Three distinct records
| Record | What it states | Evidence required |
|---|---|---|
| Record of participation | Presence or involvement in the identified activity | Participation record with known limits |
| Credential of completion | Fulfilment of published internal criteria | Corresponding history and result |
| Record of demonstrated practice | Delivery or execution analysed within the described scope | Preserved evidence, criteria and reviewer |
Participation is never promoted to proficiency, nor self-declaration to demonstrated practice. When the participant's identity is only declared, the process is not advertised as robust identity verification. The validation label is never stronger than the preserved evidence.
What the document contains
Issuer, participant, activity and version, completion date, criteria met, activities carried out, type of evidence, estimated dedication (separate from any supervised time), issue date, verification identifier and status. The public verification page at /verificar/ shows what the record proves and what it does not, displays the name only at the holder's choice, and never includes personal documents, address, contact details, full history or detailed marks.
Internal assessments
Assessments verify exclusively the objectives and criteria of the centre's activities. Results record performance in the indicated context and do not constitute a professional licensing examination or academic recognition. Types used: self-check, knowledge check, scenario analysis, reviewed practical delivery and observed activity, each with its corresponding limit of conclusion.
| Criterion | Sufficient evidence | Situation requiring revision |
|---|---|---|
| Understanding | Identifies the need and the relevant information | Confuses facts, assumptions and objective |
| Procedure | Executes or organises a coherent sequence | Omits a step necessary for the result |
| Verification | Checks the delivery against clear criteria | Claims success without checking |
| Limits | Recognises risk, authorisation and referral | Acts or promises beyond their responsibility |
| Record | Documents relevant decisions and evidence | Does not allow understanding of what was done |
Each criterion is classified as not demonstrated, partial, adequate or consistent. Essential safety, integrity or privacy criteria may prevent completion even when the others are met; there is no average mark that hides a critical failure. Feedback points to the evidence in the delivery itself and indicates what to revise. Attempts, resubmission conditions and permitted support are stated before starting.
Correction, appeal, revocation and continuity
There is a channel to correct a name, an issuance error or a history discrepancy (contato@animalcare.global). An automated decision may assist triage, but denying or revoking a credential admits responsible human review. Possible states: valid as a record, superseded by correction (with the identifier of the new document) and revoked for a substantiated reason (fraud, undue issuance or material error), always with the right to appeal. A new pathway version does not erase a legitimate historical completion. There is no charge for approval and no document is issued without existing evidence. The maintaining organisation provides for minimum continuity of issued records, without promising unlimited retention of all data.
Privacy of records
Data processed for issuance and verification: name, e-mail (private), activity, dates and criteria. There is no public directory of participants. The holder chooses whether the name appears on the verification page. Participation in an activity is separate from subscription to commercial messages.