AI-Assisted Regulatory Review
Axon Review helps UK regulators review full populations of submissions, surface the cases that matter, and keep every final decision human-led, explainable, and defensible.
100% Review
Every CPD submission assessed. No sampling.
Real-Time Assessment
Reviewed on submission, not after deadlines.
Human-Led Decisions
AI prioritises. Your team decides.
Explainable by Design
Clear rationale. Full audit trail.
When registers are large and headcount is fixed, manual review cannot keep pace. Sampling becomes a practical compromise, but it also creates blind spots, weakens targeting, and slows intervention.
40,000
architects regulated by ARB, generating a volume of CPD evidence that manual teams cannot review comprehensively.
Hundreds of thousands
of records can accumulate quickly when each professional submits multiple activities and written reflections each year.
3% to 5%
is the historic review range many regulators are left with. That means important issues may never be seen at all.
Weeks lost
to manual trawling before action can begin, even when non-compliance is already present in the underlying data.
For senior leaders, the strategic issue is control: understanding what is happening across the register in time to act, and being able to defend that action.
Axon Review evaluates structured fields, documents, and written submissions against your standards, then directs human attention where it is most likely to matter.
Analyse the full population rather than relying on random checks and post-hoc sampling assumptions.
Flag records that appear incomplete, inconsistent, low quality, or potentially out of standard.
Case owners retain judgement and authority. Axon Review is a prioritisation and validation layer, not an autonomous regulator.
Reduce variability between reviewers by running the same assessment logic across the whole dataset.
Tailor outreach to what a professional has already done, what is missing, and what requires clarification.
Start with CPD, then extend the same operating model into accreditation, investigations, licensing, and other document-heavy review tasks.
Product video
The Architects Registration Board adopted Axon Review to improve CPD oversight after the Building Safety Act increased focus on professional competence and public protection.
ARB case study
From sampling to full-population visibility
Review extended across the CPD dataset, not a small subset.
From delayed insight to immediate action
Non-compliance identified instantly, not after weeks of manual review.
From generic outreach to targeted communication
Messages reflect what each architect has completed and what remains.
From admin-heavy review to expert judgement
Staff focus on real decisions, not sifting compliant records.
Simon Howard
Director of Standards, ARB
“As soon as the CPD deadline passed, we could immediately see who had not complied.”
Time-to-action changed. Not just reporting.
“AI has actually allowed us to be more human in our communication.”
Better context for professionals. Better focus for the regulator.
A simple loop from submission intake to board-level assurance.
Bring in structured records, uploaded evidence, and written reflections from the systems you already run.
Evaluate submissions against your criteria for completion, quality, and potential concern.
Surface the cases that need attention, with supporting rationale and a consistent ordering of work.
Regulatory staff decide, communicate, and escalate with a stronger audit trail and clearer management information.
Regulatory technology succeeds when leadership can defend how it works. Axon Review is built around control, transparency, and consistency.
CPD oversight is the entry point. The same review model can support accreditation, licensing, investigations, quality assurance, and other workflows where a regulator must evaluate high volumes of evidence with consistent standards.
CPD monitoring
Review population-wide competence evidence.
Accreditation
Check supporting documentation against programme standards.
Licensing
Prioritise applications and identify missing or inconsistent evidence.
Investigations
Structure large evidence sets and focus scarce expertise.