Know who understood. Not just who finished.

Sponge Brain questions your people from your approved procedures, in short conversations on their phone, and shows you what they really know.

Book a demo See an example conversation

A new product, early in its life.

See one conversation

Example: a made-up procedure at a made-up organization. Pre-written, no live model.

Coach

A medication was given at the wrong time, and the mistake was caught at once. The patient is fine. What happens now?

If nothing happened, telling the doctor is enough.

Telling the doctor matters. There's one part worth sharpening: why would the organization want to know about an event that caused no harm?

To see if it keeps happening. So it probably needs reporting too.

That's the direction. And when does the report need to be filed?

At the first chance, I suppose.

What the conversation leaves behind

Reporting an adverse event

DevelopingPractical

What they showed: Understands why events without harm are reported
Still open: When the report must be filed

From the document

Section 4.2· Adverse event reporting procedure

Any employee involved in or witnessing an adverse event reports it by the end of the shift, even if the patient was not harmed.

Now you try

Back to the open question. According to the procedure, when must the report be filed?

Who finished isn't the question

An audit asks how you know people understood. A completion record shows they finished, and nothing more.

Completed, 100%

Developing

Still open: when to file the report.

From document to evidence

Your documents, not a new content project.

You upload an approved document.
You review the module built from it and publish.
People answer in short conversations on their phone.
You see what was understood and what's still open.

Only what your documents say

The coach teaches from the documents you approved, and is built not to make things up. The summary shows the exact clause, word for word, so you can always check.

Any employee involved in or witnessing an adverse event reports it by the end of the shift, even if the patient was not harmed.
Section 4.2 · Adverse event reporting procedure

Understanding, not conversations

The learner: Sees their own conversations.
The manager: Sees what was understood, what's open and who hasn't started. Doesn't read the conversations.
Compliance: Can file a logged request to review a conversation.
Our staff: Reach a conversation only through a time-limited grant that is logged and tells the organization.

What the manager sees (example)

Reporting an adverse event

Noa LeviSolid
Yosef KhouryDeveloping
Dana CohenNeeds work
Miriam EzerNot assessed yet

Security you can check

Separation between organizations is enforced by the database itself, not only by code.
Every change to an assessment is stored with the prompt version and model that produced it.
Data is stored and processed in your region. Model inference runs separately, in an EU region, under zero-retention terms.
This site has no ad cookies and no third-party trackers.

The full detail, including what doesn't exist yet

What research says, and doesn't

Being asked to recall something teaches more than reading it again.
Feeling you learned and having learned are different things.
AI that hands over answers can leave people worse off, so ours asks first.

Most of these studies involve students, not working adults. We don't have results of our own yet.

Try it on one procedure

On the call we'll go through one procedure and see how it looks for you.

Book a demo