# Data referral follow-up value: answer-led library | SourceX

Canonical: https://refer.sourcex.si/guides/the-follow-up-that-adds-a-useful-answer
Last updated: 2026-11-04

A follow-up is worth sending only if it answers something the company actually wants to know, about its own situation, and leaves an easy way to say no. Replace "just checking in" with one useful answer: what the first step involves, whether the company keeps ownership, how long the steps take, or what you earn and why it never comes out of the company's payout. Each answer in the library below comes from SourceX's published terms or process page and ends with one voluntary next step.

A check-in asks the recipient to do work: remember the earlier note, reconstruct why it mattered, then reply. An answer does the work for them. For a channel partnerships manager whose name sits on dozens of threads, that difference decides whether the next message is opened.

## Start from why this company, not from the program

Every follow-up in this guide is written for the same Illustrative company, so the before-and-after versions can be compared line by line.

Illustrative. A 210-person physical therapy group with its own billing team. It holds nine years of prior authorization follow-up work in one revenue cycle platform and is moving to a new platform, with read access to the old one ending on a date written in the vendor contract. The CEO replied to the first introduction: "Interesting. What would we actually have to do? And we're careful with patient information."

Three facts in that reply are worth more than anything in the program description. The company has a dated event, the end of read access to the old platform. It has a specific record type: the live guide to [prior authorization follow-up records](/guides/workflow-prior-authorization-follow-up) explains why the earlier submission versions and the work between them are the layers a migration most often leaves behind. And the CEO has asked two direct questions. A good follow-up answers those questions and uses the date honestly; it does not restate the opportunity.

## The question-led follow-up library

Pick the row that matches the question the company asked, or the one its reply implies. Use one row per message.

| The company's question | The useful answer | Where it comes from | One voluntary next step |
|---|---|---|---|
| "What would we actually have to do first?" | Answer a few questions with no files: which systems the company uses, how many years they cover and what can be exported. No records are shared at that stage | SourceX process page | Offer the assessment link and say there is no obligation to use it |
| "Is this meant for a company like ours?" | The published fit facts are 50 or more full-time employees at peak with contractors excluded, years of the company's own records, the rights to license them, a CEO who wants the conversation and a covered location | Program terms and screening page | Point to the non-binding [company fit checker](/tools/company-fit-checker) |
| "Do we give up ownership?" | The company keeps ownership of its original licensed data. Under the signed agreement SourceX owns the de-identified dataset, and licenses are exclusive for AI training for the selected data | SourceX process page | Offer to have SourceX walk the company's counsel through the agreement |
| "How would we be paid?" | Usually a one-time fee, with no royalties or usage fees, fixed in a signed Dataset Deal Confirmation; earlier estimates are indicative, and data that does not reach Closing earns no payment | SourceX process page | Suggest the assessment as the cheapest way to learn whether a conversation is worth having |
| "How long does it take?" | One Master agreement, signed after qualification, starts an inventory assessment of initially up to 30 days; a Confirmation fixes dataset, payout and deadlines; acceptance review runs up to 30 days; payment is due within 60 calendar days of a valid invoice after Closing | SourceX process page | Ask whether a fixed date on their side, such as a platform change, should be passed to SourceX |
| "What's in it for you?" | SourceX pays the partner the greater of $50,000 plus 5% and 15% of what it actually pays the company, with no cap, separately and never deducted from the company's payout; nothing is owed unless the company completes a deal and is paid | Program terms | Invite any further question about it |
| "Are we committed once we start?" | No. The company controls whether to proceed and what scope to offer, approves scope and terms and signs before any data is delivered; if a deal does not close it receives a no-deal notice and declined data is deleted | SourceX referral and process pages | Say plainly that stopping at any step is fine |
| "What about patient or customer information?" | Personal consumer data and material that belongs to clients are usually not a fit. The conversation is about the company's own work records, de-identified through approved processing routes, and SourceX's rights review decides what is possible | Screening page and process page | Share the longer [ownership-boundary script](/guides/when-an-owner-asks-is-this-selling-my-customers-data) |

On location, quote the published rule rather than paraphrasing it. 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.

## Before and after: three follow-ups to the same CEO (Illustrative)

**1. The check-in becomes an answer.**

> Before: "Hi {first name}, just checking in on my note about SourceX. Any thoughts? Happy to jump on a call whenever suits."

> After: "{First name}, you asked what you would actually have to do. The first step is a short assessment: a few questions about which systems you use, how many years they cover and what can be exported. No files, and no records are shared at that stage. On patient information: personal consumer data is usually not a fit, so the conversation is about your billing team's own work records, de-identified before anything is delivered, and SourceX's rights review decides what is possible. Since read access to your old platform ends on {date}, it may be worth knowing before then which parts of the authorization history the migration keeps. Here is the assessment link if you want it; if not, tell me and I'll drop the subject."

The second version answers both of the CEO's questions, uses the one real date, and gives two equally easy replies.

**2. The pitch becomes a conditional outcome.**

> Before: "AI companies are paying a fortune for healthcare data right now. A group your size could see a big check, so it's worth moving fast before the window closes."

> After: "Whether anyone would license these records depends on SourceX's review of how far back they go, whether you hold the rights and whether they match a current program. A price is fixed only in a signed Dataset Deal Confirmation, and records that never reach Closing earn nothing. The only deadline I know of is your own platform change."

The "before" claims a market, a payout and a deadline, and the sender can support none of them. The "after" names the conditions and the one date the CEO already knows is real.

**3. The silent incentive becomes a disclosed one.**

> Before: the reward goes unmentioned, or appears as a line under the signature.

> After: "So you know where I stand: if your company licenses data through SourceX, SourceX pays me a referral reward of the greater of $50,000 plus 5% and 15% of what it actually pays you, with no cap. It comes from SourceX separately and never reduces your payout, and nothing is owed to me unless you complete a deal and are paid."

## How to explain direct licensing and your incentive together

Keep the opportunity and the incentive in one short paragraph so neither looks hidden. SourceX licenses approved business data directly from companies for AI training and evaluation and manages the agreement, rights review, data preparation, delivery and payout. The company controls whether to proceed, what scope to offer and the terms it accepts. Then state the reward, as in the third "after" message above.

FTC staff guidance on endorsements counts financial relationships among the material connections that should be disclosed when an audience may not know about them, and insists the disclosure sit where people will notice it: a tag, or a note left in the comments, does not count. That guidance is written for advertising and reviews rather than private email, but its test fits a referral well. Put the reward in the body of the message, in words a busy CEO will read. SourceX's own site adds that licensed professionals should check their own rules on referral fees. Fuller wording for a conversation about rewards is in [discussing referral rewards transparently](/guides/how-to-discuss-referral-rewards-transparently-with-a-business-contact).

## One voluntary next step, never a deadline you invented

- **One ask per message.** The assessment link, the fit checker or a call with SourceX: pick one.
- **Name the way out.** "If not, tell me and I'll drop it" is part of the message, not a courtesy at the end.
- **Use only real dates.** The end of read access to an old platform is real and documented. "Before the window closes" is not.
- **Stop after two unanswered follow-ups.** Close the thread politely and record what would justify reopening it. Platform teams managing many introductions can use the stage limits in [when to stop following up on an inactive referral](/guides/when-to-stop-following-up-on-an-inactive-referral), and the live guide on [following up after an introduction](/guides/how-to-follow-up-on-an-introduction-with-the-company-owner) covers tone once SourceX is in touch with the company.
- **Never ask for records.** A follow-up may offer to help list systems, years and owners. It never asks for exports, samples or logins.

More partner communication guides are in the [guides library](/guides).

## 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 company's own question gives you a reason to write again, make sure your [partner registration](/register) is done, that the company still matches the [published criteria](/who-qualifies) and that any reward wording in your answer agrees with the [program terms](/terms) before you send it.

## Sources

- https://refer.sourcex.si/terms
- https://refer.sourcex.si/
- https://refer.sourcex.si/how-it-works
- https://refer.sourcex.si/who-qualifies
- https://sourcex.si/how-it-works
- https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/ftcs-endorsement-guides-what-people-are-asking