0%
AI Act compliance
— 6 pillars, external audit done.
Evaluations & Juries
Standardize and Objectify Your Evaluation Process
Consistent, explainable, and auditable evaluations — for every jury, every session, every program.
The Challenge
Evaluation panels score inconsistently across reviewers
Customizable scoring rubrics by program — weighted criteria, structured comments, consistent scoring across panels. Every dimension is configurable without code.
Jury preparation is time-consuming
Consolidating files, distributing scorecards, collecting feedback — everything is done manually.
Deliberations lack traceability
Justifying a decision after the fact is difficult in the event of a dispute or accreditation audit.
AI Act compliance is complex to ensure for evaluations
100% of EU/UK RFPs now require AI Act compliance — every decision must be documented and justifiable.
Cognitive overload affects decision quality
Reviewers see too many files in too little time, creating decision fatigue.
Evaluation panels score inconsistently across reviewers
Customizable scoring rubrics by program — weighted criteria, structured comments, consistent scoring across panels. Every dimension is configurable without code.
Jury preparation is time-consuming
Consolidating files, distributing scorecards, collecting feedback — everything is done manually.
Deliberations lack traceability
Justifying a decision after the fact is difficult in the event of a dispute or accreditation audit.
AI Act compliance is complex to ensure for evaluations
100% of EU/UK RFPs now require AI Act compliance — every decision must be documented and justifiable.
Cognitive overload affects decision quality
Reviewers see too many files in too little time, creating decision fatigue.
Features
The Intelligence Layer
Standardized Evaluation Grid
Customizable scoring rubrics by program — weighted criteria, structured comments, consistent scoring across panels. Every dimension is configurable without code.
AI-Powered Pre-Scoring
Automatic pre-scoring of files before jury presentation — explainable scoring by academic, professional, and motivational dimension. SHAP technology on every dimension.
Jury Portal & Workflow
Dedicated jury member portal: access to filtered files, score entry, real-time deliberation tracking. Accessible from any device.
Explainable Decisions (SHAP)
Every AI recommendation is justified — SHAP technology, detailed scoring criteria, no black box. Ready for AACSB, EQUIS, AMBA audits.
Audit Trail & AI Act Compliance
Complete log of every decision: timestamp, model version, evaluators involved. 6 AI Act compliance pillars covered, external audit completed.
Blind Evaluation
Automatic masking of personal data (PII) during evaluation — names, photos, gender, nationality redacted to ensure fairness.
How It Works
End-to-End Process
1
Quick setup
Configure your scoring criteria, evaluation rubrics, and workflows. Connect to your CRM via API in a matter of hours.
2
Decision & communication
Decisions trigger personalized communications. Admitted students receive their onboarding information instantly.
3
Application intake
The applicant submits their file. Documents are received and structured automatically.
4
Human review
Your teams review the shortlists. The human always makes the final decision.
5
AI processing
AI checks eligibility, validates documents, and generates an explainable score with breakdown by dimension.
Quick setup
Configure your scoring criteria, evaluation rubrics, and workflows. Connect to your CRM via API in a matter of hours.
Decision & communication
Decisions trigger personalized communications. Admitted students receive their onboarding information instantly.
Application intake
The applicant submits their file. Documents are received and structured automatically.
Human review
Your teams review the shortlists. The human always makes the final decision.
AI processing
AI checks eligibility, validates documents, and generates an explainable score with breakdown by dimension.
Benefits
Proven Results
Reduced jury preparation and deliberation time.
Guaranteed consistency across all reviewers and all sessions.
Full traceability for accreditations (AACSB, EQUIS, AMBA).
Less bias, more fairness — built-in monitoring to detect and address statistical disparities across groups.
Case Study
Typical Workflow
1. Evaluation Setup
Define rubrics, criteria weights, and reviewer assignments for each evaluation context.
2. Submission Processing
Student submissions are collected and organized. Relevant context is prepared for reviewers.
3. Scoring Assistance
The platform provides structured scoring interfaces with rubric guidance and consistency checks.
4. Jury Preparation
For jury decisions, the platform compiles dossiers with all relevant information and prior assessments.
5. Decision Documentation
Final grades and decisions are recorded with full rationale for future reference.
What Is Automated
- Rubric-guided scoring interfaces
- Consistency and anomaly flagging
- Dossier compilation for juries
- Grade normalization assistance
- Documentation generation
What Remains Human
- All grading and evaluation decisions
- Jury deliberations and votes
- Rubric and criteria definition
- Grade dispute resolution
- Academic judgment calls
Outputs & Auditability
Evaluation Records
Complete scoring history with criteria and rationale.
Jury Minutes
Documented decisions with voting records and justifications.
Analytics
Insights into grading patterns across instructors and courses.