ISO/IEC 17024 Certification

NEW - Top Management Review Overview

Welcome to Authentic Testing Corporation (AuTe), home of the 17024 Compliance Handbook. Our printed and digital materials are all prepared with authoritative advice about how to prepare a certification that complies with ISO/IEC 17024:12. Written by Dr. Wallace Judd, Ph.D., the handbook is an invaluable resource for anyone engaged in developing or maintaining an accredited certification program, and essential if applying for accreditation under ISO/IEC 17024:12.

AuTe provides guidance for conducting internal audits, illustrates best practices gleaned throughout the certification industry, and provides guidance to create or maintain a certification program.

Accreditation is:

  • Verification that you meet the exacting standards of 17024.

  • Assurance to regulatory bodies that your testing program is developed according to exemplary professional practices and sound psychometric principles.

  • Evidence that your testing program is engaged in continual improvement.

  • Documentation of the principles and practices that underpin your certification program.

  • Assurance to certificants that your appeals policies are timely and fair.

  • Testimony in legal proceedings that your program aspires to standards of international excellence.

More About Accreditation

Frequently Asked Questions

Angoff for Test Revisions - What Data should Judges Get and Review?

I recently received this question from a certification director:

We’re revising our certification with some new items, a few revised items, and a large number of existing items with data. For the revised and existing items, should we give the Angoff judges the pValues of the items?

What Data Should Judges Get?

The answer is a qualified ‘no’.

Think of it this way.

Suppose you have a cutscore of 70 on your existing test. And you’d like to give your Angoff judges the pValues of revised & existing items. Why not?

The answer is because for an Angoff rating, you’re asking the judges to give their passing percent estimate of minimally qualified candidates.

But the pValue data from your test is from all candidates – including failing candidates and highly qualified candidates, neither of whom are minimally qualified.

If you want to give your Angoff judges helpful data, give them the item passing percents only for candidates who scored between 70 and 75 on the test. These are justifiably minimally qualified candidates.

What Should Judges Review?

The recommended Angoff procedure is for the judges to take the items themselves and reflect on the difficulty they can anticipate minimally qualified candidates will have in taking the items.

But there is no recommended process for presenting judges the items. The items should have choices in the order in which they are presented to candidates, with no indication of which choice is correct.

If the item choices are randomized in the test, then randomize the items as presented to judges.

Some item banking systems have the first choice as the item key, and it’s convenient to send items listed this way to the judges. But the choices should be randomized so the judges aren’t tipped off to the correct answer.

More FAQs


The Compliance Handbook was a quick immersion introduction of our staff to the rules, regulations and intricacies of 17024.  It is a great resource for our staff to learn the requirements and rules of 17024.  Our staff refers to the Compliance Handbook for tips and tools while working on audits and reports for 17024.

Bill Kent – Program Director, AEE (Association of Energy Engineers)