Practice statements

What the clause says

A provider documents the operational practices behind its assured age attributes, and a relying party documents the approaches it accepts. Each party in the chain should know whether its suppliers hold compatible statements.

What it supplies to a comparison

The practice statement is the comparison's business layer. It states the promised outcome and the method, so the test can ask whether the service delivered what it promised.

Evidence to keep

• The current practice statement, with a version date and an owner.
• The supplier list showing each statement held and its compatibility check.

What the evidence looks like

For 4.4, the first artefact is The current practice statement, with a version date and an owner.. The second is The supplier list showing each statement held and its compatibility check.. If 4.4 has no first artefact, the practice is unproven at 4.4, and the report should record the absence rather than infer the practice from a policy.

Questions for the provider

1. Is the statement current, and does it name the components and indicators in use?
2. What happens when a supplier's statement is missing or incompatible?

How it connects to the draft

Practice statements belongs to 4 characterisation, and it gives the analysis one fixed point: The practice statement is the comparison's business layer. It states the promised outcome and the method, so the test can ask whether the service deli. A comparison that cannot place a result against 4.4 is measuring something the framework has not defined, and the report should say so.

In the register, 4.4 is read beside the unit that tests it, and where it sets an objective rather than a number, that unit turns the objective into a question and an evidence artefact.