Certification evidence
DO-178C SOI-1 planning package evidence review for DO-178C, DO-330
This review is for avionics suppliers, Certification teams, Engineering teams responsible for DO-178C SOI-1 planning package. It is triggered by sOI-1 audit scheduled. EE checks three software standards, tool list with claimed qualification needs, transition criteria between lifecycle processes., plus the governing plan or application, against DO-178C, DO-330. Discrepancies include missing source records, mismatched configuration, unsupported assumptions, or PSAC promises activities no other plan implements. Output includes DO-178C SOI-1 planning package exception register, Claim to evidence map, Reviewer question list.
When this review is needed
- A new article, software load, or installation is moving into certification review.
- Quality control needs a repeatable list of ready and open records.
- Internal teams need a supplier request list tied to evidence gaps.
- The buyer wants a defensible package before committing the claim.
The problem
Certification risk sits in the gap between the claimed basis and the records in the folder. With DO-178C SOI-1 planning package, PSAC promises activities no other plan implements can stay hidden until the exact source record is requested.
What gets reviewed
- Review three software standards against the configuration, installation, or claim under review.
- Compare tool list with claimed qualification needs against the configuration, installation, or claim under review.
- Trace transition criteria between lifecycle processes. against the configuration, installation, or claim under review.
- Challenge applicable plan or application text against the configuration, installation, or claim under review.
- Reconcile supporting test and analysis records against the configuration, installation, or claim under review.
- Confirm configuration and revision identifiers against the configuration, installation, or claim under review.
What gets validated
- Pass check: three software standards must match the released configuration and the claimed means of compliance.
- Configuration check: tool list with claimed qualification needs must match the released configuration and the claimed means of compliance.
- Trace check: transition criteria between lifecycle processes. must match the released configuration and the claimed means of compliance.
- Rationale check: applicable plan or application text must match the released configuration and the claimed means of compliance.
- Closure check: supporting test and analysis records must match the released configuration and the claimed means of compliance.
Evidence normally required
- Controlled three software standards
- Released tool list with claimed qualification needs
- Signed transition criteria between lifecycle processes.
- Current applicable plan or application text
- Archived supporting test and analysis records
- Supplier configuration and revision identifiers
Common discrepancies
- Gap: pSAC promises activities no other plan implements.
- Mismatch: standards are templates that do not match the actual toolchain.
- Unsupported claim: tool qualification needs are never identified so credit claims surface unplanned at SOI-3.
What is at stake
A weak package can convert a planned review into a long question log. If standards are templates that do not match the actual toolchain, the program may need new evidence before the claim can proceed.
Move from findings to resolution
Identify gaps against the means of compliance.
How the work runs
Frame 178c Soi
Confirm the exact event, affected file set, buyer role, and decision standard before any three software standards is treated as sufficient.
Trace Review Prep
Walk the named evidence from index entry to source artifact and mark where the trail supports, conflicts with, or fails to answer the page-specific question.
Sort Evidence 330
Group exceptions by closure route: document retrieval, data correction, engineering disposition, authority response, or contractual decision.
Package Plans Standards
Deliver the exception list, evidence map, and owner sequence in a form that can move directly into remediation, submittal cleanup, or transaction negotiation.
What the buyer receives
Who uses the output
- software certification lead assign closure actions from the exception register.
- DER use the map to locate source evidence.
- program manager decide what can proceed and what must wait.
How the work fits into the transaction or program
Programs use the output to align engineering, quality, and certification before the package leaves internal control. The page-specific framing is is the software plan set ready for the authority's Stage of Involvement 1 review, or does it get torn up in the room. Evidence reviewed: PSAC, SDP, SVP, SCMP, SQAP, the three software standards, the tool list with claimed qualification needs, and transition criteria between lifecycle processes. Failure modes include the PSAC promises activities no other plan implements, standards are templates that do not match the actual toolchain and language, and tool qualification needs are never identified so credit claims. For 178c soi planning review, the practical output is a defensible record of what was checked, what did not match, who owns the fix, and which issue remains outside the review boundary. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep scope is intentionally narrow: Get an independent readiness review of DO-178C plans and standards before a scheduled SOI-1 audit.. The 178c Soi Planning evidence question is tested against three software standards and not against a generic checklist copied from another page. The Review Prep Package trigger is soi-1 audit scheduled, so the review ranks gaps by decision impact instead of document volume. The Evidence 330 Certification searcher pattern is A software certification lead with an SOI-1 date on the calendar searching for what the reviewer will check and how to pre-audit the plan set.. The Plans Standards Checked evidence trail has to show source location, current status, conflicting entries, and the owner who can close the issue. The Plan Set Consistency exception logic separates missing artifacts from mismatched data because those findings move through different closure routes. The Audit Trace Baseline handoff is written for software certification lead, with unresolved items preserved as decisions rather than softened into narrative prose. The deliverable stays anchored on do-178c soi-1 planning package exception register, which makes the next reviewer able to reperform the path without rebuilding the file. The boundary is deliberately explicit: records and certification evidence are organized, but approval, acceptance, and airworthiness decisions remain with the authorized parties. The brief-specific angle is is the software plan set ready for the authority's Stage of Involvement 1 review, or does it get torn up in the room. Evidence reviewed: PSAC, SDP, SVP, SCMP, SQAP, the three software standards, the tool list with claimed qualification needs, and transition criteria between lifecycle processes. The failure pattern includes the PSAC promises activities no other plan implements, standards are templates that do not match the actual toolchain and language, and tool qualification needs are never identified so credit claims surface unplanned at SOI-3. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep 178c soi planning lane records how 330 certification plans affects plan set consistency, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep planning prep package lane records how plans standards checked affects consistency audit decision, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep package 330 certification lane records how checked plan set affects decision software ready, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep certification plans standards lane records how set consistency audit affects ready authority stage, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep standards checked plan lane records how audit decision software affects stage involvement does, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep plan set consistency lane records how software ready authority affects does get torn, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep consistency audit decision lane records how authority stage involvement affects torn room reviewed, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep decision software ready lane records how involvement does get affects reviewed psac sdp, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep ready authority stage lane records how get torn room affects sdp svp scmp, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep stage involvement does lane records how room reviewed psac affects scmp sqap, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep does get torn lane records how psac sdp svp affects 178c soi planning, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep torn room reviewed lane records how svp scmp sqap affects planning prep package, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep reviewed psac sdp lane records how sqap affects package 330 certification, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep sdp svp scmp lane records how soi planning prep affects certification plans standards, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep scmp sqap lane records how prep package 330 affects standards checked plan, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep 178c soi planning lane records how 330 certification plans affects plan set consistency, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep planning prep package lane records how plans standards checked affects consistency audit decision, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The do 178c soi 1 planning review prep package 330 certification lane records how checked plan set affects decision software ready, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The governing intent remains Get an independent readiness review of DO-178C plans and standards before a scheduled SOI-1 audit.. The operating angle for this page is Decision: is the software plan set ready for the authority's Stage of Involvement 1 review, or does it get torn up in the room. Evidence reviewed: PSAC, SDP, SVP, SCMP, SQAP, the three software standards, the tool list with claimed qualification needs, and transition criteria between lifecycle processes. Failure modes: the PSAC promises activities no other plan implements, standards are templates that do not match the actual toolchain and language, and tool qualification needs are never identified so credit claims surface unplanned at.
Start with a single asset
Confirm requirements trace through verification.
Regulatory limits
The output supports applicant decision making and authority discussions. It does not replace required approvals, designee findings, conformity activity, or airworthiness determinations.
What this review does not cover
- Final certification decision
- Airworthiness determination
- Hardware or software redesign
- Production quality release
Specific to this review
- Configuration identity matters because evidence from another baseline may prove a different article, load, or installation.
- A useful trail names the source record, revision, owner, and closure decision for each claim.
- The exception list separates document-control cleanup from gaps that need engineering substantiation.
- The finding pattern for this page is specific: PSAC promises activities no other plan implements changes the strength of the certification argument.
- The scope uses the 178c Soi Planning Review question as the control point, so the review stays tied to SOI-1 audit scheduled and the buyer decision behind it.
- The evidence starts with Three software standards and follows Prep Package Evidence 330 references until every exception has a source location and a reason code.
- The finding logic separates missing paperwork, conflicting status, stale revision data, and unsupported disposition because each class closes through a different owner.
- The timing matters for software certification lead: the output is useful only if the unresolved items are visible before acceptance, submittal, handback, or negotiation pressure fixes the sequence.
- The boundary control keeps Certification Plans Standards Checked questions in the records or certification lane and sends technical acceptance issues to the authorized people who own them.
- The handoff value comes from DO-178C SOI-1 planning package exception register; it gives the next reviewer a precise map instead of another broad request for a better file.
Sources
RTCA. Objectives and lifecycle data for airborne software assurance, by design assurance level (DAL A-E).
Federal Aviation Administration. FAA type certification process, certification basis establishment, and compliance findings.
U.S. Government (eCFR). Type certificates, STCs (Subpart E), TSO authorizations (Subpart O), PMA (Subpart K), and export airworthiness approvals (Subpart L).
Frequently asked questions
What makes this evidence review different from a general file audit?
The scope is tied to 178c soi planning review and to the decision named in the request. A general audit can list weak records; this pass ranks the gaps by whether they block soi-1 audit scheduled or can be closed later without changing the decision.
What evidence has to be available before this work starts?
The starting point is three software standards, the current status source, and any index or matrix that tells reviewers where the supporting artifact should live. Missing inputs are logged as findings rather than filled with assumptions.
Who decides whether an open item is acceptable?
The review explains what the evidence supports and gives software certification lead a closure path. Acceptance remains with the buyer, operator, authority, delegated engineer, or authorized person responsible for the underlying airworthiness or certification decision.
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.
Talk through the aircraft, records, evidence, deadline, and next useful step.