A fictional report that shows exactly what a Human Audit review looks like, before you submit anything.
What this is
This is a sample report for a fictional submission, written by Krong Academy to show how a Human Audit review reads. It is not a real learner’s work. Real submissions and reports are seen only by the reviewer and the lead reviewer, and are never shared without the learner’s consent. No AI reads a submission.
Read it before you plan your submission. It shows the shape of a result: one result per section, one strength for a section that meets the standard, the change needed for a section marked Not yet, and a short summary at the top.
The report
| Submission | |
|---|---|
| Name | Sample learner |
| Certificate of Completion number | KA-2026-000000 (sample) |
| Project | Repairs Booking and Scheduling Modernisation, Brookvale Housing Group (fictional) |
| Attempt | 1 of up to 4 |
| Submission received | 2 November 2026 |
| Report date | 27 November 2026 |
| Reviewed by | An experienced, certified project management reviewer; signed off by the lead reviewer |
Not yet: resubmission of Section 3 invited.
This is a strong first submission: Sections 1 and 2 meet the standard. Section 3 needs four changes, and one matters most: the risk register quotes a contingency of $30,000, while Sections 1 and 2 say $35,000. Correct it, check the other figures that cross sections, and resubmit Section 3 only within twenty-one business days.
Section 1: Problem Analysis and Business Case
Result: Meets the standard.
Rigour. The evidence table and the 400-job sample turn the problem statement from an assertion into a measured gap, and the options are compared on stated criteria.
Section 2: Scope, Governance and Stakeholder Plan
Result: Meets the standard.
Professional judgement. Putting the data-use agreement before any configuration shows you have read where the real power to block adoption sits.
Section 3: Risk Register and Monitoring Framework
Result: Not yet. Resubmission invited.
- Integration. R4 funds a $12,000 contract extension “from the $30,000 contingency”. Sections 1.5 and 2.2 set contingency at $35,000, held by the Project Board. The figures must agree across sections. Correct the figure, and say that drawing on contingency needs a Board decision, as your governance table requires.
- Rigour. The first-time fix KPI uses a “monthly glide path” that is not defined anywhere. Add the month-by-month targets from go-live to December 2027.
- Integration. Section 2.3 names the systems workstream lead as the “IT Applications Lead”, but R1 and R7 call the same person the “Systems lead”. Use one name throughout, so the Board knows who acts.
- AI responsibility. Your AI Use Note says each risk is linked to an assumption or constraint, but R5, R6 and R10 point to section numbers and R8 to nothing. Link each one to an entry in Section 2.2, adding the assumption if it is missing, or correct the note.
Next steps
What to send: Section 3 only, revised, with a short note on what you changed. Keep the same layout and Plan Summary.
By when: 28 December 2026 (twenty-one business days from this report).
How: Through the resubmission form linked in your report email. Your original submission stays on file for context.
Included: One resubmission is included with your enrolment. After that, one further review can be bought for $100, once only (Terms and Conditions, Section 7).
Results are final. Your reviewer does not re-review a result. If you disagree, your resubmission is the route. If your reviewer missed something that is in your submission, reply to hello@krong.academy within ten business days and quote the page.
How to read this report
- The result at the top tells you where you stand and the one thing to do first.
- Each section gets one result: Meets the standard or Not yet.
- A section that meets the standard gets its main strength. A section marked Not yet gets the change needed, tied to the place in your submission.
- Scores stay internal. The dimensions named in the report are the five in the published Scoring Model.
Krong Academy is an independent training provider. Caldera Freight is a fictional organisation created for instructional purposes.