Who sets the standards, who assesses, and who reviews.

• Developing and reviewing the assessment standards for Carving and Flatland Freestyle.
• Confirming the technical ability requirements of each certification level.
• Managing revisions to the assessment rubric.
• Reviewing the fairness, consistency and professionalism of assessment.
• Proposing standard updates and improvements to the certification system.

Two discipline panels provide specialist technical input to the Technical Committee. They do not appoint examiners and do not decide individual candidate results.

• Carving Discipline Panel — edge control, turn shape, pressure management, speed control and line selection criteria.
• Flatland Freestyle Discipline Panel — balance, press control, butter execution, rotation, timing and combination criteria.
• Both panels report to the Technical Committee, which approves any change to a published standard.

Examiners deliver assessments. They do not set or revise the standards they apply.

• Conducting technical and teaching assessments according to the published rubric.
• Assessing a candidate's technique, demonstration, analysis, teaching and safety management.
• Participating in examiner calibration and scoring-consistency training.
• Observing examiner conduct, conflict of interest and candidate confidentiality requirements.
• Submitting assessment results and any documentation required for review.

• Managing versions of the assessment standards.
• Ensuring examiners apply a consistent rubric.
• Managing result review, appeal and reassessment procedures.
• Maintaining certification records and the certificate verification system.
• Monitoring whether assessment is delivered according to the published rules.

• Member and candidate management.
• Application and administrative processes.
• Examination information and notices.
• Certificate records.
• Member support and general enquiries.

• Examiners declare any coaching, employment, family or commercial relationship with a candidate before an assessment.
• Where a material interest exists, the examiner is not assigned to that candidate's assessment.
• Technical Committee members withdraw from decisions where a personal interest arises.
• The full Conflict of Interest Policy is published in the Member Portal.

• A candidate may request a review of an assessment result within a defined period.
• Reviews are handled by Standards & Quality Assurance, not by the examiner who issued the result.
• A review examines whether the published criteria and procedures were correctly applied.
• Timeframes, fees and outcomes are defined in the Appeals Policy in the Member Portal.

• Proposal — raised by a discipline panel, the Examiner Panel or Quality Assurance.
• Technical review — the Technical Committee reviews the proposal against the existing framework.
• Approval — an approved change is recorded with a version number and effective date.
• Publication — the revised standard is published and the superseded version is archived.
• Until a revision is approved, existing published criteria continue to apply.