Browse by subject:
PRACTITIONER TEMPLATE

17-field Decision Accounting record1

This template gives the minimum system-welfare audit record for a material decision: who decided, what was decided, when, where, why, under what authority, with what evidence, what was predicted, and what happened to system welfare.

PRACTITIONER ENTRY POINT
For a Monday-morning test, open Policy Lab to identify the reviewer, complete all 17 fields for one pending decision, look up the domain welfare beta (βW), add the evidence link or local verification pending note, fill Field 15 with the alternatives considered and rejected, fill Field 16 with the forecast and review trigger, fill Field 17 with the system-welfare analysis, then route the complete decision record to the named board, auditor, regulator, docket owner, procurement owner, or policy actor.

This structured Decision Accounting draft template is for process design, counsel review, and domain review before use in high-stakes environments.

PRACTICE NOTE
For your Monday-morning action, complete all 17 fields before approval. Field 15 records the alternatives considered and rejected. Field 16 records the forecast, deadline, and review trigger. Field 17 records the affected system, boundary, welfare impact, evidence, uncertainty, and review path. Attach the verification status and route the complete record to a named reviewer; see the Executive Brief.
FIELD 1
WHO
FIELD 2
WHAT
FIELD 3
WHEN
FIELD 4
WHERE
FIELD 5
WHY
FIELD 6
EVIDENCE
FIELD 7
AUTHORITY
FIELD 8
TRAINING
FIELD 9
REVIEW
FIELD 10
STAKEHOLDERS
FIELD 11
CONSEQUENCES
FIELD 12
CONSTRAINTS
FIELD 13
UNCERTAINTY
FIELD 14
COMMUNICATION
FIELD 15
ALTERNATIVES
what other options were considered and rejected, and why?
FIELD 16
PREDICTION
what do you expect to happen, by when, and what threshold triggers review?
FIELD 17
SYSTEM WELFARE
how does the decision affect the shared system the parties depend on?
BEFORE APPROVAL CHECK
Pick one material decision, complete all 17 fields before approval, attach the revenue stream, beta-W domain, and verification status, and require a named reviewer for the complete decision record. Field 17 carries the system-welfare analysis that boards, auditors, regulators, procurement owners, and policy makers need to inspect.
  1. Use Policy Lab to name the reviewer or public actor first.
  2. Pick the decision and fill the 17-field record before approval.
  3. Look up the domain beta-W value in the 61-domain table and copy the source link into the record.
  4. Mark any statute, docket, local filing channel, or remedy as local verification pending until checked.
  5. Route the complete decision record to the named board, auditor, regulator, docket owner, procurement owner, or policy actor.
BLANK RECORD — PRINT OR COPY

If Field 17 is blank, use Policy Lab to identify the reviewer or public actor who can test the system-welfare entry.

Record contextDomain beta-W from Domain Tables: ________________________________
Source routeCanonical table/source link used for the beta-W entry: ________________________________
Authority statusVerified statute, docket, filing channel, or local verification pending authority note: ________________________________
FieldPromptEntry
Field 1WHO________________________________
Field 2WHAT________________________________
Field 3WHEN________________________________
Field 4WHERE________________________________
Field 5WHY________________________________
Field 6EVIDENCE________________________________
Field 7AUTHORITY________________________________
Field 8TRAINING________________________________
Field 9REVIEW________________________________
Field 10STAKEHOLDERS________________________________
Field 11CONSEQUENCES________________________________
Field 12CONSTRAINTS________________________________
Field 13UNCERTAINTY________________________________
Field 14COMMUNICATION________________________________
Field 15ALTERNATIVES________________________________
Field 16PREDICTION________________________________
Field 17SYSTEM WELFARE________________________________
REGULATORY CROSSWALK — WHERE THIS FITS TODAY
Decision Accounting fieldsWhat the record suppliesClosest existing homesPractitioner action
Fields 1-4WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERESEC risk controls, board minutes, audit committee records, ISO 31000 context settingName the accountable owner, decision, timing, and location/context before approval.
Fields 5-11WHY, EVIDENCE, AUTHORITY, TRAINING, REVIEW, STAKEHOLDERS, CONSEQUENCESSarbanes-Oxley control evidence, Basel model-governance files, procurement record, examiner workpapersList the reason, evidence, authority, training basis, review path, stakeholders, and expected consequences; pause approval if missing evidence controls the system-welfare risk.
Fields 12-14CONSTRAINTS, UNCERTAINTY, COMMUNICATIONEnterprise risk management, SFDR/CSRD double-materiality files, supervisory review recordsIdentify binding constraints, uncertainty, and the communication record that lets a reviewer challenge the entry.
Field 15ALTERNATIVESNEPA and impact-assessment rejected-alternatives analysis, procurement bid comparison, board strategic-options memorandaName the alternatives considered, the option chosen over each, and why the rejected options were not selected.
Field 16PREDICTIONModel-risk governance, stress testing, scenario analysis, management discussion and analysisWrite the measurable forecast, deadline, and trigger that would prove the decision record wrong.
Field 17SYSTEM WELFAREDecision Accounting reconstruction line for system welfare impacts; not a statutory filing requirement unless a regulator, board, or policy process adopts it.Record the system-welfare impact and route it to the board, regulator, procurement owner, or policy actor named in the record.

This is a research template, not legal advice or a filing form. The practical adoption path is first internal process use, then regulator dialogue, board resolution, or procurement adoption once a domain-specific record has been validated.

Non-U.S. use: map Field 17 to the closest local governance home before treating it as operational. Examples include EU CSRD / double-materiality files, the UK Senior Managers and Certification Regime, Basel model-governance files, public-procurement records, or another locally verified regulator, statute, docket, or board process.

WORKED EXAMPLE — PAYDAY LENDING ROLLOVER
FIELD 1 · WHO
Covered lender compliance officer
FIELD 2 · WHAT
Payday-loan rollover approval
FIELD 3 · WHEN
Before renewal or refinancing
FIELD 4 · WHERE
Licensed storefront or online lending channel in the borrower’s state
FIELD 5 · WHY
Renew short-term credit without default or illegal fee stacking
FIELD 6 · EVIDENCE
Income, existing obligations, prior rollovers, repayment history, and any missing household-expense evidence
FIELD 7 · AUTHORITY
Ability-to-repay limit, rollover cap, state licensing rules, and internal approval authority
FIELD 8 · TRAINING
Staff trained on rollover limits, repayment-capacity review, borrower notice, and escalation requirements
FIELD 9 · REVIEW
If observed default or repeat-rollover probability exceeds 30%, route to additional review and supplemental Decision Accounting documentation
FIELD 10 · STAKEHOLDERS
Borrower, lender, household creditors, state consumer-finance system, and internal risk committee
FIELD 11 · CONSEQUENCES
Fee revenue and temporary liquidity for the borrower, offset by downstream default, collection, and household-instability costs
FIELD 12 · CONSTRAINTS
State licensing rules, rollover caps, ability-to-repay standards, and available hardship-program alternatives
FIELD 13 · UNCERTAINTY
Unverified informal debt, household emergency expenses, and repayment-capacity data gaps
FIELD 14 · COMMUNICATION
Borrower notice, internal risk committee record, regulator-facing source note, and any consumer-advocate escalation
FIELD 15 · ALTERNATIVES
Installment repayment plan and a hardship-program referral were both available at intake; the rollover was chosen for faster approval, not because the alternatives were unaffordable to offer
FIELD 16 · PREDICTION
If renewed without amortization, forecast 60-day default or repeat-rollover probability = 35-45%. If observed risk exceeds 30%, the decision re-routes to additional review and supplemental Decision Accounting documentation.
FIELD 17 · SYSTEM WELFARE
Approve only with amortization and renewal limit; otherwise the private fee is funded by higher downstream default, collection, and household-instability costs.
ADDITIONAL WORKED EXAMPLES — OTHER DOMAINS
FOREVER CHEMICALS (PFAS)
PFAS product-line continuation
Continue a high-margin product line while substitute testing is incomplete.
EVIDENCE
Complete downstream exposure map, disposal pathway, and replacement-material failure testing; mark missing evidence explicitly.
STAKEHOLDERS
Drinking-water users, remediation payers, public-health systems, state environmental agency, board risk committee, and affected water utility.
REVIEW
Route to EPA program office, state environmental agency, board risk committee, and affected water utility before continuing the product line.
PREDICTION
If production continues without a phase-down plan, remediation and liability exposure rise faster than ordinary product-margin records show.
SYSTEM WELFARE
Proceed only with exposure inventory, substitute roadmap, and funded remediation reserve; otherwise the decision books private margin while shifting persistent cleanup cost to the system.
SOCIAL MEDIA / YOUTH MENTAL HEALTH
Youth social-media feed change
Release an engagement-optimized ranking change for under-18 users.
EVIDENCE
Independent youth-safety review, adverse-event escalation data, and stress test for compulsive-use patterns; mark missing evidence explicitly.
STAKEHOLDERS
Under-18 users, parents, schools, family support systems, child-safety reviewers, and board product-risk committee.
REVIEW
Route to FTC reviewer, state attorney general consumer-protection team, board product-risk committee, and child-safety advocate before launch.
PREDICTION
If engagement rises while adverse-event reporting rises, the private gain is not a sufficient success metric.
SYSTEM WELFARE
Ship only with under-18 safety guardrails, monitoring triggers, and rollback authority tied to the predicted system-welfare indicators.

These examples show how to translate the same 17 fields across domains. They are research templates, not legal advice, statutory memos, or agency recommendations.

NOTES & REFERENCES
  1. The seventeen-field Decision Accounting record — fields 15 (Alternatives), 16 (Prediction), 17 (System Welfare) — is specified in Decision Accounting (DA-1). summary. ↩
BACK TO EXECUTIVE BRIEFLOOK UP BETA-W FOR YOUR DOMAINOPEN POLICY LAB TRIAGEUSE IN THE DECISION ACCOUNTING MODULECHECK TERMINOLOGY