Common questions from schools, colleges, universities and trusts considering an engagement with EduViksit — organised by topic.
We are an institutional consulting firm for Indian schools, colleges, universities, trusts and education-focused NGOs. We help with governance, compliance, digital transformation, leadership development and academic quality improvement.
No. EduViksit is an independent private consultancy. We are not certified, approved or partnered with any government body or regulator, and we help institutions meet regulatory requirements rather than granting approvals ourselves.
CBSE, ICSE and state board schools, international schools, engineering and medical colleges, universities, educational trusts, NGOs, CSR foundations, skill development institutes, coaching institutes, EdTech companies and school chains.
No. Our engagements are scoped to institution size — a single-campus school and a multi-campus university group both fit within our approach, with the depth and duration adjusted accordingly.
We work with institutions across India and can deliver most engagement phases either on-site or remotely, depending on the nature of the work and your institution's preference.
Our frameworks are built specifically around academic calendars, board and trust structures, and Indian education regulation — not adapted from generic corporate consulting methodology.
No. We help institutions prepare for accreditation and inspection processes run by the relevant boards and regulators; we do not issue accreditation or certification ourselves.
Yes. New institutions benefit particularly from getting governance, compliance and documentation structures right from the outset, before informal habits set in.
Most institutions aren't sure at first — that's normal. Our initial consultation is designed to identify the actual priority area before proposing a scope.
Single-service engagements are common — many institutions start with one service such as Compliance & Governance or Documentation & SOPs before considering a broader programme.
Yes. The first consultation is a no-obligation conversation to understand your institution's situation and whether our services are a good fit.
This varies by service and scope — documentation projects may run 6-10 weeks, while a full Institutional Transformation programme typically runs 4-9 months.
Both, depending on the service. Governance-related work always involves the board; operational work is primarily led with the principal, director or administrative leadership.
Yes. Many institutions combine services — for example, Compliance & Governance alongside Documentation & SOPs — and we scope combined engagements accordingly.
Most engagements include a defined handover period, and optional quarterly review support is available for institutions that want continued oversight.
We scope engagements to fit the institution rather than applying a fixed minimum, though very small or single-issue requests are best discussed directly in a consultation.
Yes — we frequently work alongside internal teams, providing external structure and sector expertise rather than replacing existing staff.
Engagement scope can be adjusted through a documented change process; we'd rather revise the plan than deliver something that no longer fits your situation.
It's our four-stage engagement method: Assess (audit current state), Architect (design a roadmap), Activate (implement with your team), and Advance (review cycles to sustain progress).
Yes. We diagnose before we prescribe — every recommendation is grounded in a structured assessment of your institution's current governance, academics or operations, as relevant to the service.
Most engagements include on-site time for discovery and key workshops, combined with remote work for drafting, review and follow-up sessions.
We phase discovery, planning and training activities around your term calendar and examination schedules, agreed upfront during scoping.
This depends on the service, but typically includes leadership (principal/director), relevant department heads, and board representation for governance-related work.
We agree specific, observable outcome indicators with your institution before the engagement begins, and review progress against them at defined checkpoints.
Yes — every engagement concludes with documentation appropriate to the service: an audit report, roadmap, policy set, SOPs or training outcomes summary.
Roadmaps are built with your budget and capacity in mind from the outset — we sequence recommendations so the highest-priority, most feasible steps come first.
Pricing is scoped per engagement based on institution size, service selected and duration — we don't publish a fixed rate card since needs vary significantly across institutions.
No, the first consultation is complimentary and used to understand your institution's needs before any commercial discussion.
Yes, phased engagements can often be aligned with your institution's budget or fiscal planning cycle — this is discussed during scoping.
Yes. Every engagement begins with a written scope of work and commercial proposal for your board or management to review and approve.
This is specified clearly in the proposal for your institution — some engagements include travel within the fee, others itemise it separately depending on location.
In many cases, yes — particularly for trust or NGO-run institutions. We can structure documentation to support this where applicable, though funding eligibility itself depends on the funder's own criteria.
Terms for cancellation, rescheduling and refunds are specified in the engagement contract provided before work begins.
Yes, we're glad to sign an NDA before any detailed institutional information is shared, and this is standard practice for governance and compliance engagements.
No consultancy can guarantee an inspection outcome, as that decision rests with the relevant board or regulator. We can significantly strengthen your readiness and documentation ahead of one.
We help prepare the documentation and readiness required for these processes; the formal submission and decision remain between your institution and the relevant authority.
It refers to a proposed education governance framework under discussion in India. It has not been enacted, and no consultancy — including EduViksit — can currently be certified or approved under it. We monitor regulatory developments and will update institutions we work with if and when it takes effect.
We track NEP 2020 implementation guidance on an ongoing basis; institution-specific compliance should always be confirmed against your state and board's latest circulars alongside our advisory.
Yes, child safety and safeguarding policy is part of our core institutional policy drafting work, developed in line with applicable legal requirements.
Yes, including board charters, delegation of authority and trust-specific governance documentation appropriate to registered educational trusts.
Yes — an honest readiness assessment is part of our value. We would rather flag a gap early than let an institution walk into an application it isn't prepared for.
No — requirements vary by state and board, so our compliance work is mapped specifically to your institution's state, board and category rather than applied generically.
No. Our ERP and AI recommendations are vendor-neutral; we are not paid by any software vendor and have no financial stake in which platform you choose.
It can be, with the right safeguards — our AI readiness work specifically addresses data handling, consent and supervision requirements appropriate for a minor-facing institution.
Yes, staff training is typically included in our Digital & AI Transformation engagements so adoption doesn't stall after the policy is written.
Yes — this is a common starting point. We can run a structured, vendor-neutral comparison against your specific requirements.
That's a common starting point too — our recommendations are matched to your actual infrastructure and budget rather than assuming a high baseline.
Yes, a documented AI use policy — covering classroom, administrative and data-handling guidelines — is a standard deliverable of this service.
No — our approach treats AI as a support tool for teachers and administrators, not a replacement, with human oversight built into every recommended use case.
We recommend an annual review at minimum, or sooner if you adopt new systems or state/board guidance on AI in education changes.
If you don't see it here, a short conversation is usually faster than searching.