Most rows that portfolio teams call exceptions are something else: a company that fails a rule outright, a company that a published route already covers, or a company nobody has asked the CEO about yet. Sorting those out first keeps the real exception requests few, specific and answerable.
Where an exception can exist under the published rules
Two published sentences create the space for an exception, and one sentence limits it.
- SourceX's qualifying page describes roughly 50 or more full-time employees at peak and several years in operation, then adds: "Some programs set higher thresholds, and smaller specialists can still be considered." It also says SourceX applies the criteria of the specific program, not one universal minimum, and that a company turned away by one program can be a match for another later on.
- The program terms say introduced companies must meet the SourceX sourcing criteria, including 50 or more full-time employees at peak. The same terms let a signed Schedule A set the reward rate, base and cap, and an expressly agreed, signed addendum override relevant provisions.
Read together, a company below the baseline can sometimes be considered by SourceX, while the referral terms tie the reward to the sourcing criteria unless a signed document says otherwise. That is why every exception request asks two questions, not one: will SourceX review this company, and does an introduction of it remain within the referral terms? What to send SourceX for a company under 50 full-time employees is set out in the exception inquiry brief for smaller specialists; this page is about what the portfolio team keeps, for every kind of exception, before and after it asks.
Fix the operating entity and its controller before you log anything
A log row describes one operating entity: the company that employs the staff, holds the records and would sign. Write its legal name, its country and the date you confirmed it. Then write who controls it. U.S. securities rules define control as the power to direct the management and policies of a company, through voting shares, contract or otherwise; for the log, that means the person or investor whose say actually moves the company, recorded with the date and source.
Then write the CEO's name. The CEO authorizes a licensing discussion and signs for the company; a row without a CEO who knows about it is not ready for any request. Do not combine entities to reach a number. SourceX does not add employees across related companies, as the sister-company headcount answer explains, so a group of small affiliates is several rows, not one larger one.
Five situations that are not exceptions
| Situation | Why it is not an exception | What to log instead |
|---|---|---|
| A staffing firm with 40 internal full-time staff and hundreds of placed workers | Placed workers do not count toward the 50, but SourceX still considers applications from staffing firms | Both numbers, separately, and an introduction when the records are strong |
| A company outside the U.S., Canada and the EU with mostly non-English records | The 70% English rule is published, not discretionary | "Fails: language", with the date |
| A portfolio company whose records belong to its clients | Client-owned material is usually not a fit; that is a rights finding, not a size gap | "Fails: rights", with the date |
| A group whose affiliates only reach 50 when added together | SourceX does not add headcount across related companies | One row per entity |
| A company whose CEO has not heard of the idea | Introductions made without the decision maker's knowledge are usually not a fit | "Not asked", and no request to SourceX |
The geography rule in full: Companies in the U.S., Canada and the EU qualify, as do companies in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, India, Singapore, South Africa, Latin America, the UAE and Saudi Arabia when at least 70% of the data is in English. For staffing firms, the staffing firm owners page covers the introduction itself.
The exception log and written-review checklist
The log has twelve fields. Fill them in order; a row that stops early is a row that is not ready to send.
| No. | Field | What to write |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Row and date opened | An ID and the date the team first discussed the company |
| 2 | Operating entity | Legal name, country, date confirmed |
| 3 | Controller and CEO | Who controls it, as of which date and from which source; the CEO's name; whether the CEO knows and wants the conversation |
| 4 | Criterion missed | The published wording, quoted, with the page and the date you checked it |
| 5 | The fact that misses it | Metadata only, for example "36 full-time employees at peak in 2025, contractors excluded" |
| 6 | The team's reason to ask | Labeled as the team's view, for example "18 years of specialist review memos in one system" |
| 7 | Questions sent to SourceX | The date, the sender and both questions, word for word |
| 8 | SourceX's written answer | The date, the sender and the text, copied in full |
| 9 | Scope of the answer | Which company, which program and which date the answer covers |
| 10 | Signed documents | Any Schedule A or addendum that changes the referral terms, by date and title; "none" if none |
| 11 | What the founder was told | The date and the exact sentence |
| 12 | Revisit trigger and outcome | The event that reopens the row, and how the row closed |
Before field 7 goes out, run the checklist. Every line must be a yes.
- The row fails exactly one published criterion, and it is not one of the five situations above.
- The criterion is quoted from the current page, with the date you checked it.
- The CEO knows, agrees and is the person who would sign.
- Fields 5 and 6 contain metadata only: no files, samples, screenshots or logins.
- The request asks both questions: will SourceX review the company, and does an introduction remain within the referral terms or need a signed addendum?
- The answer will come back in writing from SourceX, not as a recollection of a call.
- Someone owns the row and will fill in fields 8 to 12.
Why write all of this down for a handful of rows? GAO's standards for internal control put it plainly: documentation is a necessary part of an effective internal control system, its extent varies with size and complexity, and management uses judgment about how much is needed. The same standards ask management to document its reasoning when it decides a principle does not apply. An exception is exactly that kind of decision, and field 6 is where the reasoning goes. A small platform team needs a short log, not a long one, but it needs one.
Two requests and one rejection (Illustrative)
Illustrative. Generic companies, invented dates; SourceX's answers below are invented to show how a row is filled, not statements of SourceX policy.
A small specialist. A 36-person actuarial review firm, founder-led, holds 18 years of model validation memos and review notes in one document system. It fails the 50-at-peak baseline and nothing else. The platform team confirms the CEO wants the conversation, quotes the published sentence that smaller specialists can still be considered, and sends both questions on 2026-11-02. If the written answer says SourceX will review the firm under a named program and that the referral terms apply as an exception by signed addendum, fields 8 to 10 record it and the introduction goes ahead. If the answer says SourceX will review the firm but the introduction falls outside the referral terms, the team records that too, tells the founder the company can still talk to SourceX directly, and closes the reward question in writing.
A staffing firm, not an exception. A recruiting firm with 40 internal full-time staff and about 900 workers placed at clients. The team logs both numbers separately and introduces it on the strength of its placement and compliance records. No exception request is needed, because SourceX already considers staffing-firm applications on that basis.
Rejected before sending. A 28-person portfolio company, two years old, whose most valuable records are reports it produces for clients under client contracts. A senior partner wants it "pushed through as an exception" because the fund owns a large stake. The checklist stops at line 1: it fails size, history and rights, and funding status is not a criterion. The row closes as "not eligible; rights and size", with a revisit trigger of 50 full-time at peak and records the company itself owns. Nothing goes to SourceX.
Answering the founder while a request is open
Field 11 exists because the most expensive error is a sentence to a founder. While a request is open, say: "You're below the size SourceX usually looks for, so I've asked them in writing whether they would review a company like yours. I'll tell you exactly what they say." Do not say "they'll make an exception for us", do not quote a reward, and do not let the fund's ownership appear as an argument anywhere in the request.
When the answer arrives, give the founder the decision and its scope. A yes for one program is not a yes for the next; a no today is not a no forever, because programs change. For the questions only SourceX can answer, the eligibility question split sorts who answers what, and the screening workbook is where the ordinary rows belong.
Where an exception log can go wrong
- Precedent creep. One written yes becomes "SourceX takes small specialists" in a partners' meeting. Field 9 exists to stop that.
- Stale criteria. Programs set their own thresholds and change with SourceX's current data needs. A row quoted against an old page version can be wrong on the day it is sent; re-quote before sending.
- Personal data in the log. A log that grows into a diligence file holds more than it should. Keep names to the CEO and the sender; the guide to introduction records without unnecessary personal data sets a sensible floor.
- Reward assumptions. An exception to review is not an exception to the referral terms. Without a signed addendum, assume the published terms apply as written.
- No base rate. SourceX has not published how often companies below the baseline are reviewed or accepted, and those figures are not yet published. Count your own requests and answers instead of guessing.
Next step
Refer a company. No cap on rewards. Default reward on a company's first qualifying transaction: the greater of $50,000 plus 5% and 15% of Actual Supplier Payout, with no cap; further qualifying transactions first agreed within 12 months of the first Closing pay 15%. Eligibility and payment conditions apply, including the USD 100,000 Minimum Transaction, and a signed Schedule A or addendum can differ. A lead, meeting or signature alone does not trigger payment.
When a row clears the checklist and the CEO wants the conversation, register for a partner link, quote the current wording from who qualifies in field 4 and keep the program terms version next to SourceX's written answer. The portfolio team guide to data licensing introductions covers the ordinary path.
Keeping an exception log is referral work; evaluating SourceX as a possible investment is a separate decision, and a reader making it can request investor materials through the SourceX investor overview.
This article is for information only and is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy securities. Any offering by SourceX is made only to verified accredited investors through its offering documents.