Start with a precise claim
“Collected”, “processed” and “recycled” should not be used interchangeably. Before reviewing a claim, define the material, reporting period, location and activity it covers. A clear boundary makes the supporting evidence easier to assess.
Connect the handovers
Look for records that connect the source, quantity, collection and receiving facility. Dates, material descriptions and references should allow someone to follow the chain. Where partners are involved, their role should be visible rather than disappearing between two documents.
Check the processing context
Review whether the facility’s permissions and scope are relevant to the material and activity in question. Then connect incoming material with processing records, recovered outputs, residues and downstream destinations. Differences should be explained; they should not be hidden by a headline total.
Separate recovery from final use
Material dispatched to another processor is not necessarily material already incorporated into a new product. Describe the stage the evidence supports. Strong reporting distinguishes recovered quantities, further treatment and verified use instead of combining them into one claim.
Keep EPR and physical evidence connected
For producer-responsibility work, review the applicable waste stream, period, entities and supporting records together. This is an evidence-review framework, not a substitute for current rules, portal requirements or a project-specific compliance assessment.
A useful review checklist
Can the quantity be reconciled? Can the parties and facilities be identified? Is the treatment activity clear? Are output and residue destinations recorded? Does the wording stay within what the evidence proves? These questions make a review more useful than a folder of disconnected certificates.