# Summit APC Panel Marking Sheet - Residential Mock Interview

> Printable self or peer marking sheet. Use it after Script A or Script B. One sheet per mock run. Mark honestly: a soft mock helps nobody.
>
> The real decision is holistic and on balance, taken across the presentation, the answers, and the submissions together. This sheet helps you structure that judgement; it does not replace it. Source: RICS APC Assessor Guide, February 2024, "Post-interview assessment" and "Holistic Criteria".

> **Level-set flag for human review (Stobert):** Summit does not yet hold a December 2025 edition of the Residential pathway guide. The competency set and levels on this sheet are taken from the RICS Residential Pathway Guide, February 2024, Version 1.1, Section 3 Pathway requirements (page 3). Re-verify against any December 2025 Residential edition before treating the sheet as final. Stobert Vhovha (MRICS, RICS Registered Valuer) to confirm.

---

## Candidate and run details

| Field | Entry |
|---|---|
| Candidate (or "self") | |
| Pathway | Residential |
| Script used | A / B |
| Date of mock | |
| Marker (counsellor / peer / self) | |
| Interview kept to 60 minutes? | Yes / No |

---

## The Residential Core rule (read before marking)

The Residential pathway does not fix the Core competencies. The candidate selects **two to Level 3 and two to Level 2** from the Core menu (Building pathology, Housing maintenance repairs and improvements, Housing management and policy, Housing strategy and provision, Inspection, Leasing and letting, Legal/regulatory compliance, Market appraisal, Measurement, Property management, Purchase and sale, Valuation), and within that selection **Inspection, Measurement, and Valuation must each reach at least Level 2**. Mark the candidate at the levels they actually declared. Source: RICS Residential Pathway Guide, February 2024, Version 1.1, Section 3 (page 3).

Record the candidate's declared Core selection here before you start:

| Core competency declared | Declared level (L2 / L3) |
|---|---|
| (e.g. Inspection) | |
| (e.g. Valuation) | |
| (e.g. Measurement) | |
| (e.g. Building pathology / Leasing and letting / Market appraisal) | |

---

## How to score each competency

Mark each competency on the band that best fits the answer **at the declared level**. Do not mark above the declared level. Always open the question by naming the competency and level, exactly as a real panel does. Source: RICS APC Assessor Guide, February 2024, "Questioning at the competency levels".

| Band | Score | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| Strong | 3 | Clear, structured, reasoned at the required level. Cited the right standard. Used a real example. Would satisfy a panel. |
| Satisfactory | 2 | Met the level but thin in places: a missing cite, a shallow example, or a slow start. Passable, not comfortable. |
| Borderline | 1 | Touched the level but did not hold it: vague, generic, or one clear gap. Needs work before the real thing. |
| Deficient | 0 | Did not demonstrate the level. Wrong standard, no example, a bluff, or an evasion. A referral risk if it stands. |

A "Strong" answer at L3 must include all four: the **Rule or standard cited**, the **action recommended**, the **documentation created**, and the **escalation path**. Miss one and it is at best "Satisfactory".

---

## Section 1 - Presentation (10 minutes, weighted heavily)

| Listened-for point | Band (0-3) | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Clear structure: instruction, asset, key issues, options, conclusion | | |
| Kept to 10 minutes | | |
| Own role isolated from the team | | |
| Key issues identified early | | |
| Options considered and rejected, with reasons | | |
| Conclusion shows judgement and reflection (lessons learned) | | |
| Professional, confident communication (not read verbatim) | | |

**Section weighting note:** the presentation sets the tone and is given considerable importance. A strong presentation can lift weaker submissions; a poor one is hard to recover from. Source: RICS APC Assessor Guide, February 2024, "Weighting".

---

## Section 2 - Core technical competencies (as declared)

Mark each declared Core competency at its declared level. Inspection, Measurement and Valuation should each appear here at least at L2.

| Competency | Declared level | Listened-for points | Band (0-3) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| **Inspection** | L2 or L3 | Pre-inspection desktop and dynamic risk assessment; auditable record; defects and limits of competence; reasoned advice linking inspection to value or to landlord/tenant responsibilities; client made aware of statutory responsibilities (L3) | | |
| **Valuation** | L2 or L3 | Market Value defined cleanly; assumption vs special assumption with a residential example; evidence hierarchy in a thin market; uncertainty disclosed; AVM role and limits understood; valuation vs market appraisal distinction | | |
| **Measurement** | L2 (minimum) | Correct, named basis (IPMS Residential and/or local convention); basis aligned to comparable evidence; sources of error; accuracy matched to purpose | | |
| **Second L2/L3 Core** (e.g. Building pathology, Leasing and letting, Market appraisal) | L2 or L3 | Per the declared competency descriptor | | |

**Note on Measurement L3:** the Residential guide recommends Measurement L3 only for candidates with specialist sophisticated-measurement experience and points them to the RICS Geomatics pathway. Most residential candidates carry Measurement at L2. Do not penalise a candidate for not reaching L3 on Measurement if they declared it at L2.

**Referral trigger:** a Deficient (0) on any **Core** competency at its required level is a serious concern. Core is the primary technical skill of the pathway; a candidate who cannot demonstrate their declared Core competencies (with Inspection, Measurement and Valuation each at least L2) is a referral risk on that ground alone.

---

## Section 3 - Optional technical competencies (as declared)

List the candidate's declared optional competencies and mark each at the declared level.

| Competency | Declared level | Listened-for points | Band (0-3) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |

Common Residential optionals and what to listen for:
- **Market appraisal (L2):** comparable evidence analysed to a common basis; realistic price range with the asking-versus-achieved gap; clean line between an appraisal and a Red Book valuation; the limitations of appraisal advice.
- **Leasing and letting (L2/L3):** evidenced rent setting; applicant merit not price alone; compliant written terms, inventory and check-in; client-money discipline; lawful possession process only.
- **Property management (L2):** lease-driven service-charge handling; compliance and maintenance plan; transparent accounting; the management-versus-agency distinction.
- **Purchase and sale (L2):** agency obligations and client money; real marketing process; offers reported in writing and advised on by merit, not price alone.

---

## Section 4 - Mandatory competencies

| Competency | Level | Listened-for points | Band (0-3) | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| **Ethics, Rules of Conduct and professionalism** | L3 | Five Rules known; sub-rules cited (never "Rule 1" alone); L3 scenarios answered with Rule + action + documentation + escalation; overvaluing-to-win refused; deposit held for both parties; bribe declined; Rule 5.9 reporting recognised | | |
| **Client care** | L2 | Complaints procedure, ADR route, complaints log; link back to clear terms of engagement | | |
| **Communication and negotiation** | L2 | Preparation; evidenced position; listening; clear written client communication | | |
| **Health and safety** | L2 | Dynamic risk assessment with a real example; lone-working protocol for occupied-home visits; hierarchy of control | | |
| **CPD** | n/a | 20 hours per year, at least 10 formal; real example with an outcome; linked to Rule 2 | | |
| Other L1 mandatories tested (Sustainability, Data management, etc.) | L1 | Knowledge and understanding demonstrated | | |

**Referral trigger (Ethics):** failure to demonstrate the required competence on **Ethics, Rules of Conduct and professionalism** is a referral in its own right, regardless of technical strength. This is the single competency a panel can refer on alone. In Residential, the most common failure points are overvaluing to win an instruction, mishandling a tenant deposit, and accepting an inducement. Source: RICS APC Assessor Guide, February 2024 (a candidate must be referred if they fail to demonstrate the required competence on Ethics, Rules of Conduct and professionalism).

---

## Section 5 - Communication (assessed across the whole interview)

Communication is a mandatory competency and is marked across every answer, not just the negotiation question.

| Listened-for point | Band (0-3) | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Clear, concise, structured answers | | |
| Answered the question asked (no evasion or padding) | | |
| Professional manner and confidence | | |
| Recovered well from a hard or unexpected question | | |

---

## Section 6 - Overall decision

Add the bands for a feel, but decide on balance, not by the total. RICS does not pass or refer by counting ticks.

| Decision | When to record it |
|---|---|
| **PASS standard** | Required competencies demonstrated at the correct levels. Ethics solid at L3. The declared Core selection (two to L3 and two to L2, with Inspection, Measurement and Valuation each at least L2) demonstrated. Communication satisfactory throughout. Any weakness is minor and in a single optional. |
| **BORDERLINE - more practice** | Met most levels, but one or more competencies sat at Borderline, or the presentation was weak, or a Core answer was thin. Not a referral, but not ready. Re-run with the other script. |
| **REFER standard** | Any of the referral triggers below is present. |

### Referral triggers (any one is enough to refer)
- Failure to demonstrate the required competence on **Ethics, Rules of Conduct and professionalism** (L3).
- A **Deficient (0)** on a declared **Core** competency at its required level (and remember Inspection, Measurement and Valuation must each be at least L2).
- Deficiency across **more than one** optional competency, or a deficiency in a competency required to L2 or L3 (a deficiency in a single competency required only to L1 would not normally refer).
- Communication that is consistently unprofessional or unclear across the interview.
- A submission or presentation that contained significant technical or professional errors that the interview did not overcome.

Source for the referral logic: RICS APC Assessor Guide, February 2024, "Approach", "Weighting", and the mandatory referral note on Ethics.

---

## Section 7 - Feedback to the candidate (constructive, specific, actionable)

Write the feedback the way a referral report should read: factual, accurate, linked to the competency, in short sentences, no jargon, addressed to the candidate ("you"). Focus on the deficiency and how to rectify it. Source: RICS APC Assessor Guide, February 2024, "Referral reports".

**Three things that went well:**
1.
2.
3.

**Three things to fix before the real assessment (most important first):**
1.
2.
3.

**Specific standards to re-read:**
- (e.g. Red Book Global December 2024, VPS 2 and VPGA 2; Rules of Conduct 2021, Rule 5.9; RICS Residential Pathway Guide February 2024, Inspection L3)

**Next mock:** Script ___ , target date ___ .

---

## Marker discipline reminders

- Open every question by naming the competency and the level.
- Do not question above the declared level.
- Ask open questions ("how did you", "why did you", "what if"). Use closed questions only to confirm a fact.
- Do not signal how the mock is going, even in a mock. Hold the result to the debrief.
- Make notes as you go; you cannot mark fairly from memory alone.
- Mark communication everywhere, not just on the communication question.

---

*This marking sheet is a study aid only and is not the official RICS marksheet. It is built to mirror the principles in the RICS APC Assessor Guide, February 2024, and the RICS Residential Pathway Guide, February 2024, Version 1.1. The Residential competency levels are flagged for re-verification against any December 2025 Residential edition. Always verify the cited guidance against the source before relying on it in a formal setting.*

*Summit APC Academy - Mentorship without borders.*