Input
Start with the exact approved top-level change and the complete dependent agreements: current term, dates, scope, change/notice provisions and authority evidence. An approved extension in one document does not amend the others. Produce a cross-agreement impact map, rather than another upstream-clause extraction exercise.
Steps
- State exactly what the top-level approval changes and what it leaves unchanged.
- List dependent partner, vendor, lease and other commitments with their current versions.
- Read each agreement's own term and change provisions; mark missing text explicitly.
- Compare the changed dates and scope against each agreement's supplied duties.
- Classify confirmed collision, possible effect or unaffected aspect, with a bounded reason.
- Identify each separate notice, permission or clarification question under its actual terms.
- Assign the responsible agreement owner and preserve the evidence/decision status.
The classification is OpenAid's working practice. It identifies questions, not legal amendments.
Worked Fictional Map
Agreement T's approved end moves from December 31, 2026 to March 31, 2027, with one added training session. The supplied dependent facts below are invented. Change/notice details not quoted remain NOT SUPPLIED.
| Agreement | Relevant term | Change collision | Class | Reason | Separate route | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Partner P | Term ends Dec 31, 2026 | P ends before added period | Confirmed term collision | P does not cover the added period on its supplied term | Retrieve P's own change/notice clause; seek its separately authorized extension/scope decision | Partner-agreement owner and partner's actual authorized representative |
| Vendor V | Delivery completed/accepted by Nov 30, 2026 | Added period does not change completed delivery; continuing terms absent | Unaffected for delivery only; possible warranty effect | Top-level timing does not change completed delivery; warranty/service clause absent | Obtain missing warranty/service terms; identify any actual notice/change duty before calling the whole contract unaffected | Vendor-contract owner |
| Lease L | Expires Jan 31, 2027; option clause exists | Lease ends before proposed use through March | Possible effect | Continued need through March and usable option terms/authority need confirmation | Inspect actual option, notice route and permitted exercise; approval of T exercises nothing | Lease owner and actual delegated approver |
P's date interval is 31 + 28 + 31 =90 days. L's interval is 28 + 31 =59 days. If L were separately renewed for two months at its stated 1,500 USD monthly rent, extra rent would be 2 x 1,500 =3,000 USD. That is hypothetical and unapproved, not a committed extension or a complete change budget.
Exception: Missing Terms
V's missing warranty text is not evidence of no continuing duty. Keep possible effect against that aspect and request the actual clause. Similarly, an option's existence does not establish notice timing, legality, price or permission to exercise it. Do not create notices or quote invented provisions to complete the map.
Human Boundary
Agreement owners obtain the separate decisions and send notices only through actual authorized routes. Practical partner contactability is distinct from authority and valid notice service. Record approval, communication and subsequent changed terms separately. Use the uncertain-cost packet for pricing; this map does not supply it.
Sources and Scope
CC 34 (March 7, 2024), Tool 10/Tool 8 (January 3, 2011), CC 26 (September 16, 2026), CC 8 (November 27, 2024) and decision guidance (November 2, 2020) inform separate organizations, agreement/contact questions, linked risks and authority in England and Wales. Tool 10 is a checklist, not an operative agreement; Tool 8 contact fields confer no notice authority. The map and all agreement effects require actual terms; checked November 1, 2026.