Four depths of engagement, from an orientation reading to a link-by-link forensic examination of the evidence chain. The level decides how far a review goes into a file. It never decides what the review finds.
The level you commission sets how deep the methodological review goes, not the result it reaches. Everything else on this page follows from that.
The client purchases a depth of review: the perimeter analysed, the documentary checklist applied, the depth of the controls executed and the format of the deliverable. These are chosen at the start of an engagement, according to the complexity of the file and the client's needs.
High-level assessment of regulatory exposure and structural readiness. An orientation reading that establishes whether a full review is warranted, and at what depth.
First structured review of the documentary base of a file: what is proven, what is declared without support, what conflicts, and what is missing.
Cross-document consistency, contradiction analysis and defensibility assessment for complex or multi-supplier files.
Link-by-link examination of the evidence chain for high-exposure files, with reinforced reporting and an evidence manifest.
| Level | Purpose | Principal output |
|---|---|---|
| Pre-Diagnostic | Documentary triage. Is a full review needed, and at which level? | Orientation note: documents received, first inconsistencies observed, apparent maturity, recommended direction. |
| Level I | Establish the initial documentary coherence of a file within a delimited perimeter. | Structured review report: inventory and fingerprints, documentary mapping, missing-evidence table, inconsistencies, source-limited areas, prioritised recommendations. |
| Level II | Assess a complex file in depth: evidence and fact registers, contradictions, remediation planning. | In-depth consistency and defensibility report, with cross-document analysis and a remediation plan. |
| Level III | Forensic review of the full evidence chain for files under significant exposure. | Forensic review with reinforced reporting and an evidence manifest. |
A Pre-Diagnostic produces no WEETRA Determination. It is an orientation note based on a partial reading, without execution of the control grid; no definitive methodological conclusion can be drawn from it.
Every engagement ends in a defined methodological status, not a score. The status reflects the observed state of the evidence. That includes, where it applies, a review blocked by a critical contradiction, by missing critical evidence, or by a computation suspension.
WEETRA Organization is an independent methodological body. It is not a governmental body, regulatory agency, or competent body within the meaning of any EU regulation. Nothing on this page constitutes legal, tax, or compliance advice.
WEETRA does not provide certification, accredited verification, legal advice, customs representation or any guarantee of regulatory acceptance. Final decisions on the admissibility of data remain exclusively within the jurisdiction of competent authorities.
