For candidatesFor employersLogin
YANA CareersVerified > vibesSign up
Methodology & References

The numbers we publish,with the receipts.

Every headline metric on yanacareers.com is defined here — what it measures, where the data comes from, sample size, the time window, and how often it's refreshed. If a number isn't measured, we say so.

Sources documentedRefresh cadence publishedModeled vs. measured labelled
Ref 01 · Measured
89% pass rate on Q-IAOCR-aligned proctored exams
Ref 02 · Measured
14→6 weeks median time-to-productive ramp
Ref 03 · Modeled
$75,000 avoided per audit finding
Reference
01
Measured

89% pass rate on Q-IAOCR-aligned proctored exams

Definition
Share of YANA Academy learners passing the end-of-program proctored competency assessment on first attempt, scored against the Q-IAOCR competency framework (ICH-GCP E6(R3), informed consent, source documentation, AE/SAE reporting, IP accountability, monitoring).
Source
YANA Academy assessment platform — anonymized records of completed proctored exams across cohorts.
Time window
Spring 2024 → Spring 2026 cohorts (rolling 24 months).
Sample
n = 312 unique learners completing the full program assessment.
Refresh cadence
Recomputed monthly on the 1st. Last refresh: May 2026.
Notes
Includes only learners who sat the proctored exam. Excludes withdrawals and learners who paused enrolment. Pass threshold: 80/100 weighted score.
Reference
02
Measured

14→6 weeks median time-to-productive ramp

Definition
Median number of weeks between hire start date and the first independent monitoring visit / coordinator-led visit performed without supervisor co-sign-off, as reported by hiring managers in post-placement surveys.
Source
Sponsor / CRO post-placement surveys (90 days after start) for hires sourced through YANA Talent Cloud, compared against the same hiring managers' baseline ramp estimates for non-Verified hires in the prior 12 months.
Time window
Placements between Jan 2024 and Mar 2026.
Sample
n = 47 placements across 11 sponsor / CRO organizations.
Refresh cadence
Recomputed quarterly. Last refresh: Q1 2026.
Notes
Self-reported by hiring managers. "Productive ramp" defined per-organization in the survey to control for differences in study complexity. Baseline 14 weeks reflects respondents' median estimate for comparable non-Verified hires; YANA Verified median 6 weeks.
Reference
03
Modeled

$75,000 avoided per audit finding

Definition
Mean cost-per-finding for the categories of audit findings most frequently observed at clinical research sites — informed consent deficiencies, source documentation errors, IP accountability gaps, and AE reporting delays — based on published industry remediation cost benchmarks.
Source
ACRP and industry-published remediation cost ranges for site-level GCP findings ($50k–$120k per finding, depending on category and severity), midpoint applied. Reduction attributable to Verified-hire competency profile is modeled, not measured.
Time window
Industry benchmarks 2022–2025.
Sample
Composite figure derived from published benchmarks; not a YANA-internal measurement.
Refresh cadence
Reviewed annually against the latest published benchmarks.
Notes
This is a benchmark cost-avoidance figure, not a YANA-attributable savings claim. We present it to size the per-finding stakes that competency-verified hiring is designed to reduce. Causal contribution of Verified hiring to finding rates is the subject of a forthcoming case-study series.
Editorial standard

How we publish numbers

We separate measured outcomes (drawn from our own platform or first-party surveys) from modeled figures (derived from published industry benchmarks). Measured outcomes carry sample sizes; modeled figures cite their benchmarks. We update this page whenever a published metric on the site changes, and we date every refresh. If you spot a discrepancy or want the underlying anonymized data, email research@yanacareers.com.

← Back to homepage