Workplace Emergency and First Response Assessment for Offices, Sites and Public VenuesThe first ten minutes, before anybody qualified arrives.
Thirty-eight exercises keyed to the 2025 international resuscitation and first-aid consensus — including the three things that changed last year and are still being taught the old way.
This is not a first-aid certificate, and it says so before it says anything else.
First aid at work is a legal requirement in every market this is sold in, and the training market around it is large and long-established. A one-day certificate runs from about a hundred and sixty pounds in the UK; three days is three hundred and thirty-five to three hundred and sixty. An online module in the US is about twenty-five dollars and does not, by its own provider's admission, satisfy the workplace requirement on its own. A state-recognised course in India is about a thousand rupees — and one large provider issues the certificate five to six months after the exam.
Every one of those is an attendance certificate with a two- or three-year life. Not one publishes what its graduates can still do at six months. A 2025 meta-analysis of school CPR training found correct compression depth falling from about 87 per cent immediately after training to about 13 per cent within six to eight months. The certificate's length is a convention, not a retention curve.
Nothing in that market measures the thing that actually decides the first ten minutes either. Courses assess manikin technique. They do not assess whether somebody will recognise agonal gasping as cardiac arrest rather than as breathing — which is the single most common reason a bystander does not start compressions at all.
This does, and it is honest about its limits in the first block of the report rather than the last. It confers nothing, satisfies no requirement anywhere, and tested nothing with your hands. Hands-on training is the only thing that teaches the physical skills, and the report says that before it shows you a number.
The report is a table rather than a score. Every part of the subject gets a row: how many exercises it carried, what share of the composite it holds and why, how reliable it is, and — the column the design exists for — what your result actually lets you say. Where the reliability will not carry a number, the table prints the refusal instead of rounding one up.
The weights are printed too. They are an editorial judgement about how much of those ten minutes each part accounts for, not a measurement, and a judgement that decides a score belongs on the page rather than in the code.
What you walk away with
Thirty per cent. Compression-only for adults, breaths for children, and why a lone rescuer does not go looking for an AED.
Twenty-five per cent. The 2025 sequence — cough, then back blows, then abdominal thrusts — and pressure before anything else on a bleed.
Twenty per cent. Agonal gasping, the recovery position's four conditions, and when moving somebody is right.
Fifteen per cent, because the minutes go before anybody moves rather than on the way out.
Ten per cent. What the call handler needs first, and what a crew needs when they arrive.
One plain sentence per part, including the half a certificate leaves you to assume.
Inside your report
Illustrative sample — your report is generated from your own responses.
| Part | Items | Weight | Omega | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cardiac arrest and defibrillation | 11 | 30% | 0.79 | 84% |
| Choking and severe bleeding | 9 | 25% | 0.76 | 67% |
| Unresponsive, and whether to move | 8 | 20% | 0.74 | Near the standard |
| Fire and evacuation | 6 | 15% | 0.68 | Placement only |
A part whose reliability will not carry a number is given a placement and the refusal is printed in its own row, rather than a figure being rounded up to fill the space.
These weights are an editorial judgement about how much of the first ten minutes each part accounts for. They are not a measurement, which is exactly why they are on the page rather than in the code.
Built for
- Office, site and venue staff who would be first on the scene
- Certified first aiders whose certificate is more than six months old
- Facilities, HR and health-and-safety leads checking what their people actually know
- Anybody who wants to know which part has gone rather than assuming none of it has
Find out what you would actually do
38 exercises across five formats · about 35 minutes · the warrant table, the 2025 changes and one thing to do tomorrow.
₹499 (incl. GST) · assessment and full report, nothing further to pay
Frequently asked questions
No. It confers nothing, satisfies no legal requirement in any country, and does not make you a workplace first aider. It tested nothing with your hands. That is the first block of the report, before any number.
To tell you which part of what you know has gone, and when. Certificates run for two or three years by convention; the retention evidence shows compression depth performance falling sharply within six to eight months. This is the cheap, repeatable check between courses.
The 2025 international resuscitation consensus, the 2025 European and American basic life support guidelines, the 2024 American first aid guidelines, the UK 2025 guidelines, and the human-behaviour-in-fire literature for the evacuation items. Each rationale names which guideline it comes from and which ones changed in 2025.
No, deliberately. No exercise requires a national emergency number, a regulation, or a local arrangement, so the same sitting is fair in every market it is sold in.
About thirty-five minutes for thirty-eight exercises. ₹499 in India, inclusive of GST, or US$4.99 elsewhere, one time, for the sitting and the full report.
Each one takes a single capability, puts you inside the situations where it is actually tested, and scores your choices against published evidence — with a report designed for that capability alone, not a template. They span hiring, compliance, education, operations and personal skill.
Browse the catalogue →Methodology: Thirty-eight original exercises across five formats: fourteen single-choice situations, seven select-every-that-applies exercises, seven binary claims, six ordering exercises and four matching exercises. One response instruction is declared for the whole instrument and it is a KNOWLEDGE instruction - what current guidance says to do - never what the respondent would do, because on this subject what people would do is exactly what the guidance is trying to change. Construct statement: it measures what somebody knows about the first ten minutes of a medical emergency, a fire alarm or an evacuation at work, keyed to published international consensus. It does not measure clinical skill, whether somebody can perform compressions to depth on a manikin, physical capability, composure under real pressure, or fitness to act as a workplace first aider. It is not a qualification, it confers nothing, and it is not a substitute for hands-on training - which is the only thing that teaches the physical skills and which the retention evidence says decays inside a year. Scoring is a blueprint-weighted content composite. The five parts carry declared weights - cardiac arrest and defibrillation 30 per cent, choking and severe bleeding 25, the unresponsive casualty and whether to move them 20, fire and evacuation 15, calling and handover 10 - and those weights are an editorial judgement about how much of the first ten minutes each part accounts for, not a measurement. They are printed on the report for that reason. The weighting is by CONTENT rather than by reliability: reliability decides only whether a part carries a number at all. Every part is chance-corrected against an authored answer prior per option rather than against a uniform draw. Reliability is McDonald's omega estimated from item count and a stated assumed inter-item correlation; a part whose omega falls below .70 carries a three-way classification and no number, and the refusal is printed in the table rather than performed silently. Every reported figure carries its standard error band, and a band that crosses a boundary is reported as a boundary rather than as a level. Keying sources, all current at September 2026: the 2025 International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation Consensus on Science with Treatment Recommendations for basic life support; the European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2025 for first aid (Djarv, Rogers, Semeraro et al. 2025); Part 7, Adult Basic Life Support, of the 2025 American Heart Association Guidelines for CPR and Emergency Cardiovascular Care; the 2024 American Heart Association and American Red Cross Guidelines for First Aid; the Resuscitation Council UK 2025 adult basic life support and first aid guidelines; the 2025 systematic review and meta-analysis of skill retention after school-based CPR training, which reports correct compression depth falling from about 87 per cent to about 13 per cent within six to eight months (Sadjadi et al. 2025); and the human-behaviour-in-fire literature on pre-movement time, cue interpretation and affiliation, which is why the evacuation items key to leaving rather than to confirming (Kuligowski 2013). Three 2025 changes are keyed explicitly and flagged in the rationales: an ineffective cough in a responsive adult now starts with back blows in American as well as European guidance; locked cabinets for public-access defibrillators are now advised against; and telecommunicator guidance directs lay rescuers to compression-only CPR for adults while directing them toward rescue breaths for children. No emergency telephone number, national regulation or country-specific arrangement is required by any item. All items are original works. No training provider's course material, certificate scheme, instrument or report layout is reproduced or implied, and no affiliation, accreditation or endorsement by any resuscitation council, training provider or awarding body exists or is claimed.