Assessment and Recognition Decision-Making Policy

Version 1.0 · Effective 31 July 2026 · The current online version controls.

1. Purpose

This policy explains how Reedleys receives, reviews and decides applications for identity verification, profile verification and Reedleys Recognition. It is intended to support decisions that are consistent, evidence-based, proportionate and independent from commercial considerations.

It should be read with the current Reedleys Recognition Standards, the Recognition and Badges page, the Appeals Policy, the Identity and Evidence Verification Policy, and the Recognition Status, Monitoring, Suspension and Withdrawal Policy.

2. Nature of Reedleys Recognition

Reedleys is an independent private directory, verification and recognition service. A Reedleys rating is not a government approval, statutory accreditation, professional licence, credit rating, legal opinion, financial guarantee, product warranty or guarantee of future conduct or performance.

Recognition confirms that Reedleys completed an assessment against the applicable published standard using the information reasonably available at the time. The published rating communicates the result of that assessment.

Payment covers access to the assessment, administration and applicable platform features. It does not purchase Recognized status, a particular rating or a favorable decision.

3. Scope

This policy applies to:

• organizations applying for or maintaining a Reedleys business profile;
• individual professionals applying for identity verification or recognition;
• reassessments, status reviews and material rating changes;
• evidence submitted directly by an applicant and relevant information obtained from reliable public or third-party sources.

4. Assessment principles

Reedleys applies the following principles:

Evidence-based

A material conclusion should be supported by relevant and reasonably verifiable information. An uploaded document is not automatically accepted merely because it was submitted.

Proportionate

The formality and depth of review may vary according to profile type, organization size, profession, jurisdiction, risk, career stage and operating model. The underlying expectations of honesty, relevance and verifiability remain consistent.

Current and consistent

Time-sensitive information should be current. Reedleys may compare submitted information with public records, websites, licences, credentials, platform records and other credible sources to identify material inconsistencies.

Fair opportunity to clarify

Where practical, an applicant may be asked to explain a discrepancy or provide additional information before a materially adverse decision is finalized.

Impartial

Commercial, advertising, listing, subscription or referral arrangements must not determine an assessment outcome. This is set out in full in the Impartiality, Conflicts of Interest and Ethics Policy.

Data minimization

Reedleys requests and uses only information reasonably necessary for the relevant verification or assessment. Applicants should redact unrelated personal, financial or confidential information.

5. Roles and responsibility

An assessment may involve an assessor, reviewer, quality reviewer or authorized decision-maker. One person may perform more than one role for routine cases, but Reedleys may require a second review where a case is complex, disputed, high-impact or presents an actual or potential conflict of interest.

A person with a material conflict must disclose it and must not make the final decision unless the conflict has been assessed and appropriately controlled.

6. Assessment process

Step 1 - Application and authority check

Reedleys confirms that the application relates to an eligible profile and that the applicant has authority to act for the organization or professional profile.

Step 2 - Completeness review

Reedleys checks whether the required fields, declarations and evidence have been provided. An incomplete application may be placed on hold, returned for clarification or closed after reasonable notice.

Step 3 - Identity and evidence verification

Reedleys may verify identity, domain control, business authority, registry information, credentials, licences, policy documents, websites, public records, reviews and other relevant evidence. Verification may be technical, documentary, issuer-based, public-source, third-party or manual. See the Identity and Evidence Verification Policy.

Step 4 - Criterion-level assessment

Each applicable criterion is recorded using the outcome language in the Recognition Standards:

• Meets - the requirement is satisfied by credible, relevant and sufficiently complete evidence;
• Partially Meets - some credible evidence exists, but an important part of the requirement is incomplete, limited, outdated or insufficiently demonstrated;
• Does Not Meet - the requirement is not satisfied, credible evidence is absent, or reliable information materially contradicts the claim;
• Not Applicable - the criterion genuinely does not apply to the applicant or assessed activity. Reedleys determines applicability.

Step 5 - Overall recognition review

The final recognition decision is not determined solely by counting completed criteria. Reedleys considers the importance of applicable criteria, the quality and credibility of evidence, consistency across the application, the seriousness of identified weaknesses, and any quality controls in the current assessment methodology. A successful outcome is published as Reedleys Recognized status, as explained on our recognition page.

A material identity, authority, deception, safety, integrity or evidence-fraud concern may substantially affect the outcome even where other criteria are met.

Step 6 - Quality and consistency check

Reedleys may perform a second review, moderation or sample quality check before publication. This may include checking whether similar cases have been treated consistently and whether the reasons recorded support the decision.

Step 7 - Decision and publication

The applicant receives the decision or is informed that further information is required. Where recognition is granted, Reedleys may publish the profile, rating, status, certificate reference, assessment date, scope and verification information that is appropriate for public display. A published recognition can be confirmed on the verification page.

7. Requests for further information

Reedleys may set a reasonable deadline for clarification or additional evidence. Unless otherwise stated, the normal response period is 10 business days. Reedleys may extend the period where there is a reasonable explanation.

If the applicant does not respond, Reedleys may decide the application using the information available, place it on hold or close it without recognition.

8. Use of public and third-party information

Reedleys may consider information from official registries, licensing bodies, credential issuers, controlled websites, reputable review platforms, public professional records, identity-verification providers and other sources reasonably believed to be reliable.

Reedleys does not treat unsupported rumours, anonymous allegations, isolated search snippets or unrelated personal information as established fact. Where third-party information may materially reduce a rating or status, Reedleys will normally seek corroboration and, where appropriate, give the applicant an opportunity to respond.

9. Automated and assisted checks

Reedleys may use software or third-party tools to assist with identity checks, document authenticity, liveness, duplicate detection, fraud indicators, data matching, translation, completeness or consistency review.

Automated tools assist the process but do not purchase or guarantee a result. Reedleys does not intend to make a final materially adverse recognition decision solely through an automated system without an appropriate opportunity for human review where required by law or reasonably necessary for fairness.

10. Decision records and reasons

Reedleys records enough information to identify:

• the standard and version applied;
• the evidence reviewed;
• criterion outcomes and material reasoning;
• requests for clarification;
• conflicts or quality checks, where relevant;
• the final decision, date and authorized reviewer.

The applicant may receive a summary of the principal reasons for the decision. Reedleys is not required to disclose confidential sources, security controls, personal data relating to other people, privileged material, proprietary fraud indicators or internal controls where disclosure would be unlawful or undermine assessment integrity.

11. Corrections, new evidence and reassessment

A factual or administrative error may be corrected without a formal appeal. New evidence submitted after a decision may be considered through reassessment rather than appeal, particularly where it did not exist or was not provided during the original assessment.

Reedleys may reassess a profile when:

• the applicant requests reassessment;
• the recognition period expires;
• material information changes;
• credible new evidence becomes available;
• a complaint raises a relevant and supported concern;
• monitoring identifies a potential inconsistency or misuse.

12. No guaranteed rating

No employee, contractor, partner, reseller or representative may promise a specific rating or recognition outcome. Any such statement is unauthorized unless expressly confirmed in writing as a correction of an administrative error, not as a guarantee of assessment results.

13. Appeals

An applicant may appeal an eligible decision under the Appeals Policy. Filing an appeal does not automatically suspend the decision, although Reedleys may temporarily delay publication or apply an interim status where appropriate.

14. Policy review

Reedleys may update this policy to improve consistency, respond to legal or operational changes, or reflect revisions to the Recognition Standards. Material changes apply prospectively unless they correct an error, address misuse or are required by law.