For Universities
Your NBA report. One click. Your placement rate. Finally measurable.
Udgam turns outcome-based education from an accreditation chore into the engine that drives your placement numbers — and gives your faculty a reason to stay.
- Accreditation automated
- Placement intelligence live
- Faculty retained and earning
The problem, stated honestly
You are already doing OBE. It just isn't doing anything for you.
Accreditation is compliance theatre
OBE has been mandated since 2013. Most institutions still produce CO/PO attainment reports for the accreditor — not for learning improvement. Six to eight months of Excel, once every cycle, and nothing changes in the classroom.
Placement rate is a lagging indicator
You find out how the batch did after they have graduated. By then the corrective lever — curriculum, internships, industry exposure — is three years out of reach.
Faculty leave, or quietly disengage
Your best faculty are worth far more to industry than their salary reflects. Without a structured channel to earn and be recognised outside campus, they either leave or stop investing.
What changes
Four numbers your management committee actually asks about.
NBA Self-Assessment Report, compiled from live attainment data rather than assembled by hand
typical placement-rate movement in the first full year on platform, measured against a locked baseline
less OBE paperwork per faculty member, per semester — AI drafts, faculty approves
supplemental annual income available to an active faculty member through platform engagements
Every one of these figures has a mechanism behind it, documented on the pages in this section. Udgam does not claim outcomes it cannot show you the machinery for.
Before and after
The same institution, one year apart.
Today
On Udgam
Before —NBA SAR: 6–8 months of manual compilation
After —NBA SAR: Generated from live data, on demand
Before —Placement rate: Known after graduation
After —Placement rate: Forecast from a live pipeline, every week
Before —PPO rate: Informal, untracked
After —PPO rate: A six-stage pipeline the TPO can manage
Before —Faculty income: Salary only
After —Faculty income: ₹2–5L supplemental, facilitated on platform
Before —Industry MoUs: A folder of PDFs
After —Industry MoUs: A live CRM with engagement evidence for NAAC
What you get
Five systems, one subscription.
The OBE core that finally runs itself
AI reads your university-prescribed syllabus and drafts course outcomes, CO–PO matrices, question banks and rubrics. Faculty approve in minutes. HODs hold the authority gate. Attainment calculates itself — direct at 80%, indirect at 20%, exactly as NBA prescribes.
- Two-Layer CO model for affiliated colleges — university COs stay untouched
- Continuous Improvement cycles logged with evidence, ready for the SAR
- Bloom's balance checks that flag lower-order-heavy assessments
Placement intelligence your dean can read in 60 seconds
Eight metrics — placement rate, average CTC, role relevance, time-to-placement, PPO rate, employer diversity, 12-month retention, and how well readiness predicted the actual outcome. Each with a trend arrow and an anonymised peer benchmark.
- Department drill-down that names the department dragging the number
- A live placement funnel, not a year-end report
- One-click board report, formatted for management committee
A faculty development engine faculty actually want
Eight AICTE-aligned FDP tracks, self-paced, with platform-issued certificates and hour equivalence documented automatically for your NAAC Criterion 6 report. Faculty complete them because the badges feed a public profile industry can find.
An Innovation Exchange that earns
Your labs, your faculty expertise, your student teams and your IP capacity, listed as a catalogue industry can book. A meaningful non-tuition revenue line — and NAAC-reportable industry-academia collaboration at the same time.
The objections we hear
Every one of these has a product answer, not a policy answer.
| What you'll say | What the platform does about it |
|---|---|
| We have no baseline CO/PO data | The AI CO generator builds the baseline from your existing syllabus. No historical data required. |
| The input burden on faculty is too heavy | AI drafts COs, questions and rubrics; marks import via CSV or your ERP API. Target: under 20 minutes per course per semester. |
| Attainment data will be inaccurate | HOD approval workflow, inter-rater calibration, a Bloom's verb checker and a full audit trail on every change. |
| We already have an ERP | A REST integration layer with pre-built connectors. Zero data re-entry — marks flow in, CO reports flow back out. |
| Our affiliating university controls the curriculum | The Two-Layer CO model. Layer 1 is the university's, untouched and reported upward. Layer 2 is yours, reported to NBA and NAAC. |
| We tried OBE software before and it failed | Run a 90-day pilot with one department, full access, dedicated implementation support. Judge it on the SAR it produces. |
| What happens if we leave? | Full data export at any time, in CSV and Excel. Exports stay available for two years after cancellation. No lock-in. |
The platform refuses to extract value from one stakeholder to benefit another. Every design decision must answer: what does this specific stakeholder get in return?
Placements
Not more drives. Better matches. Lasting placements.
10X Faster
Accreditation in a click. Projects in a semester. Placements in a season.
Co-working
Universities and industry, working on the same problems at the same time.
For universities
The things people actually ask.
We have no baseline CO/PO data. Where does the first framework come from?
From the syllabus you already have. The AI generator reads your university-prescribed syllabus and drafts course outcomes, the Bloom's mapping and a pre-filled CO–PO matrix. No historical attainment data is required to start, and nothing is activated until your faculty approve it and your HOD signs it off.
Our affiliating university controls the curriculum. Doesn't that rule us out?
No — this is the most common situation and the platform is built for it. The Two-Layer CO model keeps the university's prescribed outcomes untouched as Layer 1, reported upward exactly as they are. Your department's supplementary outcomes sit in Layer 2 and are what gets reported to NBA and NAAC. Both are tracked separately and combined in the accreditation dashboard.
How do we know the attainment numbers will stand up to a peer reviewer?
Every figure traces back to a specific question on a specific assessment, mapped to a cognitive level and approved by a head of department before it counts. There is an HOD approval gate, inter-rater calibration when two faculty map the same topic differently, a Bloom's verb checker, and a full audit trail with timestamps and reasons on every change. You can show a reviewer the history, not just the result.
We already have an ERP. Is this another system to key data into twice?
It should not be. There is a REST integration layer with pre-built connectors for the common Indian systems and documented API access for anything custom — marks flow in, outcome reports flow back out. Where no API exists, faculty fill a pre-formatted CSV once. If Udgam ever asks someone to type a mark twice, that is a design failure on our side.
We tried OBE software before and adoption died. Why is this different?
Because previous tools asked faculty for labour and gave them nothing personally valuable back. Udgam gives faculty AICTE-recognised development tracks, a public expertise profile industry can search, and a structured income channel. Adoption stops being something you have to enforce. Run a 90-day pilot on one department and judge it on the report it produces.
What happens to our data if we leave?
It stays yours. Full export in CSV and Excel at any time, and exports remain available for two years after a subscription ends. The MoU carries a three-year term with an exit clause available after Year 1, on 90 days' notice.
Is any of this live yet?
No. Udgam launches in Q1 2027. What exists today is a complete product specification, a working prototype we can demonstrate, three university letters of intent in active discussion, and corporate commitments. No MoUs are signed and there are no placement outcomes to attribute yet — we would rather you knew that before the first meeting.
Universities
Keep exploring
- OBE & AccreditationNBA SAR and NAAC criteria, generated from live data.Read
- Placement Intelligence DashboardEight metrics your dean can report upward in 60 seconds.Read
- Faculty Development EngineAICTE-aligned FDP tracks that make faculty want to stay.Read
- Innovation ExchangeTurn labs, faculty and student teams into revenue.Read
- Founding Institution ProgrammeThree-year preferred pricing, locked in.Read
Founding Institution Programme
Be one of the five founding institutions.
Three-year preferred pricing, co-design access, priority onboarding, and guaranteed access to every company that has signed a letter of intent.