> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://help.resouris.com/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://help.resouris.com/understand-your-capacity/self-assess-attainment.md). # Levels of attainment **Throughput → Levels of attainment** A self-assessment against the two NHS England standards: * *E-rostering the clinical workforce: levels of attainment and meaningful use standards*, NHS England and NHS Improvement, June 2019 * *E-job planning the clinical workforce: levels of attainment and meaningful use standards*, NHS England and NHS Improvement, June 2019 All 33 criteria, each row carrying its own standard's reference number. Where a threshold is ReSouris's rather than the standard's, the row says so. > **This is not a submission and it is not validated by NHS England.** It is an indicative self-assessment, and the page says so at the top. Treat it as preparation for a conversation, not as a score. ## The three kinds of criterion The single most important thing to understand about this page is that "met" does not always mean the same thing. ### Computed ReSouris measured it, from your data, and can show you the arithmetic. *"At least 90% of employees have an active account"* is a query. These recompute every time you load the page — you cannot assert your way past a computed criterion, and if the number drops the level drops with it. ### Attested Somebody with authority asserted it. *"The trust has a job-planning policy in force"* is not something a database can observe, and pretending otherwise would be worse than asking a human. An attestation records **who**, **when**, and optionally a note. It can be **withdrawn**, which puts the level back down. > A self-assessment that can only go up is not a self-assessment. If a policy lapses, withdraw the attestation. ### Out of scope ReSouris cannot evidence it, and says so, naming where the evidence actually lives. *"Team objectives, departmental budgets and the trust's objectives are aligned"* needs reconciliation between rosters, finance ledgers and ESR; budget alignment belongs to finance systems. **An out-of-scope criterion still blocks its level until somebody attests it.** It does not quietly pass itself because we cannot measure it — that would be scoring yourself on a question you have admitted you cannot answer. What you can do is attest it *and name the source*, which is the honest form of "yes, and here is where to check". ## Levels are sequential Level 3 means every criterion at levels 1, 2 and 3 is met. One outstanding criterion at level 2 holds you at level 1 regardless of how much of level 4 is satisfied. This is the standards' own structure, not ours, and it is why the page's most useful output is not the number — it is the short list of what is blocking the next level. ## Attesting a criterion 1. Find the row. Un-evidenced rows are marked **Awaiting attestation**. 2. For an out-of-scope criterion, name the evidence source — the system or document where the answer lives. 3. Click **Attest**. The level recomputes immediately. Every attestation writes an audit event with your name and a timestamp. **Withdraw** does the same in reverse, and is equally audited. Withdrawing is not an admin correction to be avoided; it is the mechanism by which the assessment stays true. ## Reading the summary cards | Card | Question it answers | | ------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------ | | **Criteria met** | how much of both standards is satisfied | | **Not met** | measured, and below the threshold — the ones you cannot argue with | | **Awaiting attestation** | nobody has asserted these yet | A high **Awaiting attestation** count is not a failure. It usually means the department has never sat down and gone through the list, which is exactly the exercise the page exists to prompt. **Not met** is the column to look at first. Those are measured, so they are statements about what the system observed, and they will not change until the underlying position does. ## Exporting the return **Download return (CSV)** and **Download return (JSON)** produce the whole assessment: every criterion, its reference number, its state, the measured value where there is one, and the attestation behind it where there is one. The CSV is what you take to a governance meeting. The JSON is what you use if you want to track the position over time. ## What moves a computed criterion The two that catch most departments out: **"At least 90% of employees have an active account and are visible on the e-rostering system."** Counts active staff against those reachable through an active user account. Leavers are excluded from both sides — a departed employee is not an employee. Provisioning accounts for staff who do not use the system is the fix, and it is usually quick. **"The final roster must be published at least six weeks before the roster start date."** Measures the **first** publication of each roster, not the most recent one. A roster published eight weeks out and re-published in week three because somebody went off sick still counts as published eight weeks out — which is what the standard means, and the opposite of what a naive reading of "last published" would give you. ## Related * [What is stopping us](/understand-your-capacity/find-the-constraint.md) * [Training impact and capacity economics](/understand-your-capacity/capacity-economics-and-attainment.md) * [Quarterly workload plan reconciliation](/job-planning/quarterly-reconciliation.md) --- # Agent Instructions This documentation is published with GitBook. GitBook is the documentation platform designed so that both humans and AI agents can read, navigate, and reason over technical content effectively. Learn more at gitbook.com. ## Querying This Documentation If you need additional information that is not directly available in this page, you can query the documentation by asking a question. Perform an HTTP GET request on the following URL with the `ask` and `goal` query parameters: ``` GET https://help.resouris.com/understand-your-capacity/self-assess-attainment.md?ask=&goal= ``` `ask` is the immediate question: it should be specific, self-contained, and written in natural language. `goal` is what the user is ultimately trying to achieve, the reason they need the answer. Sharing it helps GitBook give you a better, more relevant answer. A goal is most helpful when it describes the outcome the user wants rather than restating the question. For example, with `ask=how do I create an API token`, a goal like `automate deployments from our CI pipeline` lets GitBook tailor the answer to that use case. The response will contain a direct answer to the question and relevant excerpts and sources from the documentation. Use this mechanism when the answer is not explicitly present in the current page, you need clarification or additional context, or you want to retrieve related documentation sections.