
- Coverage gaps where a basis requirement is missing from the matrix
- Derived requirements absent from the trace
What is at stake
A matrix that cites stale or missing evidence turns a single review into several. Each cycle costs schedule and consumes the engineering time that was meant for closing real gaps.
Move from findings to resolution
Identify gaps against the means of compliance.
What the buyer receives
- A reconciled compliance matrix with each entry confirmed or flagged
- A list of requirements whose evidence is missing, stale, or inconsistent
- A prioritized closure list ordered by review risk
Who uses the output
- Certification leads finalizing the submittal
- Compliance and engineering teams closing the flagged entries
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The review is a focused pre-submittal check that strengthens the package an applicant submits. It pairs with a fuller evidence review when a program needs more than the matrix checked.
Start with a single asset
Confirm requirements trace through verification.
Regulatory limits
The review checks the applicant's matrix and evidence. It does not make compliance findings on the authority's behalf or guarantee acceptance of the submission.
What this review does not cover
- Making official compliance findings
- Issuing any approval
- Generating the missing evidence itself
Specific to this review
- A compliance matrix is built early and seldom re-checked against the documents it cites, which is why stale citations are the most common finding.
- Coverage and currency are checked separately: a requirement can be present in the matrix yet cite evidence that no longer supports it.
Sources
U.S. Government (eCFR). Type certificates, STCs (Subpart E), TSO authorizations (Subpart O), PMA (Subpart K), and export airworthiness approvals (Subpart L).
SAE International. Development assurance process at aircraft and system level, including requirements capture and validation.
RTCA. Objectives and lifecycle data for airborne software assurance, by design assurance level (DAL A-E).
Frequently asked questions
Is this the same as a full evidence review?
No. The matrix review is a focused check of coverage and currency. A full evidence review goes deeper into the qualification, software, and hardware data behind the entries.
Relevant glossary terms
Related pages
Where this fits
Talk to an engineer who has done this work
We will walk through your current state, the records or evidence involved, and a scoped first engagement.
Walk through your situation with an engineer who has done this work.