You have spent weeks on your RICS APC case study — but is it ready to submit? A proper review, against the criteria assessors actually use, is one of the most valuable things you can do before the deadline. This guide gives you a pre-submission checklist and shows where an expert review adds the most value.
What a case study review actually checks
A review is not proofreading. It judges your case study the way the assessment panel will — as evidence of your professional judgement. It checks that your issues are substantive, your options are genuine, your advice is reasoned at Level 3, your competencies are clearly evidenced, and your reflection is honest. Style matters far less than substance.
Why you cannot review your own case study effectively
After weeks immersed in the document, you stop seeing it clearly. Gaps in your reasoning feel obvious to you because the context is in your head — but it is not on the page for the assessor. A second, experienced pair of eyes reads only what is written, which is exactly how the panel will read it.
The criteria assessors use
Assessors look for evidence that you can give reasoned advice and exercise judgement. Description of works earns little; analysis of options earns marks. Map your case study against the levels — our guide to RICS APC competencies explains them — and make sure every declared competency is visibly evidenced.
Your pre-submission review checklist
Work through these four tests, the same ones in the figure above:
Structure and word count · read first
Within 3,000 words, with a short introduction and the bulk of the words spent on options, advice and reflection.
Real decisions
Two or three issues with genuine options you weighed, not foregone conclusions.
Level 3 evidence
You give reasoned advice and justify recommendations — not just describe what happened.
Reflection
You say clearly what you learned and what you would do differently with hindsight.
Self-review vs an expert review
A careful self-review will catch obvious problems, but an experienced chartered reviewer adds a different level of insight:
| Self-review | Expert review | |
|---|---|---|
| Fresh perspective | Limited | High — reads only what is written |
| Knows the standard | Variable | Yes — benchmarks against passing submissions |
| Spots weak options | Hard | Reliably |
| Interview readiness | Untested | Flags claims you cannot defend |
Common issues a review uncovers
- Description crowding out analysis.
- Issues with only one realistic answer.
- Competencies declared but not evidenced at the right level.
- Little or no genuine reflection.
- Confidential client detail handled inappropriately.
Want an expert to review your RICS APC case study?
Have a chartered surveyor benchmark your submission against passing standards with RICS case study help and mentoring.
Final thoughts
Reviewing your case study before you submit is the cheapest insurance you can buy against a referral. Start by writing a winning case study, then have it reviewed and rehearse defending it for your final assessment interview.
Need help with your RICS APC case study?
Get a free review and a clear plan from experienced APC mentors who have supported 100+ professionals through the end-to-end process. Packages from £1,750.
Related RICS APC resources
- RICS APC case study example & structure
- RICS APC SOE examples (mandatory + technical)
- RICS APC case study help & mentoring
Frequently Asked Questions
It is an assessment of your case study against the criteria the panel uses — structure, real options, Level 3 reasoned advice, competency evidence and reflection — carried out by an experienced reviewer who reads it as an assessor would.
Ideally once you have a complete draft but with enough time left to act on the feedback — a few weeks before submission. A rushed review the night before leaves no room to fix anything substantive.
No. Your APC submission must be your own work. A review gives you detailed feedback and guidance so you can strengthen it yourself, which is what keeps it compliant and genuinely yours.
Describing works rather than analysing decisions. Assessors want to see judgement — options weighed and advice justified at Level 3 — not a narrative of what was done.
A maximum of 3,000 words. A good review will flag where you are wasting words on background that should be spent on analysis and reflection.
Yes. A review flags any claim you would struggle to defend under questioning, so you can shore it up before the final assessment rather than being caught out on the day.
