Applications are rarely refused on merit. They come back for a missing document, a date that contradicts another, or a competency area your own descriptions never mention. This check goes through your application section by section and puts what is wrong in the order you should fix it.
Run the check →Every finding is tied to a section of the application, with what to do about it.
Every section checked one by one, the coverage of the competency areas, the ordered list of what to fix, and an export to attach to your correspondence.
No card details are requested: online payment is not open yet.
Nobody is turned down because their years of work were not good enough. They are turned down because a payslip was missing, a period was declared twice, or the description of the job never used a single word that maps to the standard. Those are all checkable before anyone sends anything, and that is exactly what this does.
The same sections an awarding body asks for: identity, situation, experience, training, documents, funding, declaration.
Completeness, date logic, total length, description depth, coverage of the competency areas, documents required for your status.
Critical first, then what to improve, each tied to its section, exportable for your adviser.
By matching the words in your activity descriptions against the competency areas of the profile you chose. It is a useful and honest signal: work you really did but never described will not show up. The report says so explicitly, and that is usually the best sign that your descriptions need rewriting.
As a rule of thumb, about a year of relevant activity, continuous or not. The tool adds up the periods you declare and warns you if the total falls under that or sits only just above it. The exact requirement is set by the awarding body.
An adviser judges what no automatic rule can settle: how solid your experience really is, whether the profile is the right one, and how to present an unusual period. The €29 check saves them the mechanical verifications.
A chatbot does not know the structure of the application, happily invents conditions, and will “guarantee” you an eligibility it has no standing to judge. Here every remark is tied to a section, the competency areas come from a defined model, and nothing is presented as a decision.
Updated on · Published by ProRédaction