A PLENA human reviewer's scope: what they may do, what they must not claim, how they document limits, and how the reviewer registry can become a serious trust asset.
A PLENA reviewer does not become a judge, lawyer, government officer, forensic examiner, doctor, or insurer. The reviewer performs a scoped human review and records the limits.
Are documents labeled, dated, attributed, and connected to specific claims?
Does the certificate name the same institution? Does the date support the timeline? Are contradictions flagged?
The strongest reviewer is honest about what they did not verify.
Refusal protects PLENA, the reviewer, the issuer, and the person requesting help.
A reviewer should not review their own file, their employer’s disputed claim, or a case where impartiality is compromised.
Explain missing evidence without humiliation, intimidation, or careless exposure of private facts.
I agree to review only within my declared scope, to record what I checked and what I did not check, to refuse verification when evidence is insufficient, to protect private information, to disclose conflicts of interest, and to avoid presenting PLENA review as legal, medical, financial, immigration, forensic, governmental, or judicial determination.
| Step | Requirement | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Identity and contact | Name, role, organization, jurisdiction if applicable, contact route. | Profile pending / active / suspended / retired. |
| Training | Evidence handling, privacy boundaries, refusal receipts, public verification limits. | Training completed date. |
| Scope | Credential review, records organization, authorship timeline, service occurrence, or other narrow lane. | Visible scope statement. |
| Conflicts | Conflict disclosure rule and recusal path. | Declared / none / recused. |
| Complaint route | How users can challenge review, correction, refusal, or reviewer conduct. | Public complaint route. |