Research question and scope: does the retained acceptance record show what was reviewed, against which criteria, by whom, and with what disposition? Examine one deliverable class over a fixed monthly cohort. Include accepted-first-pass, corrected, rejected, and still-open items.
Methodology: preserve the submitted artifact, criteria version, reviewer, review time, noted variance, correction link, and final state. Predefine completeness categories and double-code a subset. Separate missing evidence from evidence that supports a negative decision.
GAO control guidance, NIST governance concepts, and the World Bank’s discussion of data quality inform a reviewable method. They do not prescribe one acceptance template, prove causation, or support claims about OutsourcedLabor.com quality, savings, or client outcomes.
Inference limits and limitations: silent reviews, retroactive notes, inconsistent criteria, and task-mix differences can bias comparisons. Documentary completeness is not the same as work quality. Report the sample frame, exclusions, disagreement, and unresolved records; use findings to improve the decision trail, not manufacture a performance score.