A sustained policy claim is not a claim made once. It is the same figure, recomputed on the same boundary, years later, by someone who did not write it. Most policy claims do not fail on honesty. They fail on boundary drift: the target is announced on one perimeter, reported next year on another, and the improvement is the perimeter. Nobody lied, and nothing is comparable.
Neither of these needs a new form, a new deadline or a new declaration. The mandate already produces the record. Change the numbers below and watch how much of a headline is real and how much is perimeter.
Every new declaration adds cost, adds error, adds a surface to game, and decays the year after it launches. A policy measured from records the economy already keeps is cheaper, harder to game, and still testable in 2036. The best survey is the one you never had to send.
A core banking platform handles the transaction: when, what type, which accounts, which value date. It does not account for the mandate. But what it does record, it records identically for years, which is exactly what a sustained claim needs and what an annual questionnaire structurally cannot be.
A goods receipt is recorded because the business needs it, not because a policy asked. Measuring local content or supplier certification against receipts that were going to exist anyway is evidence with no new form behind it.
Before any policy delta is read, ask whether this year's perimeter is the baseline's. If it is not, the decomposition above is not optional accounting detail. It is the difference between a result and an announcement.