One record, written from the clause, checked before release
Every page, the free check, the kit and the watch read one JSON record. The record is written from the published ISO 22301:2019 text and the public record of the draft. Nothing is generated at runtime and nothing is quoted from a source the reader cannot check.
The three layers, kept apart
- Recorded. Designation, title, committee, ICS, stage, stage date and the public scope. Taken from the ISO stage feed and the public scope.
- Our reading. The process model readings and the practical guidance. Each is labelled as our reading.
- Not stated. The draft text, its clause numbers, its definitions, the ballot result and a publication date. Named as absent, never filled with an inference.
How a clause record is written
The requirement is read against the held ISO 22301:2019 text, then stated in our own words and cited to the clause. The evidence lines are concrete records an auditor can ask for, not restatements of the requirement. The common failures are drawn from audit practice. The strict seven-word overlap test runs against the source before release; only clause titles and defined terms stay verbatim.
The free check rule
Each answer carries a weight. The weights are added and the total selects one of three bands: act this cycle, plan this cycle, monitor. The total is not printed and is never presented as a score of the BCMS. Three actions are taken from the weakest answers. The two context questions, the contract requirement and the board question, change the actions and the date advice but carry at most one point each. The check never returns a single confident date where the inputs do not determine one, and it never assumes the lighter pathway for an unanswered question. It returns an incomplete reading and names every missing answer.
| Band | Score | What it says |
|---|---|---|
| Act this cycle | 10 or more | Several gaps are in the work you already owe under ISO 22301, before the draft adds anything. |
| Plan this cycle | 5 to 9 | The foundation is partly there. The process view can be built alongside the next audit cycle. |
| Monitor | 0 to 4 | The position is sound on the answers given. Keep the basics current and watch the record. |
Why the estimate exists
A buyer needs a planning date, and ISO has not recorded one. The site gives one, derived from the stage and the normal path, and labels it an estimate in the position strip, the revision page, the FAQ, the schema and llms.txt. If a real date replaces it, the refresh script fails the build and the record is updated.
Maturity cross-check
If the organization already uses a maturity model or an assurance framework, cross-check the process sheets against it. Use the model to ask whether a process is defined, performed, measured and improved. Record where the two disagree and why. This site does not score maturity and does not present a maturity rating as a requirement; the cross-check is a way to place the process work beside a framework the board already understands.
What the site does not do
- It does not quote the draft or claim to know its clause structure.
- It does not quote ISO/IEC 33004, which is named in the public scope and not held.
- It does not present a heuristic as a requirement.
- It does not certify, audit or validate anything.