Gate review form
Complete one form per person per gate. Attach the completed instrument file (the track's file in instruments/, such as instruments/band-5-quality-assurance-test-analyst.tsv, with agreed ratings) and link the evidence. Thresholds are in the gates overview.
Gate results are developmental only. They never start a capability, performance, or conduct procedure by themselves.
1. Details
| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| Participant | |
| Band | |
| UK GDaD PCF role and role level | |
| Track | Band 3 / Band 4 quality assurance / Band 4 test engineering / Band 5 quality assurance / Band 6 quality assurance / Band 6 test engineering / Band 7 test engineering / Band 7 test management |
| Mapping decision (if any, Decision 6) | |
| Gate | 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 |
| Date | |
| Repeat of an earlier attempt? | No / Yes (date of first attempt: ) |
| Reviewers | |
| Reasonable adjustments applied |
2. Capability index
Use agreed ratings. Meets counts as 1, Partly as 0.5, Not yet as 0. scripts/capability_index.py calculates these from the completed instrument file.
| Part | Items | Meets | Partly | Not yet | Index (%) | Index at last gate (%) | Threshold (%) | Met? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A Band (21 dimensions) | 21 | |||||||
| B UK GDaD PCF role aspects | ||||||||
| C Skills | ||||||||
| Overall (mean of A, B, C) | — | — | — | — | 90 at Gate 4 (Learning outcome 13) |
3. Part D practical
| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| Practical (from Part D practicals) | |
| Time allowed | 30 / 60 minutes |
| Supervisor | |
| Result | Meets / Partly / Not yet |
| Notes | |
| Threshold at this gate | Partly or better (Gates 1, 2) / Meets (Gates 3, 4, 5) |
| Met? |
4. Conditions
Tick only the row for this gate.
| Gate | Condition | Met? | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gate 0 | Individual learning plan agreed and signed | ||
| Gate 1 | No item lower than at Gate 0 without an agreed reason | ||
| Gate 2 | Clinical risk management and information governance meet expectations | ||
| Gate 3 | Test engineering at least one level below the automation target, or at it | ||
| Gate 4 | No skill more than one level below expected | ||
| Gate 4 | Test engineering at the automation target | ||
| Gate 4 | Capstone accepted by the product owner | ||
| Gate 5 | Plan agreed for any remaining gaps, aiming for 100% by the next annual appraisal |
5. Module evidence
| Evidence | Due at this gate? | Link | Reviewed by | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evidence 1 Basics of a programming language: walkthrough signed off | Gate 0 | |||
| Evidence 2 Basics of a browser automator: walkthrough signed off | Gate 0 | |||
| Evidence 3 Basics of an AI assistant: walkthrough signed off | Gate 0 | |||
| Evidence 6 Induction and baseline | Gate 0 | |||
| Evidence 7 Automation candidate analysis | Gate 1 | |||
| Evidence 8 Programming exercises | Gate 1 | |||
| Evidence 9 Pull requests | Gate 1 | |||
| Evidence 10 Browser automation script | Gate 2 | |||
| Evidence 11 Real test suite and Given-When-Then | Gate 2 | |||
| Evidence 12 API and FHIR tests | Gate 3 | |||
| Evidence 13 CI pipeline and triage | Gate 3 | |||
| Evidence 14 Safe and lawful automation | Gate 4 | |||
| Evidence 15 Quality engineering | Gate 4 | |||
| Evidence 16 Capstone | Gate 4 | |||
| Track module evidence | As the track requires |
6. Calibration notes
| Item id | Self rating | Manager rating | Agreed rating | Evidence that decided it | Moderated? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Record every item where self and manager ratings differed by more than one level.
7. Decision
- Gate met. Continue to the next stage.
- Gate not met. Up to 22.5 extra learning hours on the items below threshold, with the written plan below and extra mentor time. Repeat date: ______
- Repeated gate not met. Next step agreed (tick one): extension to 368 hours / different automation target / more Role foundations support / pause the programme / other: ______
Extra learning hours plan (if not met)
| Item below threshold | Action | Owner | Extra mentor time | Due |
|---|---|---|---|---|
8. Individual learning plan update
| Change to the individual learning plan | Reason |
|---|---|
The top 3 gaps for the next gate period:
9. Strengths
Items rated above expectation (negative gaps), including an automation target above the role's expectation. These are strengths. They do not change band or role.
10. Signatures
| Role | Name | Signature | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Participant | |||
| Line manager | |||
| Mentor | |||
| Training lead (Gates 0, 3, 5, and moderation) | |||
| Panel chair (Gate 4) |
The participant's signature confirms they have seen this form, not that they agree. Add any comment from the participant here:
View this document on GitHub materials/gates/gate-review-form.md