Human review and quality gates

Automation can organize requirements, compare documents, draft text, and check consistency. A person must remain accountable for contract interpretation, assessment scope, system architecture, readiness decisions, and affirmations.

Decisions that require human review

Decision	Why a person must own it
Contract and CUI determination	The answer depends on authoritative contract language and context.
Assessment boundary	A wrong boundary can omit required assets or add unnecessary scope.
High-consequence gap validation	A false positive wastes money; a false negative can derail an assessment.
Remediation strategy	Technology and architecture choices must fit the organization.
SSP architecture	Each requirement statement depends on the boundary, data flow, and assigned owners.
Readiness and score sign-off	Leadership must support the information submitted.
Assessment interviews	Control owners must explain how work happens; documents cannot do that for them.

Evidence standard

A strong implementation statement answers:

• Who owns or performs the activity?
• What system, configuration, or procedure implements it?
• When does it operate or get reviewed?
• How is it enforced and monitored?
• What evidence supports the claim?

Review rule

Match the depth of review to the consequence of error. Focus on scope, critical safeguards, unresolved findings, exceptions, and claims that affect assessment status. Automate formatting and consistency checks, but not accountability.