Skip to main content
Seratlas

Company

Partnerships

For teams who deliver assessment work and want a platform underneath it, and for products that need assessment inside them.

Why partner with us

Four commitments

Short list, because a longer one at this stage would be aspiration rather than commitment.

  • A platform you can put your name on

    White-label delivery where the assessment engine is ours and the relationship is yours. We do not appear in front of your customer unless you want us to.

  • Engineers, not a partner portal

    Technical questions reach the person who built the thing being asked about. There is no tiered support queue to escalate through.

  • Terms written per partner

    We have no tier table, because nobody is in it yet. Early arrangements are negotiated and written down individually.

  • We do not go around you

    An account you bring is yours. That commitment belongs in the agreement rather than on a web page, and we will put it there.

Fit

Whether this is worth a conversation

Stated in both directions, because a partnership that should not exist is expensive for both sides to discover slowly.

Probably a fit

  • You already deliver assessment, training or certification work
  • You have engineers who will evaluate the platform properly
  • Your customers need assessment embedded rather than adjacent
  • You are comfortable being the named party to your own customer

Probably not a fit

  • You are looking for a referral fee without delivery involvement
  • You need a partner tier and a co-marketing budget on day one
  • Your timeline requires a signed agreement within the month
  • You want an exclusive territory before either side has delivered anything

How delivery runs

What project management actually means here

Five practices, each one a response to a specific way joint delivery goes wrong.

  • One scope document

    Written, versioned, and the same one everybody argues with. Not a slide deck that diverges from the ticket tracker by week three.

  • A shared channel

    Your engineers and ours in one place, without a ticket system between a question and its answer.

  • Progress against the scope

    Reported against what was agreed rather than against velocity, so a slipping project looks like one.

  • Decisions recorded

    Every consequential choice written down with its reasoning, so the question does not get relitigated after a handover.

  • Named escalation

    One person who owns a problem out of hours during an exam window, agreed before the window rather than during it.

Where the work is

Sectors with assessment at their centre

Eighteen sectors where assessment is consequential enough to be engineered deliberately. This is a map of the market, not a client list.

  • Higher education

    Large cohorts, fixed exam windows, and integrity requirements that have to hold up to appeal.

  • K-12 education

    Formative checks that teachers can author quickly, on the devices a classroom actually has.

  • Corporate training

    Completion that has to be evidenced, across a workforce that turns over continuously.

  • Professional certification

    Defensible scoring, item banks with a lifecycle, and audit trails that outlive the exam.

  • Recruitment and hiring

    High-volume screening where fairness and adverse-impact analysis matter as much as throughput.

  • Healthcare

    Competency checks tied to registration, with patient-safety consequences for getting them wrong.

  • Financial services

    Regulated attestation on a schedule, evidenced per person and per obligation.

  • Insurance

    Licensing and product training across distributed broker and agent networks.

  • Government

    Public-sector recruitment and accreditation, under accessibility and procurement obligations.

  • Defence

    Qualification tracking in environments with strict data-residency and connectivity constraints.

  • Legal

    Continuing-education requirements, recorded in a form that survives a regulator asking.

  • Manufacturing

    Line-side competency and safety sign-off, on shared devices and short shift windows.

  • Logistics

    Certification for a mobile workforce that is rarely at a desk and often offline.

  • Retail

    Seasonal onboarding at volume, where time-to-competent is the metric that matters.

  • Telecommunications

    Technical accreditation for field engineers, kept current as equipment changes.

  • Energy and utilities

    Safety-critical authorisation to work, auditable down to the individual and the date.

  • Nonprofit

    Volunteer and programme training, delivered on budgets that do not tolerate per-seat pricing.

  • SaaS

    Customer and partner certification programmes, embedded in the product that needs them.

Technology

What we build with

Every panel below is in the page source, so you can read the whole stack without clicking through five tabs.

  • TypeScript
  • React
  • Next.js
  • Tailwind CSS
  • Radix UI
  • React Hook Form
  • Zod
  • Node.js
  • TypeScript
  • Python
  • PostgreSQL
  • Redis
  • REST
  • OpenAPI
  • AWS
  • S3
  • CloudFront
  • Docker
  • GitHub Actions
  • Terraform
  • CloudWatch
  • Vitest
  • Playwright
  • Testing Library
  • ESLint
  • axe-core
  • Lighthouse CI
  • LTI 1.3
  • SCORM
  • xAPI
  • SAML 2.0
  • OIDC
  • SCIM
  • Webhooks

Process

How a partnership starts

Four steps, and none of them is a signature before a technical evaluation.

  1. 1

    Introduction

    1 week

    A conversation about what you deliver and where assessment currently limits it. No qualification call.

  2. 2

    Technical evaluation

    2–3 weeks

    A working environment, the integration documentation, and an engineer who can answer for it. Not a scripted demo.

  3. 3

    Terms

    2–4 weeks

    Written per partner: commercial split, support responsibilities, and who owns which relationship.

  4. 4

    First delivery together

    Varies

    One real project, jointly, before either side builds a process around the other.

Coverage

Global presence

TODO: this section currently describes four placeholder offices. See data/offices.ts.

Active partners
TODO
Partner-led implementations
TODO
Average partner margin
TODOTODO: confirm before publishing

Regions we cover

  • TODO: City 01
  • TODO: City 02
  • TODO: City 03
  • TODO: City 04

Questions

Common questions

Three, in rough order of how well they fit today: implementation partners who deliver assessment projects and want a platform underneath, technology partners with a product that needs assessment inside it, and resellers in regions where we have no presence.

Not yet, and we would rather say so than publish a tier table nobody is in. Early arrangements are written per partner, which is slower to read but honest about where the company is.

Whoever the customer signed with. We do not go around an implementation partner to sell directly into an account they brought, and that commitment belongs in the agreement rather than on a web page.

TODO: answer once the deployment options are settled. This is the most common technical question in this category and a vague answer is worse than none.

A working environment, the integration documentation, and access to an engineer who built it. No scripted demo as the first step — a partner evaluation that starts with a slide deck tells you nothing about the software.

Get in touch

Tell us about your organisation

What you deliver, who for, and where assessment currently gets in the way.

This form is not connected yet

No form endpoint is configured in this build, so nothing would reach us. Email us instead — it goes to the same place.

Email [email protected]

Start with the technical evaluation

We would rather you judged the platform before we discussed terms. Ask for access.

Start a conversationRead our insights