The chronology cites an email, but the attachment is missing. A reviewer finds the right title in the index and still has to ask someone else for the document. Litigation support should remove that avoidable search. A public DOJ review provides a concrete example of the gap between cataloguing a record and making it available to the authorized reviewer.
What the DOJ Review Found
A September 2021 DOJ Inspector General report examined the FBI’s misconduct adjudication process. In the workflow reviewed, information from document cover sheets was entered into Sentinel while the source documents remained in paper files. The report described retrieval delays and the administrative burden of this partial adoption.
This is a historical finding about the process examined, not a statement about the FBI’s current systems. For a law firm, the useful lesson is to test the route from an index entry to the underlying evidence.
Follow One Reference All the Way Through
Choose an entry in the matter chronology and open the source using the access the reviewing attorney will have. If it is an email, confirm whether the retained message and attachments are available under the approved collection instructions. If the original is paper, identify its custodian and how it can be retrieved.
This is a suggested review method. A complete-looking folder should not persuade the team that collection is finished. An unresolved attachment or unclear document date belongs on the open-items list, where counsel can decide what further work is needed.
Use Descriptions Another Reviewer Can Understand
An index is shared working information. Avoid labels such as “important email” or “final evidence.” Describe the item factually and connect it to its preserved source.
| Question | What to Check |
|---|---|
| Where Did This Come From? | The supplier of the record, receipt date and preserved source location. |
| What Does the Entry Describe? | The author, date and document type match the actual material. |
| Can the Reviewer Open It? | The link works using the reviewer’s authorized access. |
| What Is Missing? | A specific request is assigned for follow-up. |
Keep working copies identifiable. Follow counsel’s preservation and handling instructions when naming, copying or organizing material.
Hand Over the Questions Along With the File
Provide the factual chronology, document index and unresolved requests together. If sources conflict, record the conflict instead of rewriting the account into a single smooth narrative. That uncertainty may matter to the attorney’s analysis.
Before a filing or hearing, ask the responsible reviewer to test several key references. Correct access problems while there is time to obtain help. The handoff should make it easy to distinguish what the team has collected from what counsel still needs to assess, without suggesting that administrative preparation determines evidentiary value.