Scope: review a consecutive cohort of approval packets prepared for one Filipino operations lane under one rule version. Include approved, rejected, returned, withdrawn, expired, and pending requests. Define completeness from the information an authorized owner needs, not from the eventual decision.
Methodology: blind reviewers to outcome where practical and score the request, governing rule, verified facts, source links, feasible options, stated consequence, deadline, and named approver. Record whether the owner requested missing factual context before deciding. Double-code a sample and publish disagreements, exclusions, and unavailable evidence.
Inference boundaries: GAO and NIST support control information, responsibility, and decision evidence. They do not prescribe this checklist or prove that a complete packet produces a correct or faster decision. Completeness is a property of the saved record, not a judgment about an individual worker.
Limitations: verbal decisions, sensitive redactions, owner familiarity, urgency, and changing rules can affect both the packet and response. A returned packet may reflect a changed request rather than missing preparation. Preserve these categories and avoid causal claims.