The Gold Standard of Education | IB World School Programme Authorization, Candidacy, Verification and Evaluation

Start here: identify the decision before collecting evidence

Open the International Baccalaureate school finder and match the exact legal school, campus, location and authorised programme. A school may be authorised for the Primary Years Programme, Middle Years Programme, Diploma Programme or Career-related Programme without being authorised for every IB programme. Candidate status means the school is working through consultation, professional development, implementation and a verification route; it is not permission to present itself as an authorised IB World School for that programme.

Read the current authorisation route in order: consideration, request for candidacy, candidacy, consultation, request for authorisation, verification visit and the IB decision. The IB states that no fixed deadline applies to every stage because progression depends on readiness. If authorisation is granted, the school signs the agreement and receives its certificate. After authorisation, programme evaluation ordinarily occurs every five years. Keep each programme and campus separate, especially where a school group runs more than one division.

This guide was checked on 29 October 2026 against current primary guidance. IB sources checked on 29 October 2026 include the authorisation process pages last updated in February and May 2026, the candidacy requirements, the decision route and current public explanation of five-year programme evaluation. PYP and MYP candidates complete at least one academic year of trial implementation before moving through the stated milestones. Authorisation does not establish local operating permission, university admission, transfer credit, student immigration status or a learner result.

This specialist sits under The Gold Standard of Education: Learning That Transfers into Life. The parent framework keeps the purpose visible: understand the system, act on the correct evidence and build independence for the next decision.

Contents and reading routes

Use the quick route for an immediate decision, the complete route for a live case, and the teaching route when helping a learner explain the mechanism.

Quick route: chapters 1, 4, 7, 10 and 12.
Complete route: chapters 1–12, authoritative sources, verification workbook and FAQs.
Teaching route: chapters 2–3, worked case in chapter 7, and failure repair in chapter 10.

Open the chapter index

Open the IB school finder
Separate programmes within one school
Read consideration as exploration
Verify the candidacy decision
Follow professional development
Trace trial implementation and consultation
Worked case: one school, two IB claims
Read the request for authorisation
Interpret the verification visit
Handle matters to be addressed or denial
Track five-year programme evaluation
Ask the receiving institution

1. Open the IB school finder

Match the exact school, campus, country and listed programme.

An IB-branded school name does not prove every programme or campus is authorised.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking an IB school and programme states the present decision in one sentence. the International Baccalaureate, its authorisation team and visiting educators, the exact school and campus, local regulator, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the IB school-finder entry, programme listing, application for candidacy, candidacy decision, professional-development evidence, consultation record, application for authorisation, verification report, authorisation decision, evaluation record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the receiving organisation changes. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Contents · Next chapter

2. Separate programmes within one school

Record PYP, MYP, DP and CP independently.

Authorisation for one programme does not silently extend to the others.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking an IB school and programme states the present decision in one sentence. the International Baccalaureate, its authorisation team and visiting educators, the exact school and campus, local regulator, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the IB school-finder entry, programme listing, application for candidacy, candidacy decision, professional-development evidence, consultation record, application for authorisation, verification report, authorisation decision, evaluation record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the record is older than expected. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

3. Read consideration as exploration

Identify the school’s comparison of its context with IB requirements.

Interest in the IB is not candidacy.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking an IB school and programme states the present decision in one sentence. the International Baccalaureate, its authorisation team and visiting educators, the exact school and campus, local regulator, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the IB school-finder entry, programme listing, application for candidacy, candidacy decision, professional-development evidence, consultation record, application for authorisation, verification report, authorisation decision, evaluation record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: a deadline moves forward. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

4. Verify the candidacy decision

Keep the application, fee, supporting documents and formal decision together.

Submitting an application does not create candidate status.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking an IB school and programme states the present decision in one sentence. the International Baccalaureate, its authorisation team and visiting educators, the exact school and campus, local regulator, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the IB school-finder entry, programme listing, application for candidacy, candidacy decision, professional-development evidence, consultation record, application for authorisation, verification report, authorisation decision, evaluation record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the programme changes after an offer. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

5. Follow professional development

Match required workshops to coordinators, teachers and the relevant programme.

Attendance in one workshop does not prove whole-school readiness.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking an IB school and programme states the present decision in one sentence. the International Baccalaureate, its authorisation team and visiting educators, the exact school and campus, local regulator, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the IB school-finder entry, programme listing, application for candidacy, candidacy decision, professional-development evidence, consultation record, application for authorisation, verification report, authorisation decision, evaluation record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: one identifier is wrong. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

6. Trace trial implementation and consultation

Check the applicable academic-year trial, consultant feedback and programme evidence.

Implementation activity remains part of candidacy until the IB decides authorisation.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking an IB school and programme states the present decision in one sentence. the International Baccalaureate, its authorisation team and visiting educators, the exact school and campus, local regulator, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the IB school-finder entry, programme listing, application for candidacy, candidacy decision, professional-development evidence, consultation record, application for authorisation, verification report, authorisation decision, evaluation record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: a listing is current but the intake is not. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

7. Worked case: one school, two IB claims

Match a learner’s division to the exact authorised programme and dates.

A DP authorisation cannot be used as proof that the primary division is PYP-authorised.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking an IB school and programme states the present decision in one sentence. the International Baccalaureate, its authorisation team and visiting educators, the exact school and campus, local regulator, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the IB school-finder entry, programme listing, application for candidacy, candidacy decision, professional-development evidence, consultation record, application for authorisation, verification report, authorisation decision, evaluation record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the learner changes jurisdiction. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

8. Read the request for authorisation

Confirm the school has reached the programme-specific milestones.

Readiness is not established by a planned submission date.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking an IB school and programme states the present decision in one sentence. the International Baccalaureate, its authorisation team and visiting educators, the exact school and campus, local regulator, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the IB school-finder entry, programme listing, application for candidacy, candidacy decision, professional-development evidence, consultation record, application for authorisation, verification report, authorisation decision, evaluation record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: evidence arrives after an internal deadline. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

9. Interpret the verification visit

Separate visitor evidence from the IB’s decision.

A completed visit is not itself authorisation.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking an IB school and programme states the present decision in one sentence. the International Baccalaureate, its authorisation team and visiting educators, the exact school and campus, local regulator, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the IB school-finder entry, programme listing, application for candidacy, candidacy decision, professional-development evidence, consultation record, application for authorisation, verification report, authorisation decision, evaluation record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: a published route disappears. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

10. Handle matters to be addressed or denial

Record the deadline, follow-up evidence and final outcome exactly.

A school resolving conditions should not market a future result as current authorisation.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking an IB school and programme states the present decision in one sentence. the International Baccalaureate, its authorisation team and visiting educators, the exact school and campus, local regulator, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the IB school-finder entry, programme listing, application for candidacy, candidacy decision, professional-development evidence, consultation record, application for authorisation, verification report, authorisation decision, evaluation record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the decision-maker asks for the original document. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

11. Track five-year programme evaluation

Keep evaluation evidence and continuing compliance beside the authorisation.

A historical certificate should not replace the current programme record.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking an IB school and programme states the present decision in one sentence. the International Baccalaureate, its authorisation team and visiting educators, the exact school and campus, local regulator, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the IB school-finder entry, programme listing, application for candidacy, candidacy decision, professional-development evidence, consultation record, application for authorisation, verification report, authorisation decision, evaluation record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the search result is correct but incomplete. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents · Next chapter

12. Ask the receiving institution

Obtain the next school or university’s learner-specific decision.

IB authorisation cannot guarantee admission or credit.

Decision rehearsal and changed-context transfer

Turn this chapter into a live file. the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking an IB school and programme states the present decision in one sentence. the International Baccalaureate, its authorisation team and visiting educators, the exact school and campus, local regulator, receiving institution, learner and family supplies only the evidence it owns. the IB school-finder entry, programme listing, application for candidacy, candidacy decision, professional-development evidence, consultation record, application for authorisation, verification report, authorisation decision, evaluation record, learner record and destination decision records the result. Date every source and distinguish an official fact, an institution-specific decision, an estimate and a personal preference.

Now change one condition: the learner changes goal. Preserve every fact that remains valid and reopen only the conclusions that depend on the changed condition. Name the new page, document, calculation or contact required. This is the difference between understanding a system and memorising one outcome.

Run a boundary test. Write what the current evidence proves, what it does not prove and who has authority over the next decision. Replace one identifier, date or category and repeat the reasoning. If the conclusion changes without a cited rule or written decision, an assumption has entered the file.

Finish with a five-line handover: current state; controlling source; unresolved question; next permitted action; review date. A parent, adviser or future learner should be able to reconstruct the case without relying on memory or a private conversation.

Previous chapter · Contents

Authoritative sources and evidence boundary

These primary sources were checked on 29 October 2026. Reopen the live record near any enrolment, recognition, immigration, transfer, funding or licensing decision because statuses, dates and operating guidance can change.

A source can establish only the fact within its remit. Keep the current authority record beside learner-specific evidence and obtain the responsible organisation’s written decision where acceptance, credit, protection, immigration or eligibility is at stake.

Verification workbook

Complete every line with a dated official page, document, recorded state or named follow-up. A blank is useful because it shows where certainty has not yet been earned.

IB school finder
Legal school name
Campus
Location
PYP
MYP
DP
CP
Application for candidacy
Candidate status
Professional development
Trial implementation
Consultation
Application for authorisation
Verification visit
Matters to be addressed
IB decision
Authorisation agreement
Authorisation certificate
Five-year evaluation
Learner dates
Receiver decision

Build an auditable decision file

Open with the exact decision and its deadline. Attach the current current IB school-finder entry and the school’s programme-specific authorisation decision, the learner-specific record and the receiver’s published requirements. A general webpage explains a rule; it does not replace a learner-specific decision from the responsible body.

Create one evidence row for each controlling fact: school name, campus, location, PYP, MYP, DP, CP, consideration, candidacy application, candidate status, professional development, trial implementation, consultation, authorisation application, verification visit, matters to be addressed, authorisation agreement, authorisation certificate, five-year evaluation, learner dates and receiver decision. Give every row a source, retrieval date, status and owner. Mark a fact confirmed only when the cited source proves it. Use reported, estimated or pending for everything else.

Separate inputs from outputs. Inputs are facts supplied by the learner, provider or authority. Outputs are comparisons, classifications and decisions made from them. If an output looks wrong, check the input, then the dated rule, then any recorded exception.

Keep a change log for school identity, campus, programme, candidacy state, trial implementation, professional-development completion, verification visit, authorisation decision, evaluation outcome, learner dates and destination rules. Record the old fact, new fact, date learned, source and every conclusion that must be reopened. Do not silently overwrite the earlier state; the history explains why a reasonable plan changed.

Add a deadline map with the formal deadline, an earlier internal deadline and the recovery route if evidence arrives late. Where no recovery route is published, record that absence rather than inventing one. Reopen the official page near the action date because archived guidance can look authoritative.

Use a responsibility matrix. the IB owns programme authorisation and evaluation; the school owns delivery and learner records; public authorities own permission to operate; receiving schools and universities own admission and recognition decisions. If two people assume the other has acted, the file should expose the gap before the deadline.

Keep a contact note for each official enquiry: channel, date, question, answer and reference number. If verbal advice conflicts with a published rule or written decision, ask for clarification in writing before an irreversible action.

Run a source hierarchy check. Put the responsible authority first, current operational guidance second, the learner-specific notice third and informal explanation last. Where two official pages appear inconsistent, record both dates and ask which governs the present case.

Schedule a cold review two working days before any irreversible boundary. Recheck names, identifiers, dates, programme codes, study load and document version. Save the submission acknowledgement without treating receipt as approval.

After the decision, reconcile the notice with the plan line by line. Record what was accepted, refused, limited or deferred and the route for correction, review or appeal. Preserve the original decision when adding later correspondence.

Add a “not yet proved” page. List every conclusion that still depends on school name, campus, location, PYP, MYP, DP, CP, consideration, candidacy application, candidate status, professional development, trial implementation, consultation, authorisation application, verification visit, matters to be addressed, authorisation agreement, authorisation certificate, five-year evaluation, learner dates and receiver decision. Beside each item, name the smallest official record that would settle it and the person who can obtain that record. This stops a plausible estimate from drifting into the confirmed column merely because it has been repeated.

Rehearse a correction request before one is needed. Identify the learner, present decision, disputed input, supporting document and requested remedy without claiming an entitlement the evidence cannot establish. Address it to the organisation that owns the record or decision, keep a copy, and record the published response or escalation route.

Ask an independent reader to challenge the file. They should identify the weakest assumption, locate the official sentence that controls it and describe what changes if the assumption fails. Record that answer without deleting the earlier reasoning; the audit trail should show learning, not pretend uncertainty never existed.

Build a conservative time and cost plan beside the evidence file. Show what is already confirmed, what is estimated, which payment or enrolment step becomes irreversible and when. Then test a delayed decision and a less favourable outcome. The exercise does not predict the authority’s answer; it prevents an optimistic reading from becoming an unexamined commitment.

Ask the parent, student, school leader, adviser, receiving school, university applicant, registrar or evaluator checking an IB school and programme to narrate the case aloud in under two minutes: “This is my present state; this is the governing source; this is the learner-specific evidence; this is the unresolved boundary; this is my next permitted action.” A listener should be able to distinguish fact, comparison and choice without prompting.

Practise one counterfactual. Change only the school name stays the same but the learner changes campus, age division, IB programme, candidacy period, completion date or receiving university and trace which conclusions stay valid. The exercise reveals whether the learner understands the dependency chain or has memorised an answer belonging to another case.

Finish with a retention plan. Keep source documents, decisions, receipts and later corrections for as long as they remain useful to explain the education record. Store identifiers securely and share only what the named recipient needs.

Frequently asked questions

Is an IB candidate school an IB World School?

No. Candidate status is a development stage before the IB authorisation decision.

Can a school be authorised for only one IB programme?

Yes. Check the directory programme by programme.

Is there one fixed authorisation timeline?

No. The IB states that readiness, milestones and programme context govern progression.

Who makes the authorisation decision?

The IB; the Director General is ultimately responsible for application outcomes.

Does a verification visit confer authorisation?

No. It supplies evidence for the IB decision.

How often is programme evaluation?

The IB public explanation states every five years after authorisation.

Does IB authorisation guarantee university admission?

No. The receiving university decides admission and recognition.

What should a family save?

The current directory entry, programme authorisation, learner record and receiving decision.

Close the workbook by explaining the process without notes. A dependable explanation names the authority, present state, evidence, deadline and consequence if one assumption fails.

Continue with this Education batch

These companion guides use the same evidence-first method for a different register, framework or recognition decision.

Continue through the Education branch

Return to The Gold Standard of Education. Continue with the international-school pathways guide, the institutional and programme accreditation guide, the official international-curriculum source guide, the IB Diploma bilingual-diploma specialist, the Pearson Edexcel Astronomy evidence specialist. Each guide preserves the specialist owner while showing how records, qualifications and decisions connect.