Evidence review

A supporting document should answer a question about the request. Its title, attachment and external reference let the reviewer find that source again. The document links to the request, while its verification state and named verifier show whether the evidence check has been recorded. The Request Owner prepares the material and Evidence Reviewer checks its relevance to the business case.

An independent review has a different purpose. It records the reviewer’s outcome against an exact request revision, with a reason and an evidence reference. That context matters when the amount or explanation changes after an earlier review. The team needs to see which version received the review before using it in an approval decision.

• Supporting material. Keep the attachment with a clear title and source reference. A quotation, authorization letter or source confirmation should be recognizable when opened from the related request.
• Verification ownership. Evidence Reviewer records whether the document has been verified and identifies the person who checked it. The record allows the coordinator to follow up on material still awaiting that check.
• Revision review. Record Pending, Approved, Returned or Rejected against the selected request revision. Include the review reason and evidence reference so the next person can understand the outcome without reconstructing an earlier conversation.

Agree what counts as sufficient evidence for the first request type. Decide who prepares it, who verifies it and when an independent revision review is required. Define how the reviewer identifies the exact source material they examined. If documents come from a separate repository, agree the connection and access rules before using its references in real work.

Set the review boundary between Evidence Reviewer and Approver. Document verification confirms the evidence check. An independent review records its own outcome. The Approver still makes the business decision for the eligible step. Rehearse these actions separately so the team can explain who decided what and which request revision each result belongs to.

A request includes a supplier quotation that has been verified. The Request Owner later changes the requested amount because the scope now includes an accessory. Evidence Reviewer compares the new request revision with the document already reviewed and decides what supporting material is needed for the revised case.

Record the new review with its source revision and reason. Preserve the earlier review outcome so the team can explain the sequence. Ask the Approver to locate the evidence for the amount currently under review. A verified attachment should not leave them guessing whether it covers the changed business case.

Repeat the rehearsal with a review marked Returned and a specific question for the Request Owner. Confirm that the question remains visible and that a returned review is distinguishable from an approved one. Review access to the attachment with each participating role, including the person who prepared the request. The handoff is ready when the reviewer can explain the evidence and the Approver can identify the applicable outcome.

• Evidence awaiting verification — Find supporting documents that still need their recorded check.
• Pending revision reviews — Inspect reviews waiting for an outcome against a named request revision.
• Decision chain entries — Compare the review context with the later recorded approval decision.

Evidence to decision covers the review sequence. Correction and follow-up explains how a changed request returns to review.