Material flags
Material Flags
Select a flag to inspect its impact and required response.
Evidence Register
| Package | Verified | ProvenanceWhere evidence came from, how it was obtained and what happened to it before entering the case record. | CustodyThe recorded chain of responsibility for evidence as it moves between people or systems. | StrengthA reasoned judgement about how much confidence an evidence item deserves in this decision context. | Material concern |
|---|
Select EP-003 to inspect the omitted adverse reference.
EP-003 - Reference Checks
Verified: Yes
Provenance: Complete
Custody: Incomplete
Strength: Moderate
EI-003-01 Positive reference - subsidiary organisation
Strength: Moderate · Independence: Limited
EI-003-02 Positive reference - parent organisation
Strength: Moderate · Independence: Limited
EI-003-03 Adverse reference - former comparable customer
Strength: Strong · Status: Excluded from Board pack
Exclusion history
Excluded by: Procurement Lead
Rationale: “Not representative of the current offer”
Approved authority: None recorded
Challenge status: Not reviewed
The two positive references are not independent, while the strongest adverse reference was excluded without approval.
Required actions
- Reinstate excluded evidence.
- Independently re-moderate scores.
- Normalise commercial pricing.
- Review the conflict of interest.
- Assess late mobilisation evidence.
- Produce a revised recommendation.
Accountable next step
Recommended action: Pause Award
The system may recommend an action. The accountable human owns the decision.
Ask Companion Intelligence
Answers separate Fact, Inference and Human Judgement, expose uncertainty and refuse to invent missing reasoning.
A governed product, not a clever answer
Evidence first
Claims remain connected to source evidence, provenance, limitations and adverse material.
Explainable by design
Fact, inference, judgement, confidence and limitations are separated visibly.
Human accountability
The system recommends. The accountable human decides.