Skip to main content

Data review and sign-off

F
Written by Femke Hummert
Updated today

The Data Review and Sign-Off functionality in KEY ESG enables your company to run structured, auditable review workflows for data submissions. It helps organisations validate data before approval, ensuring accuracy, transparency, and compliance.

Role Capabilities Summary

  • Admins: Configure the review process, view all tasks, and remove review decisions.

  • Reviewers: Approve, reject, or comment on assigned tasks.

  • Data Gatherers: Submit data, view submission status, and respond to feedback.

Admins can also act as reviewers for specific tasks but cannot approve or reject submissions they are not assigned to.

Setting Up and Configuration Workflow

Where to find it:
Data Request Setup → Step 4: Review and Sign-Off Data Collection Task Assignment

Prerequisites:
Entity setup, framework selection, and data point assignment must be complete.

Steps

  1. Enable Review Process:
    Switch on the Review and Sign-Off toggle. Click Edit to start configuration.

2. Select Data for Review:
Choose entities or specific data points for review. You can search by data point name across entities.

3. Assign Reviewers:
Assign one or more reviewers to each data task. Tasks can be marked for review even without reviewers to preserve audit trails.

Grey flag: Data points have not been marked for review.

Green flag next to large categories such as “org level” or “Environment” shown above: Some or all data points have been marked for review

Green flag next to a singular data point such as “OECD guidelines” below: Data point had been marked for review

4. Save Changes:
Reviewers see their assigned tasks in the Review Dashboard once data is submitted for those tasks.

How to unmark data points

  1. Select the data point you want to unmark for review

  2. Cross check which user has been assigned for review

  3. Select the ‘remove’ button

4. EITHER select the user you want to un-assign OR unmark the entire data point from being reviewed and by doing so un-assign all users from reviewing the data point if multiple reviewers were assigned.

5. Click ‘save changes’

Submission Viewer

The Submission Viewer provides a full context for reviewers to make decisions.
It includes:

  • Submitted Data: The data values entered by the data gatherer.

  • Evidence and Notes: All supporting files and comments.

  • Comments and Timeline: A chronological view of all submissions, decisions, and discussions.

  • Actions:

  • Approve – locks the submission to protect approved data.

  • Reject – requires a rejection reason and returns data for correction.

  • Comment – allows clarification without changing status.

  • Add/Remove Reviewers- Add new reviewers to data tasks or remove existing reviewers from assignments

Notifications

The system automatically alerts users at key stages:

  • Approval Notification: Sent to data gatherer confirming completion.

  • Rejection Notification: Sent to data gatherer with rejection reason.

  • Decision Removal Notification: Sent to reviewer and data gatherer when an admin reverses a decision.

Notifications ensure all users know when to take action and prevent delays in the review cycle.

When a Workflow Is Finished

A review cycle is complete when:

  • All submissions have been reviewed and approved.

  • All comments and actions are logged in the audit trail.

  • The reporting year can be locked for compliance assurance.

This ensures your data is accurate, verified, and ready for reporting.

Benefits and Key Features

  • Granular control: Assign reviewers at the entity or data point level.

  • Multi-reviewer support: Add multiple reviewers per task to avoid bottlenecks.

  • Selective review: Choose which data points require review for a focused process.

  • Audit protection: Review tasks remain marked even if reviewers change.

  • Role flexibility: Admins configure reviews; reviewers manage approvals; data gatherers submit data.

  • Full traceability: All actions, comments, and decisions are logged automatically.

Best Practices

  • Avoid assigning reviewers to their own submissions to maintain independence.

  • Assign multiple reviewers for critical data to reduce delays.

  • Use Mark for Review early to flag key data points even before assigning reviewers.

  • Admins should periodically check the dashboard to monitor progress.

Did this answer your question?