Review and evidence

A review decision points to a packet and its source revision. The reviewer records a pending, approved, returned or rejected outcome, with a decision time, reason and evidence reference. Evidence documents give the team an attachment or external reference tied to the same packet. A verifier can mark the document after checking it. The reviewer must know which revision is being judged, because an approval of an earlier document cannot authorize a changed one.

• Decision. Keep the reviewer, revision, outcome and reason together.
• Evidence. Link supporting documents to the packet and name the verifier.
• Handoff. Return changed work to its owner with a reason that can be acted on.

Agree who may review a packet and how independence is checked. Decide which attachments or external references must support a decision, and who can verify them. Keep the meaning of Returned distinct from Rejected: one asks for corrected work, while the other records a refusal. Set a clear rule for whether a new packet revision needs a new decision before sending.

A prepared contract is sent to the signature reviewer. The reviewer finds that the signer order does not match the agreed authorization path and records Returned with a reason. The owner updates the packet as a successor revision and sends that revision for review. After checking the attached proof and document hash, the reviewer records Approved with the date and evidence reference. The sending handoff uses that reviewed revision. Anyone investigating later can see the earlier return without confusing it with the final approval.

The handoff should be checked on a real packet, not just on a status label. Open the linked record and compare the people, revision and provider evidence behind the decision. If the record is returned or uncertain, keep it visible to the person responsible for the next action. The next team should be able to explain what was received, what was accepted and why the packet changed state.

The decision record separates a pending check from an approved, returned or rejected result. Before approving, the reviewer compares its source revision with the packet and reads the evidence reference or linked document. A return should tell the owner what to change; the next prepared revision needs its own decision. If an attachment is later verified, its verifier and packet link should let another reviewer locate the same proof. The owner should not send a packet simply because an earlier revision has an approved decision.

• Pending Review Decisions — Packet revisions waiting for a named reviewer.
• Evidence Verification — Documents waiting for a verifier’s check.

Follow packet preparation and signer verification.