This template is part of the deliverable acceptance revisions guide. The guide explains what to inventory before closeout; this page gives you the note itself, a way to fill it, and a finished Illustrative version to compare against.
Copy this note
Fill the brackets. Where nobody knows, write "unknown" rather than estimating.
Subject: Revision history at [firm type], for a short call
[Firm type, client sector, full-time headcount at peak] has delivered roughly [number] contract deliverables over [years], with revision chains kept in [project platform] and [document control system]. For each deliverable the firm holds [milestones, submitted revisions, reviewer comments, response matrices, acceptance records: keep only what is true]. Rejected revisions are [kept with their own files / kept as versions / not kept]. The records are maintained by [owner role]. One open question: [what nobody can confirm yet]. [Documented event, such as a workspace archive date, with its source, or "No closeout event is scheduled."] Would [CEO's name], as CEO, take a 20-minute call about whether any of this could be licensed?
Seven facts, one question, no attachments. The note promises no buyer interest, offer or reward.
The facts behind each bracket
| Bracket | Where the answer comes from | Write it as |
|---|---|---|
| Firm type and headcount | The director, or the firm's public profile | Sector, client type, full-time staff at peak |
| Number of deliverables | Contract count times typical deliverables per contract | A rounded figure plus how it was derived |
| Years | Earliest and latest contract still in the systems | A year span, noting any system switch |
| Systems | The director or document controller | System type, product name as plain text if offered |
| Record classes | The director's knowledge of a typical project folder | Only classes that exist |
| Rejected revisions | Document controller | Kept as files, kept as versions, or not kept |
| Owner | The director | Role, not personal contact details |
| Open question | The director's own uncertainty | One sentence |
| Documented event | Platform contract or closeout plan | A date and its source |
The rejected-revisions line deserves care. "Kept as versions" inside one file is weaker than "kept as files", because version history can be trimmed by whoever administers the library; ask the document controller which applies and write it as said. The system map has the full list of joins to ask about.
Lines that sink a brief
These show up in drafts and should come out before the note goes anywhere.
- Client names, contract numbers or project titles. They identify third parties and say nothing about coverage.
- A quoted reviewer comment. Even a one-line example is a record. Describe the class instead: "comments cite numbered criteria".
- Retention as urgency. Federal fixed-price service contracts typically require the contractor to keep complete inspection records during performance and for as long afterwards as the contract requires (FAR 52.246-4). That is a duty to keep records, not a deadline for a data discussion, and it is counsel's to interpret.
- A value guess. No figure, range or comparison to anything another firm received.
- Admin as the contact. A document controller or platform admin can confirm what exists but cannot authorize licensing.
A finished note (Illustrative)
Written for this page about a fictional 260-person environmental engineering firm. Every value is invented; this is not a real firm, project or completed deal.
Subject: Revision history at an environmental engineering firm, for a short call
An environmental engineering firm serving federal and state clients, with 260 full-time staff at peak, has delivered about 300 contract deliverables over eight years, with revision chains kept in its project platform and a document control library. For each deliverable the firm holds milestone schedules, every submitted revision, reviewer comments tied to numbered acceptance criteria, response matrices and signed acceptance records. Rejected revisions are kept with their own files. The records are maintained by the document controller, with the project controls lead for milestones. One open question: some deliverables were assigned to clients, and whether the firm's own review logs and response matrices are on different terms is for counsel. Two contracts close out next quarter and their workspaces are archived 60 days after final payment, per the platform agreement. Would the CEO take a 20-minute call about whether any of this could be licensed?
Check it against the table: every fact is a count, a span, a type or a role. The reviewer comments it mentions carry weight on federal work, since under FAR 46.407 a notice rejecting nonconforming services must state its reasons; the note relies on that without quoting a single comment. For what one of those chains looks like inside, see the worked exception example.
Sending it and what happens next
Let the program operations director forward the note; a partner should not send it cold to an executive they have never met. The client opportunity brief generator can produce a similar draft from your answers, and the warm introduction brief helps with the covering message. Advisors who already sit close to finance, such as fractional CFOs, are often the ones who spot the closeout timing first.
If the CEO agrees, the firm applies and SourceX reviews record classes, rights and qualification. SourceX licenses approved business data directly from companies for AI training and evaluation, and manages the agreement, rights review, data preparation, delivery and payout. Which records are the firm's to license, what must be de-identified, SourceX's current data needs and any offer all stay unknown until that review. Private equity owners of engineering services firms may need to sign off too.
The firm needs 50+ full-time employees at peak (contractors excluded), a documented operating history, rights to license and an authorized contact. 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. Partners sign the Channel Partner Agreement before submitting; the first valid introduction within the 90-day window is credited when the company submits a verified application.
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 the note reads cleanly and the director is willing to forward it, register as a partner, check the firm on who qualifies and read the program terms first.