Use non-negotiable acceptance gates before weighted supplier scoring. The following is this desk’s recommended control framework, not a claim that every item is legally mandated in every jurisdiction.
| Gate | Minimum acceptance evidence | Suggested owner |
|---|---|---|
| Rule applicability | Counsel-reviewed map of entities, people, jurisdictions and intended decisions. | Legal and football operations |
| Permitted use | Clause-linked approval for exports, models, external AI, group sharing and retention. | Procurement and legal |
| Data provenance | Source, date, identifier and correction route for sampled player claims. | Recruitment analytics |
| Human control | Demonstrated review, override and recorded reasoning. | Head of scouting |
| Change management | Model and rules versions, release notices and regression tests. | Analytics and IT |
| Rights handling | Tested access, correction, deletion and legal-hold workflow. | Privacy owner |
| Coverage | Competition-season evidence, missing-data reasons and authorised samples. | Recruitment lead |
| Exit | Successful export and documented treatment of retained evidence. | Procurement and IT |
What should happen over the next 30 days?
Days 1–5: establish the decision. Name the renewal or purchase, budget owner and deadline. Inventory actual workflows and prevent new uses from being added informally during a trial.
Days 6–15: request evidence. Send the Recruitment Data Licence Stress Test and AI Scouting Report Evidence Check. Ask football operations for current league instructions and counsel for jurisdiction-specific requirements.
Days 16–25: run an authorised trial. Test one identity correction, one adverse recommendation, one model update, one rights request and one exit export. For NWSL buyers, use women’s competition data throughout.
Days 26–30: decide and document. Record retain, add, replace, consolidate, defer or buy nothing. Unresolved permission, provenance or mandatory-control failures should remain visible rather than disappear inside an average score.
The final decision memo should answer: what genuinely new evidence does this supplier provide, can we use it as intended, and can we explain and preserve the decisions it supports?