Review finding

What this worksheet records

A review finding should separate the observation from its interpretation. Identify the criterion and exact record version, then describe what the reviewer actually saw or could not verify. Preserve the evidence reference and the limits of the reviewed sample. A missing document is an evidence gap; it should not be automatically converted into a claim that the physical work was unsafe, fraudulent or unsuccessful. Explain the finding's practical significance in relation to the declared review purpose.

Complete and review it

Give the responsible party an opportunity to respond and link its clarification or corrective action. Keep the reviewer's competence and source method retrievable where relevant. If new evidence changes the interpretation, retain the original finding and issue an attributable revision instead of silently removing the history. A closed finding should identify the outcome and remaining limitations. Avoid using a narrow review as certification of the whole organisation, complete lifecycle performance or future work.

Field definitions

• finding_id: A stable identifier for this finding, used to connect related rows without merging unrelated records.
• audit_id: A stable identifier for this audit, used to connect related rows without merging unrelated records.
• criterion_reference: The actual attributable source for criterion reference; a reference is not evidence that a decision was authenticated or its content verified.
• record_version: The exact record version used for this row; retain earlier versions and revisit affected decisions after a change.
• observed_fact: What the reviewer actually observed, separated from its interpretation or consequence.
• evidence_reference: The actual attributable source for evidence reference; a reference is not evidence that a decision was authenticated or its content verified.
• interpretation: The reviewer’s explanation of the observation within the declared criteria and scope.
• scope_limit: The actual scope limit relevant to this row’s declared purpose. Record the source or unresolved question where it is not confirmed.
• severity_basis: The relevant requirement and consequence supporting the issue’s significance.
• reviewer: The named person or agreed role responsible for reviewer; confirm its real scope rather than assuming authority from a typed name.
• reviewed_date: The actual reviewed date, with date format or period meaning explicit; distinguish requested, planned, confirmed and observed values.
• response_owner: The named person or agreed role responsible for response owner; confirm its real scope rather than assuming authority from a typed name.
• response: The actual response relevant to this row’s declared purpose. Record the source or unresolved question where it is not confirmed.
• corrective_action_reference: The actual attributable source for corrective action reference; a reference is not evidence that a decision was authenticated or its content verified.
• state: The current state supported by the record, preserving unknown, proposed and confirmed outcomes as distinct states.

Prepare a deliberate export

Findings may contain reputationally sensitive information and private evidence. Share the agreed review scope with authorised parties, using an accurately limited public statement only when permitted. The worksheet itself makes no authenticated or certified assessment.

Take it to the next job

• Record observed facts separately from reviewer interpretation.
• Retain exact evidence versions and sample limitations.
• Preserve responses and revisions when new information arrives.