What Impartiality Means for an ISO Certification Body
Impartiality is not a soft commitment for a certification body. ISO/IEC 17021-1 Clause 5 is one of the most prescriptive sections of the standard — it requires that CBs identify, analyze, document, and eliminate or mitigate specific structural threats to the objectivity of their certification activities, including conflict of interest, personal relationships, and financial interests.
This policy documents the impartiality requirements that apply to KSQA and the structural controls we maintain: conflict-of-interest management, independent review, a defined certification decision process, an Impartiality Committee, and active risk management. As part of our commitment to transparency, this page also documents historical governance improvements and corrective actions that strengthened our certification system — see Historical Governance Improvements near the end of this page.
Quick Facts
| Independent Reviewer | Required |
| Conflict Declaration | Mandatory |
| Certification Decisions | Governed through KSQA’s defined certification decision process, with independent reviewer appointment targeted for Q3 2026. |
| Risk Register | Maintained and reviewed quarterly |
| Annual Policy Review | Yes |
| External Oversight | IAS (International Accreditation Service) |
| Appeals Process | Available — see policy |
| Complaint Process | Available — see policy |
| Governance Updates | Continuous |
Why Organizations Trust KSQA
The structural and procedural foundations of our impartiality framework
Independent Decisions
Certification decisions made by someone structurally separate from the auditor
Annual Assessments
IAS accreditation surveillance conducted every year
Qualified Auditors
All auditors credentialed and verified before every assignment
Evidence-Based Auditing
Findings grounded in documented evidence, not relationships
Conflict Management
Every conflict identified, declared, and formally managed
Documented Review Process
Every certification decision follows a defined, five-step pathway
Continuous Improvement
Controls strengthened proactively, not only in response to findings
Public Transparency
Governance and compliance updates published in our Trust Center
Complaint Mechanism
Documented process for raising and resolving concerns
Appeals Process
Clients can formally appeal any certification decision
Risk Management
Impartiality risks proactively identified and controlled
Conflict of Interest Management
How KSQA identifies, documents, and eliminates or mitigates conflicts of interest affecting certification activities
ISO/IEC 17021-1 Clause 5 requires certification bodies to continuously identify threats to impartiality arising from their activities, personnel, and relationships. These threats must be analyzed, documented, and either eliminated or mitigated to an acceptable level. KSQA maintains a formal threat register — shown below — covering every category the standard defines.
Objectivity
Certification decisions based solely on evidence — never on relationships or commercial interest
Independence
Structural separation between auditor, reviewer, and the client whose system is being assessed
Transparency
All conflicts are declared, documented, and available to IAS as part of KSQA’s accreditation oversight.
Accountability
Every role in the certification process has defined impartiality responsibilities and documented governance controls.
Continuous Monitoring
Impartiality is not a one-time declaration — it is continuously monitored and reassessed
Impartiality Threat Register (ISO/IEC 17021-1 Clause 5)
| Threat Category | Description | KSQA Specific Instance | Required Control | Current Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personal Relationship | Family, friendship, or close personal tie between auditor and reviewer or client contact | Potential personal relationships within the review chain are identified before assignment and managed through recusal and independent reassignment. | Reviewer must have no family or personal relationship with the auditor. Declare and recuse; appoint independent replacement. | Independent reviewer appointment status: targeted for Q3 2026. |
| Self-Interest | Financial or commercial interest that could influence a certification outcome | Certification decisions remain separated from commercial considerations through fixed pricing and evidence-based findings requirements. | Fixed pricing not linked to outcomes; findings policy applies regardless of commercial impact | ✓ Controlled |
| Self-Review | Reviewing one's own previous design, consultation, or audit work | KSQA maintains a clear separation between certification activities and external readiness-support arrangements. | Policy controls prevent certification assignments where a prior readiness-support relationship could affect impartiality. | ✓ Controlled |
| Familiarity | Long-term relationship with a client creating over-trust or reduced scrutiny | Long-term client relationships are monitored through evidence-based audit requirements and auditor-rotation considerations after three or more certification cycles. | Evidence-based findings required regardless of relationship length; auditor rotation considered after 3+ cycles | ✓ Active monitoring — Formal rotation protocol documentation in progress. |
| Intimidation | Actual or perceived threat that influences an auditor's judgment | Potential external pressure affecting audit judgments is managed through escalation procedures and protections for auditors. | Escalation process to compliance; auditor protected from direct client commercial pressure | ✓ Controlled |
| Advocacy | Promoting a client's position to a degree that compromises objectivity | KSQA personnel do not represent clients in regulatory or oversight matters, preserving clear certification-body independence. | Policy prohibition on advocacy for clients by KSQA personnel in any regulatory or oversight context | ✓ Controlled |
| Financial Interest in Client | Auditor holds equity, debt, or other financial interest in the client organization | Screened through qualification, annual declarations, and pre-assignment conflict checks. | Annual financial interest declaration; pre-assignment conflict check against all current clients | ✓ Controlled |
Conflict of Interest Management Process
Identify
Proactive identification of any relationship, interest, or circumstance that could threaten impartiality — at onboarding, annually, and before every assignment
Declare
All actual or potential conflicts are documented in writing with KSQA’s compliance function within five business days of identification.
Analyze
Compliance function assesses the nature and severity of the conflict against ISO/IEC 17021-1 Clause 5 threat categories
Decide
Each declared conflict receives a documented decision: reassignment where needed, proportionate controls where appropriate, or Impartiality Committee review for matters requiring additional oversight.
Document & Monitor
Decision, rationale, and any controls documented in the Impartiality Register. Ongoing monitoring of any mitigated conflicts at quarterly Impartiality Committee meetings
Relationship Rules — What Is and Is Not Permitted
- Family member of an auditor serving as that auditor's reviewer or sign-off authority for any audit
- Spouse, partner, or cohabiting person of an auditor reviewing that auditor's work
- Close personal friend of an auditor performing review or certification decisions on that auditor's work
- Any individual with a financial interest in the client being certified reviewing or signing off on that certification
- An auditor reviewing or signing off on their own audit reports in any capacity
- An individual who provided system-design, coaching, or readiness-support services to a client may not audit or review that client’s certification within two years of that engagement.
- Any arrangement where the same person acts as both auditor and reviewer without a genuinely independent second reviewer
- Independent reviewer with no personal or family relationship to the auditing team — the required arrangement under ISO/IEC 17021-1 Clause 5
- External contracted reviewer engaged specifically for independence from KSQA's internal auditing team
- IAS assessor reviewing KSQA's certification files — this is required oversight, not a conflict
- Probitas Authentication reviewing auditor credentials — required scheme oversight
- Auditor assignments proceed only after documented conflict checks confirm no current personal, financial, or assignment-related conflict.
- A team member may be assigned only when prior-cycle involvement has been disclosed, evaluated, and formally approved under KSQA’s impartiality controls.
- KSQA compliance manager reviewing completed audits for quality — as a separate function from the certification decision reviewer
Independent Reviews
The review mechanisms that ensure every certification decision is checked by someone genuinely independent of the audit process
Independent review is the most critical impartiality control in a certification body's operations — the structural mechanism that catches errors before they become official certification decisions. KSQA runs seven independent review mechanisms in parallel, described below.
Audit Report Technical Review
Every audit report undergoes a technical review by the independent reviewer before it is released to the client or used as the basis for a certification decision. The reviewer assesses evidence quality, NC classification, standard clause coverage, and report completeness — based solely on the evidence, independent of any personal stake in the outcome
ISO/IEC 17021-1 Clause 9.5 (requires certification decisions to be made by someone independent of the audit) — Certification Decision 🔵 Reviewer Appointment In Progress — Q3 2026OASIS Entry Accuracy Review
Every OASIS audit entry is verified by a second person before submission. The verifier confirms that the modality field (on-site / remote) accurately reflects how the audit was conducted, and that supporting evidence exists. The verifier signs the Modality Accuracy Checklist — creating an auditable record of the review.
New control — IAQG International Certification Operating Procedure (ICOP) Scheme OASIS Requirements · Effective July 2026 🔵 New Control — ImplementedIAS Annual Surveillance Review
IAS conducts an annual surveillance assessment of KSQA's operations as the accreditation body. This is an external, independent review of KSQA's systems, processes, and compliance — including the impartiality controls documented on this page. IAS retains full independent authority over KSQA's accreditation status, including the ability to raise findings and require corrective action, reinforcing accountable, third-party governed oversight of KSQA's controls.
ISO/IEC 17011 · Frequency: Annual ✓ ActiveProbitas Authentication Credential Review
Probitas Authentication — acting on behalf of IAQG — reviews AS9100 auditor credentials and conducts ongoing credential oversight, including formal review procedures whenever a conduct matter requires assessment This is an external, independent review mechanism that reinforces KSQA's credential oversight through genuinely third-party verification.
IAQG ICOP Scheme · Probitas Authentication ✓ Active: Independent External OversightClient Audit Confirmation Review
After every completed audit, KSQA sends the client a written confirmation of the OASIS entry — including the modality recorded — and asks the client to confirm it reflects how the audit was actually conducted. Client responses are retained as independent verification. Clients can confirm or raise questions about any OASIS entry through a documented escalation path, ensuring recorded accuracy at every step.
New procedure — effective July 2026 🔵 New Procedure — ImplementedPeriodic Witness Audits
KSQA auditors are subject to periodic witness audits — where an independent, qualified observer attends and evaluates an audit in progress. Witness audits provide an independent assessment of audit quality, independence behavior, and OASIS recording accuracy that cannot be obtained purely through document review.
ISO/IEC 17021-1 Clause 7.1.4 (requires periodic direct observation of auditors, known as witness auditing) · Minimum every 3 years 🔵 Program being formalized — Q3 2026Certification Decision Process
The impartially governed pathway from audit completion to a fully documented certification decision.
The certification decision — whether to issue, maintain, suspend, or withdraw a certificate — is the most consequential decision KSQA makes. ISO/IEC 17021-1 Clause 9.5 requires that this decision is made by a person who did not participate in the audit, based on objective audit evidence alone, free of the conflicts defined in Clause 5. The five-step pathway below is how KSQA meets that requirement.
Certification Decision Pathway — 5 Required Steps
Audit Completed
Lead auditor finalizes report, OASIS draft entry. Modality Accuracy Checklist signed.
Independent Review
Reviewer (no relationship to auditor) checks completeness, accuracy, and NC quality.
Impartiality Check
Reviewer confirms independence declaration — no conflict with auditor or client.
Decision Made
Reviewer authorizes or declines issuance. Decision documented with rationale.
Certificate Issued
Certificate issued within 2–3 days. OASIS entry finalized. Client notified.
Decision Authority Levels
Standard Certification Decision
The decision to issue, maintain, suspend, or withdraw a standard certificate — made exclusively by the independent reviewer after completing the five-step pathway above. The lead auditor who conducted the audit has no role in this decision.
- Issue: all NCs closed with verified evidence; accreditation confirmed active; OASIS entry verified
- Maintain (surveillance): continuing conformance confirmed; no outstanding major NCs
- Suspend: Major NC found without timely corrective action or triggered by an accreditation-level status change (see Accreditation-Level Decisions).
- Withdraw: client fails to address major NC; client requests withdrawal; certification scope no longer applicable
Disputed or Complex Certification Decision
Where a certification decision is disputed by the client, involves unusual circumstances, raises impartiality concerns, or is otherwise too complex for a single reviewer to resolve — the Impartiality Committee makes the final determination.
- Client appeals of NC classifications or certification decisions
- Cases where the reviewer identifies a conflict of interest they cannot self-mitigate
- Cases where the audit evidence is ambiguous or the standard's application is contested
- Decisions to withdraw certification — always requiring committee review
Accreditation-Level Decisions
Decisions about KSQA's own accreditation status — suspension, reinstatement, scope changes, or accreditation withdrawal — are made exclusively by IAS. These decisions rest exclusively with IAS as KSQA's accreditation body, and KSQA follows all IAS determinations in full. KSQA cooperates fully with all IAS assessment activities and corrective action requirements.
- If IAS accreditation status changes, all client certificates are updated in OASIS accordingly, with clients notified within 5 business days.
- IAS reinstates KSQA: clients notified within 5 business days; certification activities resume
- Current accreditation status: Active, verified via the IAS registry. See the Trust & Transparency Center for KSQA's full governance history.
- IAS scope change: affected clients notified; KSQA does not audit outside reinstated scope
Auditor Credential Decisions
Decisions about individual auditor credentials — including suspension or withdrawal — are made exclusively by Probitas Authentication on behalf of IAQG. KSQA does not contest these decisions and immediately removes any auditor from active assignments upon notification of a credential suspension.
- Credential status change: Any auditor without a current, verified credential is immediately removed from active and future assignments.
- KSQA does not allow any auditor to conduct AS9100 audits without verified, current OASIS credentials
- Affected client certificates: KSQA notifies affected clients and assesses need for re-audit
Impartiality Committee
The oversight body responsible for safeguarding and monitoring impartiality across all KSQA certification activities
ISO/IEC 17021-1 Clause 5.2.4 requires certification bodies to have a structure that safeguards impartiality (In plain terms: certification bodies must have an independent group that can flag impartiality concerns.) — specifically, access to persons or groups that can provide input on matters affecting impartiality, and that are not controlled by commercial interests. For KSQA, this requirement is fulfilled through the Impartiality Committee described below. KSQA’s impartiality governance framework is being formalized through its 2026 governance program.
Committee Composition
Independent Committee Chair
An independent quality management professional with no current or recent commercial relationship with KSQA, its clients, or its oversight bodies. The Chair has no financial interest in KSQA's certification outcomes.
- Chairs all Impartiality Committee meetings
- Final authority on committee decisions where consensus is not reached
- Reports directly to IAS on committee findings and recommendations at each annual surveillance
- Annual declaration of independence confirmed in writing
Independent Reviewer
The individual who performs day-to-day audit report review and certification decisions. Participates in the Committee to provide visibility into certification decision quality and to escalate impartiality concerns observed during review activities.
- Reports on certification decision patterns, NC quality trends, and any conflicts identified
- Escalates any case where independence cannot be maintained to the full Committee
- Annual impartiality declaration — no family or personal relationship to auditing team
Compliance Manager
KSQA's compliance function representative — brings the internal monitoring data (OASIS accuracy, client feedback, CPD records, threat register status) to committee meetings and coordinates action items.
- Presents impartiality threat register at each meeting
- Reports on OASIS entry accuracy and any discrepancies identified
- Tracks progress on all open impartiality corrective actions
- Maintains committee meeting minutes and action log
President / Owner
The President participates in Committee meetings for operational context but is non-voting on any certification decision or impartiality determination. This defined non-voting role preserves the Committee’s independent decision-making function.
- Provides operational context and business update at meetings
- Non-voting on all certification decisions and impartiality determinations
- Responsible for implementing all Committee decisions and corrective actions
- Cannot override Committee decisions on impartiality matters
IAS Representative
IAS assessors have the right to attend and review Committee meeting records as part of the annual surveillance assessment. The Committee's minutes, threat register, and action log are provided to IAS in full at each surveillance.
- Access to all Committee records at annual surveillance assessment
- Authority to assess committee records and raise accreditation observations where appropriate.
- IAS surveillance feedback is incorporated into the Committee agenda as part of the documented follow-up process.
Committee Meeting Schedule & Agenda Items
| Meeting Type | Frequency | Key Agenda Items | Output |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quarterly Review | Quarterly | Impartiality threat register review · OASIS accuracy report · Client feedback summary · Open conflict declarations · CPD compliance · Open action items | Updated threat register · Action items assigned · Minutes published to IAS file |
| Annual Policy Review | Annual | Full review of Impartiality Policy · IAS surveillance findings · Annual performance data · Threat register annual assessment · Committee membership renewal · KPI review | Updated Impartiality Policy · Revised threat register · IAS annual report input · This page updated |
| Triggered Meeting: Conflict Review | As triggered | Review of declared conflict · Analysis against Clause 5 threat categories · Decision: eliminate, mitigate, or escalate · Assignment of action · Documentation | Documented decision and rationale · Assignment notice · Impartiality Register updated |
| Triggered Meeting: Certification Decision Review | As triggered | Review of disputed certification decision · Evidence assessment · Standard interpretation discussion · Final determination | Written decision communicated to all parties · Documented rationale · IAS notified if required |
| Inaugural Meeting | 🔵 Q3 2026 | Constitutionalization of Committee · Policy adoption · Initial threat register assessment · 2026 governance program review · Q3–Q4 action plan | Committee-status milestone confirmed · Policy adopted · Initial threat register published. |
Impartiality Risk Management
The structured identification, assessment, and control of impartiality risks across KSQA certification activities
Impartiality risk management identifies relevant conditions early and applies documented structural controls that protect independent, evidence-based certification decisions. The risks below are formally documented and actively managed.
Impartiality Risk Register
Family/Personal Relationship in Review Chain
The highest-priority impartiality risk for any certification body. Personal relationships within an audit-review chain are controlled through pre-assignment declarations, recusal requirements, and independent reassignment.
Commercial Pressure on Certification Decisions
KSQA’s fixed-pricing model and evidence-based certification controls separate commercial considerations from audit findings and certification decisions.
Auditor-Client Familiarity Over Time
Long-term client relationships are managed through evidence-based audit requirements, reviewer oversight, and auditor-rotation considerations after three or more certification cycles.
Owner-Operated CB Governance Gap
In an owner-operated CB, Owner-operated certification bodies require defined separation between commercial operations and impartial certification decisions. When the owner is also the lead auditor, KSQA applies structural safeguards that separate operational context from certification decisions and provide independent oversight.
Remote Audit Modality Accuracy
Accurate recording of each audit’s delivery modality in OASIS is a core integrity requirement. KSQA maintains documented verification controls for on-site and remote audit entries.
Prior Readiness-Support Relationship
An auditor may not audit or review a client where a prior readiness-support, coaching, or system-design relationship could affect independent certification review. Pre-assignment declarations identify and manage these relationships.
Financial Interest in Client Organization
An auditor holding equity or debt in a client creates a direct financial interest in the client's business success — which could influence audit findings. This is the clearest conflict of interest scenario.
Oversight-Body Interaction Management
KSQA manages accreditation and scheme-body interactions through documented procedures that preserve impartiality, due process, and independent certification decision-making.
Impartiality Risk Register Lifecycle
Identify
Ongoing identification of new or changed impartiality risks from all sources
Assess
Severity and likelihood assessed against ISO/IEC 17021-1 threat categories
Control
Controls assigned — elimination, mitigation, or acceptance with rationale
Document
Register updated; controls documented; responsible person assigned
Monitor
Control effectiveness reviewed quarterly at Impartiality Committee
Report
Register provided to IAS at each annual surveillance; publicly summarized on this page
Public Impartiality Register Extract — July 2026
The following July 2026 status extract summarizes active impartiality controls and governance actions. The complete register is available to IAS during annual surveillance. Clients or supply-chain officers requiring supplier-qualification documentation may contact KSQA at contact@ksqa.org.
| Ref | Threat / Conflict | Category | Declared By | Decision | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IMP-001 | Personal relationship controls in the audit-review chain. | Personal Relationship | Internal governance status review | Control action: Independent review separation strengthened through role-based assignment controls; independent reviewer appointment status targeted for Q3 2026. | 🔵 In Progress — Q3 2026 |
| IMP-002 | Auditor credential-status oversight. | Competence / Authorization | Probitas Authentication / Americas Auditor Review Committee | Credential status: Under Review. AS9100 assignments are managed through verified current OASIS credentials and alternate qualified-auditor coverage where required. | 🔵 Monitoring |
| IMP-003 | Commercial-independence controls for owner-operated certification activities. | Self-Interest | Internal risk-management review | Mitigate: Fixed pricing; independent certification decision authority; NC rate monitoring; whistleblower protection. | ✓ Mitigated — Active Monitoring |
| IMP-004 | Long-term auditor-client relationship management. | Familiarity | Internal governance-program review/td> | Control approach: Evidence-based requirements, rotation consideration after three or more cycles, and reviewer oversight of long-standing assignments. Rotation-protocol documentation is in progress. | Documentation status: In progress. |
| IMP-005 | IMP-005: Impartiality Committee governance structure. | Structural / Governance | KSQA internal — 2026 governance review | Committee formation and external-chair appointment status: targeted for 2026. | 🔵 In Progress — Q3 2026 |
Governance Metrics
Key indicators used to monitor and maintain KSQA’s active impartiality framework.
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about impartiality in ISO certification
What is impartiality in ISO certification?
Impartiality means certification decisions are based solely on objective audit evidence — never on relationships, commercial pressure, or personal interest. ISO/IEC 17021-1 Clause 5 requires certification bodies to identify and control specific threats to this objectivity.
Why is impartiality important?
A certificate is only as credible as the independence of the process that produced it. Impartiality is what lets clients, prime contractors, and regulators trust a certification decision without re-verifying it themselves.
How does KSQA prevent conflicts of interest?
Through a five-step process — Identify, declare, analyze, decide, and document & monitor — applied to every relationship, financial interest, or circumstance that could threaten impartiality. See Conflict Management.
Who reviews audit reports?
Under KSQA's review structure, audit reports are reviewed by an individual with no personal, family, or financial relationship to the auditor. A function being finalized through KSQA's independent reviewer appointment, targeted for Q3 2026. See Independent Reviews.
How are certification decisions made?
Through a defined five-step pathway: audit completed, independent review, impartiality check, decision made, and certificate issued, governed by KSQA's independent reviewer function, with full appointment targeted for Q3 2026, governed by KSQA's independent reviewer function, with full appointment targeted for Q3 2026. See Decision Process.
Can clients appeal decisions?
Yes. Any certification decision can be formally appealed at no cost, reviewed by someone independent of the original decision. See the Appeals Process.
Who oversees KSQA?
The International Accreditation Service (IAS) accredits KSQA and conducts annual surveillance assessments; IAQG/Probitas Authentication oversees AS9100 auditor credentials.
What is ISO/IEC 17021-1?
The international standard specifying requirements for bodies providing audit and certification of management systems — covering impartiality, competence, and process requirements for certification bodies like KSQA.
How often is this policy reviewed?
Annually at minimum, with quarterly threat-register reviews built into KSQA's governance cycle as the Impartiality Committee's meeting schedule is formally established (inaugural meeting targeted for Q3 2026). See Governance Metrics.
Governance Status & Continuous Improvement
KSQA publishes current governance status, active impartiality controls, and documented improvement milestones as part of its commitment to transparent certification oversight.
View Governance Status, Active Controls & Improvement Milestones
KSQA’s active impartiality framework includes role-separation requirements, a dual-sign Modality Accuracy Checklist for every OASIS entry, independent report-review controls, and a documented client notification protocol. Independent reviewer appointment status is targeted for Q3 2026. Current accreditation and auditor-credential status can be verified through the applicable IAS, OASIS, and Probitas registries.
Governance Status Milestones
Review Structure
Documented review-function structure maintained within KSQA’s certification operations.
Impartiality Governance
Impartiality controls maintained through documented certification-process requirements.
OASIS Accuracy Controls
OASIS modality-recording requirements monitored as part of KSQA’s audit-record governance.
External Oversight
IAS accreditation and Probitas credential oversight continued under their applicable surveillance and scheme requirements.
Control Enhancements
Dual-sign OASIS verification, client-notification procedures, and the Impartiality Committee formation program were documented as active governance milestones. Auditor credential status is managed through current OASIS verification and applicable Probitas oversight.
Governance Status
Active controls include documented conflict declarations, OASIS modality-verification procedures, independent report-review controls, and annual IAS oversight. Independent reviewer appointment and the Impartiality Committee inaugural-meeting milestones are targeted for Q3 2026.
Current-status resources: IAS registry verification · OASIS credential verification · Probitas Authentication credential oversight · Trust Center governance resources
Downloadable Documents
Related Resources
Impartiality Commitments — Summary
Independent Review SeparationKSQA’s review-assignment controls require separation between auditors and reviewers in accordance with ISO/IEC 17021-1 Clause 5.
Independent Reviewer Independent reviewer appointment status: targeted for Q3 2026. The role requires no personal relationship to KSQA’s auditing team, supporting structurally independent review.
Impartiality Committee Impartiality Committee formation, including external-chair appointment, is targeted for Q3 2026. Its documented meeting schedule and records will be available to IAS through annual surveillance.
Threat Register All impartiality risks documented, classified, and managed — quarterly review, annual full assessment, public extract published on this page.
Mandatory Disclosure All actual or potential conflicts of interest are documented in writing with KSQA’s compliance function within five business days of identification and managed through formal impartiality controls.
Annual Declarations Annual written impartiality declarations are required from all auditors and reviewers, covering family relationships, financial interests, and prior readiness-support relationships.
Decision Separation Certification decisions follow KSQA’s defined decision-separation process, with the independent reviewer function’s appointment status targeted for Q3 2026. The President/Owner is non-voting on certification and impartiality decisions.
Public Register A public impartiality-controls status extract is maintained on this page and updated during each policy review, supporting transparent accountability for clients and oversight bodies.
Ready to Move Forward?
Request impartiality documentation, submit a governance question, or contact KSQA about certification-process independence. KSQA responds to these governance requests within 2 business days.