Evidence for vendor due diligence.
Risk and compliance teams clear counterparties on external checks. Regulators later ask exactly which checks ran, against which data, and when.
One decision, end to end.
The decision
A vendor is cleared
An onboarding workflow, increasingly automated, clears a vendor or counterparty to proceed.
Evidence needed
What the clearance relies on
Company registries, identifier lookups, sanction and advisory sources, each consulted at a specific moment with a specific freshness.
The failure
What stale evidence causes
A clearance based on a registry state that had already changed is a finding waiting to happen. If the consulted state was not preserved, the review cannot distinguish a reasonable decision from a negligent one.
Integration
How Dynamic Feed fits
The workflow pulls signed registry and identifier data through REST or MCP; every response carries source attribution, licence, observation time and freshness.
The receipt
What remains afterward
A Decision Receipt for the clearance: which sources were consulted, what they showed, when, with what freshness, and the verdict, signed and independently verifiable years later.
Pilot result
What thirty days should show
Cleared vendors in the covered workflow each have a receipt; a regulator-style spot check can re-verify one from scratch; the evidence chain is inspectable without access to Dynamic Feed.
Where to next.
The product tour walks one observation to an independently verified receipt · verify one yourself · the 30-day pilot · REST docs · MCP connection.