Certification plan evidence review for qualification test teams

When this review is needed

• A certification plan is set and the team wants to confirm the data package can meet what it promised.
• The certification approach shifted mid-program and the plan may commit to work the data no longer reflects.
• An authority finding questioned whether a plan commitment was actually delivered in the package.
• The affected areas were scoped early and a design change may have widened them beyond the plan.

The problem

The certification plan is a promise made early, before most of the evidence exists, and the program rarely closes the loop back to it. The plan commits to a set of review milestones, names affected areas, and fixes a basis, then the data package drifts as the design and schedule move. By submittal the plan can promise coverage the package never produced, and an authority reading the plan against the data is the first to notice.

What gets reviewed

• The stated certification basis reconciled to the basis the evidence was produced against
• Affected areas in the plan checked against the areas the data package actually addresses
• Review and involvement commitments reconciled to what was delivered
• The committed means of compliance checked against the evidence types produced
• Plan assumptions checked against how the program actually ran
• Design changes checked for corresponding updates to the plan's scope

What gets validated

• The basis stated in the plan matches the basis the evidence was produced against
• Every affected area named in the plan is addressed by the data package
• Each review or involvement commitment in the plan was delivered
• The means of compliance committed in the plan match the evidence types produced
• A change that widened the affected areas is reflected in the plan's scope

Evidence normally required

• The certification plan with its basis, affected areas, and commitments
• The data package the team intends to submit
• The certification basis the evidence rests on
• The compliance matrix showing which commitments were met
• Change records that altered the certification approach or scope

Common discrepancies

• An affected area named in the plan that the data package never addressed
• A review commitment in the plan with no record that it was delivered
• A means of compliance the plan committed that the evidence does not reflect
• A design change that widened scope without an update to the plan

What is at stake

A plan that promises more than the package delivers reads as a program that lost track of its own commitments, and an authority that finds the gap can question whether the certification approach was followed. Commitments the data does not meet either force late work to catch up or an amended plan negotiated under time pressure, both of which cost schedule.

How the work runs

What the buyer receives

• A gap list keyed to plan commitments the data package does not meet
• An evidence map from each commitment to the record that delivers it
• A closure sequence ordering the shortfalls by dependency and effort

Who uses the output

• Test leads confirming the package meets the plan before submittal
• Certification leads answering a finding on an undelivered commitment
• Engineering owners closing scope a design change added to the plan

How the work fits into the transaction or program

The review closes the loop the program opened when it wrote the plan, checking at submittal that the promises made early are matched by the evidence in hand. Its gap list drives the work or the plan amendment needed to reconcile the two, and its evidence map ties each commitment to the record that satisfies it.

Jurisdiction-specific considerations

FAA and EASA both work from an agreed certification plan and each sets its own expectations for involvement and review milestones. The review notes where the plan satisfies one authority's involvement structure and where the other would expect the milestones or the affected-area definition to be framed differently.

Regulatory limits

The review checks the plan against the deliverable evidence. It does not agree the plan with an authority, accept the certification approach, or make a compliance determination.

What this review does not cover

• Authoring or negotiating the certification plan
• Agreeing the plan or the basis with an authority
• Determining compliance of the certified product

Specific to this review

• The plan is written before the evidence exists, so it is the one deliverable the program almost never checks itself back against.
• Affected areas are scoped early and a later design change is the usual reason the plan promises less coverage than the finished design needs.
• Review and involvement commitments are easy to leave undelivered, because they are agreed up front and rarely tracked to a closing record.

Sources

Frequently asked questions

Relevant glossary terms

Related pages

Where this fits