Interactive demonstration · fictional information only

Know what’s promised. Know who’s responsible. Know what’s being delivered.

Switch between the customer, prime contractor and supplier to see how each one gets the assurance it needs, without disclosing confidential commercial agreements. The programme (National Workplace Technology Services Programme) and every organisation, clause and review are invented. No live AI, real contracts or accounts are used.

Viewing as

National Public Services Agency

Fictional organisation · simulated permissions

Switch perspective to see how visibility changes for each fictional role. This is not a sign-in: anyone can choose any perspective, and nothing here protects real confidential information.

AI Assurance Briefing

Executive briefing

Illustrative AI assurance workflow — fictional data, not live AI analysis. Simulated AI briefing — generated by fixed rules from fictional data. No live AI model was used.

Each line is marked: fact from the data, simulated AI summary or needs a human decision. Potential breaches are reviewed concerns, not legal determinations. Anything this organisation is not entitled to see was excluded before the briefing was composed.

Simulated AI summary
10 matters need attention, 6 of them high priority.
Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
1 evidence item has been accepted; 18 of 21 obligations still have no performance assessment.
Sources:E-180 Meridian PI certificate 2026/27
Needs a human decisionHigh priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-002 (“Notify the Authority of security incidents within 4 hours”) is disputed by Sentinel Technology Support Ltd. Challenge summary: Sentinel disputes the finding. It states that its operating procedure escalates incidents to Meridian in time to meet the Authority's 4-hour notification requirement. Note: E-170 relates to a different obligation (OBL-0076), not the challenged obligation OBL-0118. It was attached by the challenger and does not on its own show that OBL-0118 was met.
Simulated AI summary Why high priority: High because the original exception EX-002 is rated high priority in the fictional register, and the matter stays unresolved until the assigned reviewer records a decision.
Fact from the data Evidence: On file: E-220 Q3 incident notification log (assessed). Performance reviews: R-09 independent assessor verification, 2026-10-15: formally-reviewed.
Next action: Assigned reviewer to record a decision with the evidence considered · Responsible: Northgate Assurance Partners Ltd
Sources:EX-002 · PSA Sch. 2.3 §11.1 OBL-0118 · Sch. 2.3 §11.1 CH-01
Simulated AI summaryHigh priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-001: a potential inconsistency affects “Quarterly environmental and carbon reporting for delivered services” at Atlas Logistics Services Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Simulated AI summary Why high priority: High because the original exception EX-001 is rated high priority in the fictional register, and no person has reviewed it yet.
Fact from the data Evidence: On file: E-120 Q2 Environmental Performance Report (Meridian only) (submitted). Missing or out of date: E-121 Atlas logistics emissions data (not provided).
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Sources:EX-001 · PSA Sch. 5.1 §3.4 OBL-0041 · Sch. 5.1 §3.4
Simulated AI summaryHigh priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-003: a potential inconsistency affects “Maintain records of processing and sub-processor approvals” at Sentinel Technology Support Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Simulated AI summary Why high priority: High because the original exception EX-003 is rated high priority in the fictional register, and no person has reviewed it yet.
Fact from the data Evidence: Missing or out of date: E-210 Consent for Cobalt Cloud Hosting (not provided).
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Sources:EX-003 · PSA Sch. 2.4 §6.2 OBL-0105 · Sch. 2.4 §6.2

1. What is happening across the contract and supply chain?

Fact from the data
21 obligations, 17 evidence items and 9 findings are visible to National Public Services Agency.
Fact from the data
8 findings remain open; 1 challenge is awaiting a decision.
Simulated AI summary
Open findings are most concentrated at Sentinel Technology Support Ltd (3 of 8).
Sources:EX-002 · PSA Sch. 2.3 §11.1 EX-003 · PSA Sch. 2.4 §6.2 EX-004 · PSA Sch. 3 §2.4

2. Which obligations are verified, unverified, disputed or potentially at risk?

Evidence accepted (1)

Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
Meridian PI certificate 2026/27 was accepted (customer review). Performance of OBL-0089 is “Not assessed” — accepting evidence does not show the obligation is being met.
Sources:OBL-0089 · Cl. 24.2 E-180 Meridian PI certificate 2026/27

Not yet verified (13)

Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
18 of 21 visible obligations have no performance assessment yet.
Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
Meridian ISMS attestation 2026 has been submitted but not yet reviewed.
Sources:OBL-0012 · Sch. 2.3 §4.1 E-101 Meridian ISMS attestation 2026
Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
Q2 Environmental Performance Report (Meridian only) has been submitted but not yet reviewed.
Sources:OBL-0041 · Sch. 5.1 §3.4 E-120 Q2 Environmental Performance Report (Meridian only)
Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
September asset reconciliation has been submitted but not yet reviewed.
Sources:OBL-0058 · Sch. 2.1 §9.1 E-140 September asset reconciliation
Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
September performance report has been submitted but not yet reviewed.
Sources:OBL-0074 · Sch. 3 §2.1 E-160 September performance report
Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
August P1 incident extract has been submitted but not yet reviewed.
Sources:OBL-0076 · Sch. 3 §2.4 E-170 August P1 incident extract
Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
Sentinel PL certificate has been submitted but not yet reviewed.
Sources:OBL-0090 · Cl. 24.4 E-190 Sentinel PL certificate
Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
Northbridge PL certificate has been submitted but not yet reviewed.
Sources:OBL-0090 · Cl. 24.4 E-191 Northbridge PL certificate
Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
Cobalt DPA (signed) has been submitted but not yet reviewed.
Sources:OBL-0102 · Sch. 2.4 §3.1 E-200 Cobalt DPA (signed)
Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
H1 payment performance report has been submitted but not yet reviewed.
Sources:OBL-0133 · Cl. 18.3 E-240 H1 payment performance report
Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
Subcontract audit clause review has been submitted but not yet reviewed.
Sources:OBL-0147 · Cl. 21.1 E-260 Subcontract audit clause review
Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
Meridian BCDR test 2026 has been submitted but not yet reviewed.
Sources:OBL-0162 · Sch. 8 §2.1 E-270 Meridian BCDR test 2026
Fact from the dataIncomplete assessment
Swiftline GIT certificate has been submitted but not yet reviewed.
Sources:OBL-0192 E-310 Swiftline GIT certificate

Disputed (1)

Needs a human decisionHigh priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-002 (“Notify the Authority of security incidents within 4 hours”) is disputed by Sentinel Technology Support Ltd. Challenge summary: Sentinel disputes the finding. It states that its operating procedure escalates incidents to Meridian in time to meet the Authority's 4-hour notification requirement. Note: E-170 relates to a different obligation (OBL-0076), not the challenged obligation OBL-0118. It was attached by the challenger and does not on its own show that OBL-0118 was met.
Next action: Assigned reviewer to record a decision with the evidence considered · Responsible: Northgate Assurance Partners Ltd
Sources:EX-002 · PSA Sch. 2.3 §11.1 OBL-0118 · Sch. 2.3 §11.1 CH-01

Potentially at risk (8)

Fact from the dataHigh priority
EX-007 (“Maintain and annually test a business continuity plan”): reviewed potential breach, recorded by Northgate Assurance Partners Ltd on 2026-10-18. This is a reviewed concern, not a legal determination.
Next action: Customer to decide the contract-management response; accountable party to provide the missing evidence · Responsible: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Sources:EX-007 · PSA Sch. 8 §2.1 OBL-0162 · Sch. 8 §2.1 CH-03
Simulated AI summaryHigh priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-001: a potential inconsistency affects “Quarterly environmental and carbon reporting for delivered services” at Atlas Logistics Services Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Sources:EX-001 · PSA Sch. 5.1 §3.4 OBL-0041 · Sch. 5.1 §3.4
Simulated AI summaryHigh priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-003: a potential inconsistency affects “Maintain records of processing and sub-processor approvals” at Sentinel Technology Support Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Sources:EX-003 · PSA Sch. 2.4 §6.2 OBL-0105 · Sch. 2.4 §6.2
Simulated AI summaryHigh priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-004: a potential inconsistency affects “Priority 1 field incidents resolved within 8 hours” at Sentinel Technology Support Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Sentinel Technology Support Ltd
Sources:EX-004 · PSA Sch. 3 §2.4 OBL-0076 · Sch. 3 §2.4
Simulated AI summaryMedium priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-006: a potential inconsistency affects “Asset traceability” at Swiftline Couriers Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Swiftline Couriers Ltd
Sources:EX-006 OBL-0061
Simulated AI summaryLow priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-009: a potential inconsistency affects “Insurance” at Swiftline Couriers Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Swiftline Couriers Ltd
Sources:EX-009 OBL-0192
Simulated AI summaryMedium priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-010: a potential inconsistency affects “Annual independent penetration test of systems processing Authority Data” at Cobalt Cloud Hosting Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Sources:EX-010 · PSA Sch. 2.3 §7.2 OBL-0027 · Sch. 2.3 §7.2
Fact from the dataHigh priority
OBL-0076: a reviewer recorded a performance concern for “Priority 1 field incidents resolved within 8 hours”.
Next action: Accountable party to set out remediation · Responsible: Sentinel Technology Support Ltd
Sources:OBL-0076 · Sch. 3 §2.4

3. What evidence supports these assessments?

Four different things — not interchangeable

Fact from the data
Available: 17 evidence items are visible to National Public Services Agency. Being available does not mean an item has been reviewed.
Fact from the data
Reviewed: 3 of these have been examined by someone other than the owner (a documentary, customer or assessor review, or a challenge decision). Self-attestation is not counted.
Sources:E-180 Meridian PI certificate 2026/27 E-220 Q3 incident notification log E-260 Subcontract audit clause review
Fact from the data
Supporting a conclusion: no visible evidence is recorded as supporting a decision.
Fact from the data
Accepted by the customer: 1 item. Customer acceptance confirms the document was checked; it never establishes full contractual compliance on its own.
Sources:E-180 Meridian PI certificate 2026/27

Reviewed evidence, item by item (2)

Fact from the data
Meridian PI certificate 2026/27 (Meridian Systems Integration Ltd): accepted · Customer review · checked: insurer Ashcombe Mutual Insurance plc (fictional); policy period 1 Apr 2026 – 31 Mar 2027; limit of indemnity £10m each claim (professional indemnity).
Sources:OBL-0089 · Cl. 24.2 E-180 Meridian PI certificate 2026/27
Fact from the data
Q3 incident notification log (Meridian Systems Integration Ltd): assessed · Customer review.
Sources:OBL-0118 · Sch. 2.3 §11.1 E-220 Q3 incident notification log

Evidence acceptance confirms the document was checked. It is not a finding that the obligation is being performed, and it never establishes full contractual compliance on its own.

4 and 5. What needs attention, and who is responsible for the next action?

Actions in priority order (10)

Needs a human decisionHigh priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-002 (“Notify the Authority of security incidents within 4 hours”) is disputed by Sentinel Technology Support Ltd. Challenge summary: Sentinel disputes the finding. It states that its operating procedure escalates incidents to Meridian in time to meet the Authority's 4-hour notification requirement. Note: E-170 relates to a different obligation (OBL-0076), not the challenged obligation OBL-0118. It was attached by the challenger and does not on its own show that OBL-0118 was met.
Simulated AI summary Why high priority: High because the original exception EX-002 is rated high priority in the fictional register, and the matter stays unresolved until the assigned reviewer records a decision.
Fact from the data Evidence: On file: E-220 Q3 incident notification log (assessed). Performance reviews: R-09 independent assessor verification, 2026-10-15: formally-reviewed.
Next action: Assigned reviewer to record a decision with the evidence considered · Responsible: Northgate Assurance Partners Ltd
Sources:EX-002 · PSA Sch. 2.3 §11.1 OBL-0118 · Sch. 2.3 §11.1 CH-01
Simulated AI summaryHigh priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-001: a potential inconsistency affects “Quarterly environmental and carbon reporting for delivered services” at Atlas Logistics Services Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Simulated AI summary Why high priority: High because the original exception EX-001 is rated high priority in the fictional register, and no person has reviewed it yet.
Fact from the data Evidence: On file: E-120 Q2 Environmental Performance Report (Meridian only) (submitted). Missing or out of date: E-121 Atlas logistics emissions data (not provided).
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Sources:EX-001 · PSA Sch. 5.1 §3.4 OBL-0041 · Sch. 5.1 §3.4
Simulated AI summaryHigh priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-003: a potential inconsistency affects “Maintain records of processing and sub-processor approvals” at Sentinel Technology Support Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Simulated AI summary Why high priority: High because the original exception EX-003 is rated high priority in the fictional register, and no person has reviewed it yet.
Fact from the data Evidence: Missing or out of date: E-210 Consent for Cobalt Cloud Hosting (not provided).
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Sources:EX-003 · PSA Sch. 2.4 §6.2 OBL-0105 · Sch. 2.4 §6.2
Simulated AI summaryHigh priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-004: a potential inconsistency affects “Priority 1 field incidents resolved within 8 hours” at Sentinel Technology Support Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Simulated AI summary Why high priority: High because the original exception EX-004 is rated high priority in the fictional register, and no person has reviewed it yet.
Fact from the data Evidence: On file: E-170 August P1 incident extract (submitted). Performance reviews: R-06 supplier self-attestation, 2026-09-30: satisfactory; R-08 prime contractor documentary review, 2026-10-06: concern. 1 further evidence item is not disclosed to this organisation.
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Sentinel Technology Support Ltd
Sources:EX-004 · PSA Sch. 3 §2.4 OBL-0076 · Sch. 3 §2.4
Fact from the dataHigh priority
EX-007 (“Maintain and annually test a business continuity plan”): reviewed potential breach, recorded by Northgate Assurance Partners Ltd on 2026-10-18. This is a reviewed concern, not a legal determination.
Simulated AI summary Why high priority: High because an authorised reviewer did not accept the challenge, so a reviewed concern now stands against this obligation (raised from the original medium rating).
Fact from the data Evidence: On file: E-270 Meridian BCDR test 2026 (submitted). 1 further evidence item is not disclosed to this organisation.
Next action: Customer to decide the contract-management response; accountable party to provide the missing evidence · Responsible: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Sources:EX-007 · PSA Sch. 8 §2.1 OBL-0162 · Sch. 8 §2.1 CH-03
Fact from the dataHigh priority
OBL-0076: a reviewer recorded a performance concern for “Priority 1 field incidents resolved within 8 hours”.
Simulated AI summary Why high priority: High because a reviewer recorded a performance concern, which suggests the obligation may not currently be met in practice.
Fact from the data Evidence: On file: E-170 August P1 incident extract (submitted). Performance reviews: R-06 supplier self-attestation, 2026-09-30: satisfactory; R-08 prime contractor documentary review, 2026-10-06: concern. 1 further evidence item is not disclosed to this organisation.
Next action: Accountable party to set out remediation · Responsible: Sentinel Technology Support Ltd
Sources:OBL-0076 · Sch. 3 §2.4
Simulated AI summaryMedium priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-006: a potential inconsistency affects “Asset traceability” at Swiftline Couriers Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Swiftline Couriers Ltd
Sources:EX-006 OBL-0061
Simulated AI summaryMedium priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-010: a potential inconsistency affects “Annual independent penetration test of systems processing Authority Data” at Cobalt Cloud Hosting Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Sources:EX-010 · PSA Sch. 2.3 §7.2 OBL-0027 · Sch. 2.3 §7.2
Needs a human decisionMedium priorityIncomplete assessment
CH-02: the decision “No issue identified” is not supported by the evidence reviewed (E-260). It should not be relied on as a verified conclusion.
Next action: Reviewer to record the evidence considered, or the customer to re-review · Responsible: National Public Services Agency
Sources:CH-02
Simulated AI summaryLow priorityIncomplete assessment
EX-009: a potential inconsistency affects “Insurance” at Swiftline Couriers Ltd. Not yet reviewed by a person.
Next action: Accountable party to confirm or correct the flow-down; customer to decide whether review is needed · Responsible: Swiftline Couriers Ltd
Sources:EX-009 OBL-0192

Standard briefing questions

Question

Fact from the data
EX-001 (high priority): Potential inconsistency.
Sources:OBL-0041 · Sch. 5.1 §3.4
Exception: EX-001
Fact from the data
EX-002 (high priority): Disputed — under review.
Sources:OBL-0118 · Sch. 2.3 §11.1
Exception: EX-002
Fact from the data
EX-003 (high priority): Potential inconsistency.
Sources:OBL-0105 · Sch. 2.4 §6.2
Exception: EX-003
Fact from the data
EX-004 (high priority): Potential inconsistency.
Sources:OBL-0076 · Sch. 3 §2.4
Exception: EX-004
Fact from the data
OBL-0076: performance concern identified by a reviewer.
Sources:OBL-0076 · Sch. 3 §2.4
Exception: EX-004

What are we contractually entitled to receive?
21
obligations visible · 6 disclosure rights apply to this role
Who is responsible?
3
Meridian Systems Integration Ltd, Atlas Logistics Services Ltd, Sentinel Technology Support Ltd
What has been verified?
1
evidence items accepted · 0 independently verified
What remains uncertain?
21
obligations with incomplete assurance · 18 performance not assessed
What needs attention?
8
8 open findings · 0 expired · 0 overdue requests

What is verified, and what is not

Verified (accepted by a reviewer): 1
Supplier self-attestation only: 0
Missing evidence (requested, not submitted): 3
Potential contractual inconsistencies: 4
Restricted by contractual permissions: 10

Evidence assurance

Not requested0
Requested3
Submitted12
Assessed1
Accepted1
Rejected0
Expired0

Performance assurance

Not assessed18
Satisfactory1
Concern identified1
Formally reviewed1

Contractual alignment

Obligation identified0
Responsibility allocated3
Flow-down verified9
Exception identified9

The three tracks are reported separately. There is no combined compliance score.

Obligations and assurance tracks (21)

OBL-0012Sch. 2.3 §4.1
Maintain an information security management system aligned to the Authority's security schedule.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Flow-down verified
Evidence assurance
Submitted
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0027Sch. 2.3 §7.2
Annual independent penetration test of systems processing Authority Data.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Exception identified
Evidence assurance
Requested
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0041Sch. 5.1 §3.4
Quarterly environmental and carbon reporting for delivered services.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Exception identified
Evidence assurance
SubmittedRequested
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0043Sch. 5.1 §5.2
WEEE-compliant disposal with certificates of destruction.
Accountable: Atlas Logistics Services Ltd
Contractual alignment
Flow-down verified
Evidence assurance
No evidence visible
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0058Sch. 2.1 §9.1
Maintain an accurate asset register for all end-user devices.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Responsibility allocated
Evidence assurance
Submitted
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0061
Asset traceability
Detail restricted — status only
Contractual alignment
Exception identified
Evidence assurance
No evidence visible
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0074Sch. 3 §2.1
Service desk first-time-fix rate of at least 75%.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Flow-down verified
Evidence assurance
Submitted
Performance assurance
Satisfactory
OBL-0076Sch. 3 §2.4
Priority 1 field incidents resolved within 8 hours.
Accountable: Sentinel Technology Support Ltd
Contractual alignment
Exception identified
Evidence assurance
Submitted
Performance assurance
Concern identified
OBL-0089Cl. 24.2
Maintain professional indemnity insurance of at least £10m.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Flow-down verified
Evidence assurance
Accepted
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0090Cl. 24.4
Ensure Sub-contractors hold equivalent insurance; provide current certificates.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Responsibility allocated
Evidence assurance
SubmittedSubmitted
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0102Sch. 2.4 §3.1
Process personal data only on documented instructions.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Flow-down verified
Evidence assurance
Submitted
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0105Sch. 2.4 §6.2
Maintain records of processing and sub-processor approvals.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Exception identified
Evidence assurance
Requested
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0118Sch. 2.3 §11.1
Notify the Authority of security incidents within 4 hours.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Exception identified
Evidence assurance
Assessed
Performance assurance
Formally reviewed
OBL-0121Sch. 2.3 §11.4
Provide a root-cause report within 10 working days of a major incident.
Accountable: Sentinel Technology Support Ltd
Contractual alignment
Flow-down verified
Evidence assurance
No evidence visible
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0133Cl. 18.3
Pay undisputed sub-contractor invoices within 30 days.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Responsibility allocated
Evidence assurance
Submitted
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0147Cl. 21.1
Grant the Authority audit access, flowed down to Sub-contractors.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Flow-down verified
Evidence assurance
Submitted
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0149Cl. 21.3
Retain records for 7 years after expiry.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Exception identified
Evidence assurance
No evidence visible
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0162Sch. 8 §2.1
Maintain and annually test a business continuity plan.
Accountable: Meridian Systems Integration Ltd
Contractual alignment
Exception identified
Evidence assurance
Submitted
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0165
Business continuity
Detail restricted — status only
Contractual alignment
Flow-down verified
Evidence assurance
No evidence visible
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0184Sch. 3 §6.1
Deliver new devices within 5 working days of approved order.
Accountable: Atlas Logistics Services Ltd
Contractual alignment
Flow-down verified
Evidence assurance
No evidence visible
Performance assurance
Not assessed
OBL-0192
Insurance
Detail restricted — status only
Contractual alignment
Exception identified
Evidence assurance
Submitted
Performance assurance
Not assessed

Evidence and sharing (17)

Select an evidence item to see what this role may access, and why.

Access outcomes: No access · Status only · Approved summary · Full document. Items with no access are not listed.

Exceptions and challenges (9)

What the challenge outcomes mean

Disputed — under review: A challenge has been made and is waiting for an authorised reviewer's decision. The original finding still stands.
Potential breach — reviewed: The reviewer did not accept the challenge. This is a reviewed concern for contract management, not a legal determination.
No issue identified: The reviewer accepted the challenge. The original finding and its evidence remain on record.

EX-001 · OBL-0041HighPotential inconsistency
Original finding
Detail restricted — subcontract wording not disclosed
Source clauses: PSA Sch. 5.1 §3.4 · Supplier: Atlas Logistics Services Ltd
EX-002 · OBL-0118HighDisputed — under review
Original finding
Detail restricted — subcontract wording not disclosed
Source clauses: PSA Sch. 2.3 §11.1 · Supplier: Sentinel Technology Support Ltd
Challenge CH-01Under review
Challenged by:
Sentinel Contracts Manager (fictional), Sentinel Technology Support Ltd · submitted 2026-10-09
Reason (approved customer summary):
Sentinel disputes the finding. It states that its operating procedure escalates incidents to Meridian in time to meet the Authority's 4-hour notification requirement.
Supporting evidence:
E-170 August P1 incident extract
Limitation:
E-170 relates to a different obligation (OBL-0076), not the challenged obligation OBL-0118. It was attached by the challenger and does not on its own show that OBL-0118 was met.
Assigned reviewer:
Northgate Lead Assessor (fictional), Northgate Assurance Partners Ltd
Reviewer independence:
Authorised by the customer for this finding (G-06) · No recorded conflict of interest · Not reviewing its own work · Earlier review R-09 of OBL-0118 is not disputed by this challenge, so it does not disqualify
Decision:
Awaiting decision
Audit history (3 events · simulated, not tamper-proof)
1. 2026-10-09 · Sentinel Contracts Manager (fictional), Sentinel Technology Support Ltd — Challenge submitted with supporting evidence E-170
2. 2026-10-11 · NPSA Commercial Assurance Lead (fictional), National Public Services Agency — Assigned to Northgate Assurance Partners Ltd (authorisation G-06)
3. 2026-10-11 · NPSA Commercial Assurance Lead (fictional), National Public Services Agency — Evidence access authorised: Northgate may see the approved summary of E-170 while G-06 remains active
Reassign reviewer
EX-003 · OBL-0105HighPotential inconsistency
Original finding
Detail restricted — subcontract wording not disclosed
Source clauses: PSA Sch. 2.4 §6.2 · Supplier: Sentinel Technology Support Ltd
EX-004 · OBL-0076HighPotential inconsistency
Original finding
Detail restricted — subcontract wording not disclosed
Source clauses: PSA Sch. 3 §2.4 · Supplier: Sentinel Technology Support Ltd
EX-006 · OBL-0061MediumPotential inconsistency
Original finding
Detail restricted — subcontract wording not disclosed
Source clauses: — · Supplier: Swiftline Couriers Ltd
EX-007 · OBL-0162MediumPotential breach — reviewed
Original finding
Detail restricted — subcontract wording not disclosed
Source clauses: PSA Sch. 8 §2.1 · Supplier: Atlas Logistics Services Ltd
Challenge CH-03Decided
Challenged by:
Atlas Compliance Manager (fictional), Atlas Logistics Services Ltd · submitted 2026-10-02
Reason (approved customer summary):
Atlas states that its annual continuity test took place and the report is being finalised.
Supporting evidence:
E-271 (restricted)
Assigned reviewer:
Northgate Lead Assessor (fictional), Northgate Assurance Partners Ltd
Reviewer independence:
Authorised by the customer for this finding (G-05) · No recorded conflict of interest · Not reviewing its own work
Decision:
Potential breach — reviewed — Northgate Lead Assessor (fictional), Northgate Assurance Partners Ltd, 2026-10-18. Reason: No test report was available at review; outcome is a reviewed potential breach, not a legal determination.
Evidence considered:
Reviewed: E-271 · Supports the conclusion: E-271E-271, the Atlas continuity test report, was checked and was not on file at review. Its absence is the basis of the reviewed potential breach.Simulated decision in this demonstration, not an authenticated record
Audit history (4 events · simulated, not tamper-proof)
1. 2026-10-02 · Atlas Compliance Manager (fictional), Atlas Logistics Services Ltd — Challenge submitted with supporting evidence E-271
2. 2026-10-08 · NPSA Commercial Assurance Lead (fictional), National Public Services Agency — Assigned to Northgate Assurance Partners Ltd (authorisation G-05)
3. 2026-10-08 · NPSA Commercial Assurance Lead (fictional), National Public Services Agency — Evidence access authorised: Northgate may see the approved summary of E-271 while G-05 remains active
4. 2026-10-18 · Northgate Lead Assessor (fictional), Northgate Assurance Partners Ltd — Decision recorded: Potential breach — reviewed (evidence reviewed: E-271; supporting: E-271 — not on file)
EX-008 · OBL-0149LowNo issue identified
Original finding
Detail restricted — subcontract wording not disclosed
Source clauses: PSA Cl. 21.3 · Supplier: Atlas Logistics Services Ltd
Challenge CH-02Decided
Challenged by:
Meridian Commercial Director (fictional), Meridian Systems Integration Ltd · submitted 2026-10-04
Reason (approved customer summary):
Meridian states that it retains the relevant records centrally for the full period required by the Prime Services Agreement.
Supporting evidence:
E-260 Subcontract audit clause review
Limitation:
E-260 relates to a different obligation (OBL-0147), not the challenged obligation OBL-0149. It was attached by the challenger and does not on its own show that OBL-0149 was met.
Assigned reviewer:
NPSA Commercial Assurance Lead (fictional), National Public Services Agency
Reviewer independence:
Customer review (the customer is a party to the head agreement, not an independent assessor) · No recorded conflict of interest · Not reviewing its own work
Decision:
No issue identified — NPSA Commercial Assurance Lead (fictional), National Public Services Agency, 2026-10-14. Reason: Central retention arrangement accepted for this demonstration; subcontract alignment recommended at next variation.
Evidence considered:
Reviewed: E-260 · Supports the conclusion: none — unsupported decision; not to be relied on as a verified conclusionE-260 (a review of subcontract audit clauses) was reviewed, but it does not address how long records are retained, so it does not support this conclusion. No evidence of Meridian's central retention arrangement is on file.Simulated decision in this demonstration, not an authenticated record
Audit history (3 events · simulated, not tamper-proof)
1. 2026-10-04 · Meridian Commercial Director (fictional), Meridian Systems Integration Ltd — Challenge submitted with supporting evidence E-260
2. 2026-10-05 · NPSA Commercial Assurance Lead (fictional), National Public Services Agency — Assigned to National Public Services Agency
3. 2026-10-14 · NPSA Commercial Assurance Lead (fictional), National Public Services Agency — Decision recorded: No issue identified (evidence reviewed: E-260; supporting: none)
EX-009 · OBL-0192LowPotential inconsistency
Original finding
Detail restricted — subcontract wording not disclosed
Source clauses: — · Supplier: Swiftline Couriers Ltd
EX-010 · OBL-0027MediumPotential inconsistency
Original finding
Detail restricted — subcontract wording not disclosed
Source clauses: PSA Sch. 2.3 §7.2 · Supplier: Cobalt Cloud Hosting Ltd

Findings are potential issues for human review. No finding is treated as a legally confirmed breach. The audit history is illustrative and saved only in your browser; it is not a tamper-proof record.

All organisations, clauses, reviews and findings are fictional. Permissions, decisions and history are simulated in your browser: they are not real security, not authenticated records and not tamper-proof. This demonstration is saved separately from the Interactive Demo; each can be reset on its own.