Evidence Room · Section 02 of 06

ED / FICS Authority Shift

Decision rights, delegation, reporting lines, and where administrative support becomes de facto authority.

This section separates the documents we can name publicly, the records that require privacy review, and the question the evidence helps members test.

View the source register ↓Back to Evidence Room →

Question this section helps test

What exactly is FICS contracted to do, and where are the limits of that role?

Question first. Record next. Interpretation last.

Start with these records

The public trail begins here.

Executive Director and support-team transition announcement
June 2026 Assessor Meeting slides and summary
IAF Assessor FAQ — 6 August 2026

These starting points are not presented as a complete answer. They show members where to look and what remains to be clarified.

Read the record

What we can say—and what we still need to know

The left column is limited to source-grounded observations. The right column names missing information as questions, not allegations.

Record

What the record currently supports

The public Board role statements place accountability for Bylaws compliance, strategy, budgets, Board performance, and Executive Director oversight with the volunteer Board and Chair.
The June 2026 assessor briefing, August summary, and FAQ describe operational pathways and reporting relationships that members can compare with those public governance responsibilities.
Transition announcements and Basecamp records provide first-hand chronology, but are treated as private context rather than stand-alone public proof.
FICS’s public team page lists the author of the 20 August Hangzhou update as its Administrative Manager, Governance Support, and Research Coordinator; the formal update was sent from an IAF governance mailbox and signed in an overlapping IAF administrative and governance-support role.

Open

What members still need answered

The current FICS scope of work, decision rights, deliverables, performance measures, cost, and termination or review provisions.
Which decisions are administrative implementation, which require professional certification judgment, and which remain non-delegable Board governance.
How the Board independently monitors the ED / FICS arrangement and reports that oversight to members.
When contractor personnel communicate from an IAF governance mailbox, what authority they are exercising, who authorised it, and how members can distinguish administrative execution from governance voice.

Who is FICS?

A management and accreditation-services company now sits inside IAF’s operating model

Record / source

FICS publicly describes expertise in Facilitation, Management, Leadership Development, and Accreditation.
Its accreditation services include standards and policy development, governance and appeals support, and recruiting, training, and managing accreditation evaluators; it offers full or partial programme management.
Its public management-services page lists the International Association of Facilitators as a client.
IAF’s public site identifies Kathrina Loeffler as its Executive Director; FICS identifies her as its founder and Chief Strategy Officer.
The published pages do not disclose the IAF contract scope, decision limits, performance measures, remuneration safeguards, or the boundary between administrative delivery and final professional authority.

What we observe

Management of an accreditation programme and professional authority within a peer-assessed credential are related, but they are not the same thing. A paid management company can provide strong administration without becoming the source of the profession’s final judgment.

Question this raises

What safeguards separate the vendor relationship, the Executive Director role, Board oversight, and the professional authority of IAF’s experienced Assessors?

Reading noteThe dual role is a governance question, not proof of misconduct. This section does not allege corruption, self-dealing, improper enrichment, or individual intent.

Source register

The documents behind this section

Public sources open directly. Member records lead to IAF’s sign-in boundary. Private records are described so members can understand the basis without exposing contributors or redistributing restricted files.

Tier APublic · IAF source

Approved 19 June 2025

IAF Board of Directors Role Statements

Publicly describes the Board, Chair, and Executive Director accountability relationship.

Opens the public source in a new tab.Open official source

Tier APublic · IAF source

Current public page

IAF: Discover the IAF

IAF’s public description of its nonprofit structure, volunteer Board, professional standards, and Executive Director role.

Opens the public source in a new tab.Open official source

Tier BPublic · IAF source

Current public page

FICS Management Services

FICS’s own description of its management services and its public identification of IAF as a management-services client.

Opens the public source in a new tab.Open official source

Tier BPublic · IAF source

Current public page

FICS Accreditation Services

FICS’s own description of accreditation standards, policy, governance, appeals, evaluator recruitment and training, and programme-management services.

Opens the public source in a new tab.Open official source

Tier BPublic · IAF source

Current public page

FICS: About / Meet Our Team

FICS’s public description of its service areas, founder and Chief Strategy Officer, and the personnel behind an IAF governance-mailbox communication.

Opens the public source in a new tab.Open official source

Tier APrivate verification

20 August 2026

IAF governance email: Hangzhou CPF event update

A formal IAF-domain communication acknowledging leadership-level discussions while addressing event operations, selection considerations, staffing, and survey figures. Recipient details remain private.

The source has been reviewed in the private evidence library and is not deployed publicly.

What this protected source helps establish

What this source helps establish

Why the full record is protected

It may contain personal information, private correspondence, or material shared without consent for public release. The complete record is therefore not published.

Confidential verification

Where there is a reasonable verification need, the Working Group may consider controlled review within applicable privacy and consent boundaries.

Ask about confidential verification

Tier BPrivate verification

Transition record

Executive Director and support-team transition announcement

The stated purpose and shape of the operating arrangement. The circulated record was reviewed privately and is not republished.

The source has been reviewed in the private evidence library and is not deployed publicly.

What this protected source helps establish

What this source helps establish

The stated purpose and shape of the operating arrangement. The circulated record was reviewed privately and is not republished.

Why the full record is protected

It may contain personal information, private correspondence, or material shared without consent for public release. The complete record is therefore not published.

Confidential verification

Where there is a reasonable verification need, the Working Group may consider controlled review within applicable privacy and consent boundaries.

Ask about confidential verification

Tier APrivate verification

17–18 June 2026

IAF Assessor Meeting slides

The formal briefing on decision pathways, reporting lines, assessor roles, and implementation.

The source has been reviewed in the private evidence library and is not deployed publicly.

What this protected source helps establish

What this source helps establish

The formal briefing on decision pathways, reporting lines, assessor roles, and implementation.

Why the full record is protected

It may contain personal information, private correspondence, or material shared without consent for public release. The complete record is therefore not published.

Confidential verification

Where there is a reasonable verification need, the Working Group may consider controlled review within applicable privacy and consent boundaries.

Ask about confidential verification

Tier APrivate verification

7 August 2026

IAF Assessor June 2026 Meeting Summary

IAF’s later written account of the June briefing and the intended direction of implementation.

The source has been reviewed in the private evidence library and is not deployed publicly.

What this protected source helps establish

What this source helps establish

IAF’s later written account of the June briefing and the intended direction of implementation.

Why the full record is protected

It may contain personal information, private correspondence, or material shared without consent for public release. The complete record is therefore not published.

Confidential verification

Where there is a reasonable verification need, the Working Group may consider controlled review within applicable privacy and consent boundaries.

Ask about confidential verification

Tier APrivate verification

6 August 2026

IAF Assessor FAQ

Formal answers about Board communication, reporting, FICS support, and assessment work.

The source has been reviewed in the private evidence library and is not deployed publicly.

What this protected source helps establish

What this source helps establish

Formal answers about Board communication, reporting, FICS support, and assessment work.

Why the full record is protected

It may contain personal information, private correspondence, or material shared without consent for public release. The complete record is therefore not published.

Confidential verification

Where there is a reasonable verification need, the Working Group may consider controlled review within applicable privacy and consent boundaries.

Ask about confidential verification

Tier BPrivate verification

2025–2026

FICS transition and Basecamp records

Operational chronology and role-boundary questions. Personal details and raw exchanges remain protected.

The source has been reviewed in the private evidence library and is not deployed publicly.

What this protected source helps establish

What this source helps establish

Operational chronology and role-boundary questions. Personal details and raw exchanges remain protected.

Why the full record is protected

It may contain personal information, private correspondence, or material shared without consent for public release. The complete record is therefore not published.

Confidential verification

Where there is a reasonable verification need, the Working Group may consider controlled review within applicable privacy and consent boundaries.

Ask about confidential verification

How to read this section

Fact, source, question, interpretation.

Fact

State only what the record directly shows.

Source

Name the document, date, access status, and page where possible.

Question

Ask what members still need to understand or verify.

Interpretation

Label analysis as analysis; do not present it as proof.

Continue carefully

Compare this section with the Five Facts and the wider source map.

One evidence area should not be mistaken for the whole story.

Review the Five Facts →Open the source map →