Reviewing a PEP Name Match: What Evidence to Keep

Start with a potential match

A fictional customer shares a name with a public official. Similar names alone do not establish that they are the same person. This worked example describes a review process; it does not report a real customer result.

Compare identifiers and source evidence

The reviewer compares available dates, countries, aliases, the recorded public role, and source details. If the record lacks the information needed to reach a decision, the team requests more information or escalates according to its policy.

Record the reasoning

Save the evidence compared, who reviewed it, the decision, and any further work. Avoid a note that merely repeats the match score. The next reviewer should understand why the finding was resolved or kept open.

Test the workflow before production

Use representative fictional or authorized fixtures and inspect coverage for the jurisdictions your business needs. The PEP review guide explains the evaluation questions to bring to a provider. Confirm your organization's requirements using applicable official guidance.