Evidence-Based Training (EBT)

Evidence-Based Training is the recurrent-training application of CBTA. Where CBTA is the methodology, EBT is the specific operational implementation for periodic recurrent training of qualified line pilots. ICAO Doc 9995 originated the concept, and EASA codified it for European operators through the ORO.FC.231 amendment, with the Acceptable Means of Compliance (AMC1 ORO.FC.231) defining the implementation in detail.

The central premise of EBT is that recurrent training should be informed by the threats and competency gaps that actual line operations expose, not by a fixed scenario rotation that an operator's training department designed years ago. Operators implementing EBT analyze data from line-operations safety audits (LOSA), Flight Data Monitoring (FDM/FOQA), Air Safety Reports, and other operational evidence sources to identify the specific competencies most exposed in their fleet and route network. Recurrent simulator sessions are then designed to develop those competencies — through scenarios that may involve unfamiliar failures, in unfamiliar conditions, with realistic crew workload — rather than through the same hand-flown engine-failure-on-takeoff that the operator has rehearsed for thirty years.

EBT recurrent sessions are graded against the same nine ICAO core competencies and observable behaviors used in initial CBTA. The output is a competency profile for each pilot — strengths and weaknesses across the nine domains — that informs the next recurrent cycle's training focus for that individual. EASA's Mixed EBT, Baseline EBT, and Enhanced EBT variants in AMC1 ORO.FC.231 differ in how much of the legacy recurrent checking they retain, with Enhanced EBT being the closest to the pure EBT vision.

For training organizations, EBT typically applies in commercial AOC operations (the recurrent training the operator's pilots undergo) rather than in initial flight training at an ATO. However, the data infrastructure and competency framework are shared with initial CBTA — a school that runs CBTA properly is much closer to running EBT for an affiliated AOC than a school that runs hours-and-tasks recurrent.

Many operators that adopted EBT badged their existing recurrent program with the EBT label without rebuilding it on operational evidence. The result is checkbox compliance — the regulator sees an EBT-labeled syllabus, the line pilots experience the same checking, and the safety dividend EBT was designed to deliver doesn't materialize. EASA's audit posture on this has tightened, and operators now have to demonstrate the evidence pipeline that informs each recurrent cycle's competency focus.

The data integration is the hard part. FDM, ASR, LOSA, and training data have to flow into a single competency-tagged dataset that the training department can analyze. Without that integration, the training department reverts to what it knows — a fixed scenario rotation, with a CBTA-flavored grading sheet retrofitted on top.

Aviatize's training management module captures recurrent training and checking events in the same competency framework as initial training, so a pilot's competency profile is continuous across their career at the operator — initial type rating, line training, every recurrent. The KPI reporting module aggregates competency outcomes across the operator's pilot population, exposing fleet-wide and route-network-wide weak competencies that should drive the next recurrent cycle's focus.

For combined ATO + AOC operators, the same competency framework spans initial training delivered by the ATO and recurrent training delivered for the AOC, eliminating the data-handoff gap that operators with separate systems struggle to close. This is exactly the integration EBT requires to deliver the evidence-driven training the regulator now expects.