Secondary inspection + QA evidence packaging

Show QA what happened, not just what was rejected.

Fulcrym adds an independent inspection and evidence layer to legacy solid-dose lines. Start in parallel mode, preserve existing validation, and generate audit-ready outputs built for QA review and investigations.

Positioned as decision support. Final release authority remains with QA.

The 30-second overview

Fulcrym captures inspection evidence, standardizes defect classification, and packages batch-ready outputs so QA can review, trend, and defend decisions without ripping out existing validated systems.

Inputs

Tablets/capsules being inspected or sampled, plus optional line signals and batch context.

Process

Evidence capture → defect taxonomy → QA review workflow → structured reporting.

Outputs

Batch evidence package, searchable defect library, and trend signals for drift and recurrence.

Where it sits

Start in the lowest disruption mode and graduate to deeper integration once value is proven.

Parallel mode (recommended start)

Run alongside the incumbent process to validate performance without impacting release decisions.

Line-adjacent deployment

Installed near the inspection point for high throughput while preserving the existing validated flow.

Offline / sampling mode

Ideal for early pilots or change-control sensitive environments, while still generating the same evidence outputs.

Validation and compliance positioning

Fulcrym is positioned as decision support and evidence generation. QA retains authority and review control.

What we validate

Defect taxonomy configuration, throughput targets, audit trails, role-based access, and report reproducibility.

What it supports

Deviation investigations, OOS/OOT context, supplier conversations, continuous improvement, and audit defense.

Change-control friendly

Begin with parallel evidence generation and expand based on risk assessment and demonstrated value.

What a pilot looks like

A practical rollout designed to move through site governance without drama.

Weeks 0–1

Discovery: intended use, success criteria, and validation scope.

Weeks 2–3

Install & configure: evidence capture + defect taxonomy alignment.

Weeks 4–6

Parallel run: compare to incumbent workflow and document results.

Weeks 7–8

Readout: pilot report including defect breakdown, false reject analysis, and ROI projection.

What you provide

Line access windows, sample runs, and a QA point-person for review workflow alignment.

What Fulcrym provides

Deployment, training, SOP templates, evidence reporting pack, and final pilot report.

Data integrity and security

Short, confidence-building, and aligned to how quality teams actually operate.

Access control

Role-based access aligned to QA review responsibilities.

Audit trails

Review actions are traceable to users and time, supporting investigations and audits.

Retention

Retention policies configurable to site requirements and governance.

FAQ

Answers to the objections that show up in the first five minutes of a serious conversation.

Does this replace our current vision system?
No. Fulcrym is designed to augment and independently verify, so you can start in parallel and preserve existing validated flow.
Does Fulcrym make release decisions?
No. Fulcrym is positioned as decision support and evidence generation. Final authority remains with QA.
How disruptive is installation?
Pilots can start in the lowest-disruption mode. The goal is to prove value and build the validation narrative before deeper integration.
What do we receive at the end of a pilot?
A pilot report with defect breakdown, comparative analysis, and a recommended rollout plan, plus an evidence package aligned to QA use.
Can this scale across multiple products or sites?
Yes. Defect taxonomies and workflows are configurable per product and can be standardized across lines once validated.

Ready to see it on your product?

We’ll walk through intended use, pilot scope, and the validation path that fits your site governance.

Request a walkthrough Read the white papers