# Champion capability framework and evidence rubric

Template id: `champion-capability-framework`

Responsible skills: `champions:capability-framework` (sections 1 to 5) and `champions:evidence-assessment`
(sections 6 and 7).

Use this framework to define what a Champion can demonstrably do, how they show it, how evidence is assessed and how
progress is recorded. Every fact the organisation must supply is marked `[To confirm: ...]`; replace the marker when
the fact is confirmed, and never fill it with a guess. Example content is fictional and is there to be replaced or
deleted. The framework assesses evidence of practice, never the person, and is never used to rank anyone.

## 1. Framework details

| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| Framework owner | [To confirm: name and role] |
| Approved tools for Champions | [To confirm: reference to the approved tools list] |
| Agent building allowed for Champions? | [To confirm: Yes, under which governance / No, the agent capability covers judging use cases and evaluating approved agents] |
| Self-service guidance or advisor agent that uses this framework | [To confirm: what it is and who owns it] |
| Version and date | [To confirm] |
| Next review | [To confirm: date] |

## 2. Capability cards

Training is one route, not the gate. Both options lead to the same verification criteria.

| Element | Chat capability | Productivity capability | Agent capability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Objective | Use Copilot Chat effectively and safely for real tasks - clear prompts, refinement, relevant context, verified output | Use Copilot across the Microsoft 365 apps to produce useful, validated outputs from recurring work, and help a colleague do the same | Explain what agents are, judge good and poor use cases and, where approved, configure a basic agent and test its behaviour |
| Training option | [To confirm: session plus guided exercise on own non-sensitive work] | [To confirm] | [To confirm] |
| Evidence option | Two or three real examples with prompt, refinement, output, check applied and what changed | Before-and-after account of a recurring task, a reusable prompt pattern and evidence a colleague used it | A note on one good and one poor agent candidate, plus a governed basic build with owner and tests, or evaluation notes on an approved agent |
| Verification criteria | Every rubric dimension at least Meets; refinement and choice of context visible | Every dimension at least Meets; output validated against its source; transfer shown | Every dimension at least Meets; sound use-case reasoning; tests with expected and observed behaviour; intake record for any build |
| Outcome | Chat verified; tracker updated; next milestone is productivity | Productivity verified; pattern offered to the scenario catalogue; next milestone is agents | Agent verified; eligible for the Champion Challenge |

Local adjustments to the capabilities: [To confirm]

## 3. Learning session map

Sessions stay open to the whole workforce. The guided exercise, not attendance, is what counts as evidence.

| Session | Rhythm | Open to | Counts towards | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Getting started and approved use | [To confirm] | Everyone | Joining the community | [To confirm] |
| Copilot Chat | [To confirm] | Everyone | Chat capability, training option | [To confirm] |
| Copilot in the Microsoft 365 apps, including meetings and collaboration in Teams | [To confirm] | Everyone | Productivity capability, training option | [To confirm] |
| Agent design and evaluation | [To confirm] | Everyone; building limited to approved makers | Agent capability, training option | [To confirm] |

## 4. Submission guide

| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| How to submit | [To confirm: secure route with access limited to assessors and the programme owner] |
| What to redact | Personal data, client or confidential information, anything you would not share with the whole organisation |
| Retention period for evidence | [To confirm: agreed with the data protection lead] |
| Promised turnaround | [To confirm] |

## 5. Evidence rubric

Rate each dimension from the evidence alone. A capability is verified when every dimension is at least Meets and its
specific verification criteria are met. Strong is used for feedback, not ranking.

| Dimension | Not yet | Meets | Strong |
|---|---|---|---|
| Real work | Example is a demo or invented task | Example comes from the person's actual role | Example addresses a recurring, valued task for the team |
| Safe use | Sensitive data shared or unapproved tool used | No sensitive data shared; approved tools only | Explains choices about what not to share |
| Verification | No check of the output | Output checked; the check is explained | Check is built into a reusable pattern |
| Transferability | Only the submitter could repeat it | Someone else could reuse the pattern | A colleague has already reused it |
| Reflection | No account of limitations | Says what did not work and why | Shows how the approach was improved as a result |

> Fictional example: a submission shows a prompt used to summarise a supplier contract, a refined second prompt, the
> summary produced, and a note that the person compared every date and value against the contract before using it.
> Verification is rated Meets.

## 6. Assessment procedure

| Element | Entry |
|---|---|
| Assessment lead | [To confirm] |
| Assessor pool and training date | [To confirm] |
| Calibration rhythm | [To confirm: for example quarterly and when new assessors join] |
| Conflict rule | Assessors do not assess people they manage or know well; reassign |
| Both routes | Guided exercises and direct submissions are assessed against the same criteria |
| Second assessor | When unsure between ratings, for the agent capability and for disputed cases |
| Champion Challenge | Assessed on impact, reusability, quality and strategic alignment, using the `champion-challenge-catalogue` |
| Outcomes | Verified / Not yet (feedback and invitation to resubmit) / Returned unassessed (sensitive or incomplete evidence) |
| Feedback standard | Specific feedback on every dimension; for each Not yet, what would reach Meets; always the next milestone |
| Appeals | Heard by an assessor not involved originally, against the same criteria; [To confirm: how to request] |
| Decisions | Made by trained human assessors; no agent or automated check decides verification |
| Aggregate reporting | Submissions, share verified at first submission, turnaround, milestone conversion, appeal rate, assessor agreement |

## 7. Progress tracker

One row per participant, one column per journey stage. Each cell is Not started, In progress, Submitted, Not yet, or
Verified or complete with a date.

| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| Where the tracker is kept | [To confirm: restricted location] |
| Who updates it, and how soon after an outcome | [To confirm] |
| Who can see what | Participants see their own row; assessors and the programme owner see all rows; everyone else sees aggregates only |
| Used by self-service guidance or an advisor agent? | [To confirm: if yes, each participant sees only their own status] |
| Retention and alumni handling | [To confirm: agreed with the data protection lead] |
| Never used for | Performance management, pay, promotion or league tables |

| Participant (fictional example) | Join | Chat | Productivity | Agent | Challenge | Recognised |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fictional example: participant A | Complete | Verified | Submitted | Not started | Not started | No |
| [To confirm] | [To confirm] | [To confirm] | [To confirm] | [To confirm] | [To confirm] | [To confirm] |

> Credit: Template from CopilotForge by Simon Foote (https://github.com/SimonFoote-greensparx/CopilotForge), licensed under CC BY 4.0. Keep this credit when you share or adapt the template; in your own completed document you may keep it as a footer or remove it.