Wanted ApexQC: seeking UK small businesses for a supported compliance pilot

[Dean Wood]

Hi, I’m Dean Wood, a director of ApexQC.

We’re developing a compliance platform to help smaller businesses manage ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 work without becoming overwhelmed by spreadsheets and disconnected documents.

ApexQC is designed to provide plain-English guidance, organise requirements, assign owners and actions, collect supporting evidence, and show what still needs attention. It provides guidance and structured records; it does not replace an auditor or guarantee certification.

We’re now seeking a small number of UK businesses that are building or improving their management system and would like to help shape a supported pilot.

The platform is substantially developed, with production testing and launch preparation still underway. We are targeting an initial pilot during the final quarter of 2026, subject to completing those gates, and will confirm the start date and included features before participation.

For the first pilot group, we can offer 90 days with no subscription charge, supported onboarding and direct assistance in return for practical feedback. There would be no obligation to subscribe afterwards, and the pilot scope and terms would be agreed in writing before access.

If this may suit your business, reply here or send me a private message with your industry, approximate team size, the standard you are working toward, and the main compliance difficulty you want to solve. Please do not post confidential company information or evidence in the thread.

 

[AI Helper]

Fair play for being upfront that this doesn't replace an auditor or guarantee a certificate. Plenty of software pitches in this space blur that line, and the certification bodies take a dim view when a client turns up thinking the tool "passed" them.

A few things anyone weighing this up should pin down before signing a pilot agreement, and which Dean may want to address here:

• Data location and ownership. Evidence for 9001 and 14001 often includes customer contracts, supplier records and incident reports. Members will want to know where the data sits (UK or EU hosting ideally), who controls it under UK GDPR, and whether a full export in a usable format is available on day 91 if they walk away.
• Auditor access. UKAS-accredited certification bodies will need to see records during Stage 1 and Stage 2. Is there a read-only auditor login, or does the business end up printing everything off anyway?
• Clause mapping. Both standards follow the Annex SL structure. It would help to confirm the platform tracks against the actual clauses rather than a generic checklist, as that's what the auditor will walk through.
• Post-pilot pricing. "No obligation" is fine, but businesses invest real hours loading a system. Knowing the likely monthly cost now avoids the awkward conversation in month four.

One practical point on timing: Q4 2026 is a fair way off. Any business already booked in with a certification body this year won't be waiting, so the sweet spot is probably firms planning to go for certification in 2027 or those looking to tidy up a system that drifted after the initial audit. Being clear about that would save both sides some wasted messages.

For members considering it, treat a pilot like any other supplier relationship. Get the scope, data terms and exit arrangements in writing (Dean has said that's the plan, which is encouraging), and don't let a free trial dictate how you structure your management system. The system should suit the business first; the software is there to support it.

 

[Dean Wood]

Thank you — those are fair questions and exactly the points a business should establish before committing time to a pilot.

To clarify the current ApexQC position:

Data location, ownership and exit

The production environment is being migrated and hardened before pilot access is opened. We are targeting UK-hosted production infrastructure, but I will not describe that as complete until it has been technically verified and the related privacy and legal documentation has been reviewed.

Each participating organisation will retain ownership and control of its own records and evidence. The agreed pilot terms will identify the hosting location, processors, data responsibilities, retention arrangements and exit process before any business uploads operational information.

ApexQC is also designed to provide a usable export without imposing an exit charge. That export and deletion process will be tested and documented before the pilot begins.

Auditor access

Controlled auditor and assurance access forms part of the ApexQC model. The intention is to provide an independently controlled, scoped and read-only route so an auditor can inspect the relevant records without being given a normal internal user account.

The organisation’s own assessment and any external auditor’s findings remain separate. ApexQC does not determine conformity or guarantee certification.

Clause mapping

ApexQC is structured around the requirements of the applicable standard rather than a generic checklist. The initial pilot focus is ISO 9001:2015 and ISO 14001, with requirements, evidence and actions linked to the relevant clauses.

Evidence may be reused where it genuinely supports more than one requirement, but reuse will not automatically mark another requirement as complete or Ready. Human review and authorisation remain required.

Pricing after the pilot

Our currently published prices, excluding VAT, are:

• Focused — £175 per month or £1,750 annually for one core framework
• Combined — £350 per month or £3,500 annually for two to three core frameworks
• Comprehensive — £550 per month or £5,500 annually for four to eight core frameworks
• Regulated Configuration — £350 per month or £3,500 annually for specialist regulated frameworks

Annual subscriptions provide 12 months for the price of 10.

The initial supported pilot would provide 90 days without a subscription charge, with no obligation to continue. Before participation, the business would receive the pilot scope, included capabilities, applicable post-pilot price, data terms and exit arrangements in writing.

Timing

You are also correct about timing. This opportunity is unlikely to suit a company relying on the platform for an imminent 2026 certification audit.

The better fit is an organisation preparing for certification or recertification in 2027, improving an existing management system, or willing to test the workflow and provide structured feedback while the final production, privacy and legal gates are completed.

I hope that provides a clearer and more realistic picture. I would rather be explicit about what is complete, what is still being verified and what must be agreed before operational data is accepted.