Appeal Lifecycle

Follow The Record Over Time

Use this guide when a safety, accountability, or follow-up record needs careful handling. In this guide, Appeal Lifecycle narrows that work to how network ban appeals move from submission to review, decision, resubmission, and record update. Because this is a lifecycles page, read it as part of the Report System learning path rather than as an isolated checklist.

A report is a written memory of something important. The goal is to protect people, keep facts clear, and leave enough context for future reviewers. Read the page for the decision it helps a person make, then use the steps and checks as a steady path from context to action to proof.

What Changes Across The Lifecycle

This page follows a record from one state to another. Read it as a timeline so handoffs, reversals, and closeout work stay understandable. The intended readers are FPH administrators and Partner admins. If the guide names a dashboard route, service area, export, or record type, treat that name as a pointer to real operational responsibility.

• Primary surface or service: /reports/network-ban-appeal?entryId=:watchlistEntryId and /reports/ban-appeals.
• Records or contracts involved: Network ban appeals, Appeal revisions, and Watchlist entries.
• Main care point: Watch for incomplete facts, unfair wording, privacy exposure, or a decision that another reviewer cannot understand later.
• Proof worth keeping: report ID, saved status, revision history, person profile, evidence note, reminder, reviewer decision, and handoff owner.

Track Each State Change

1. Find the current state: Begin by naming the Report System situation, the owner, and the exact item involved in Appeal Lifecycle.
2. Read what must be true before the next state: Use /reports/network-ban-appeal?entryId=:watchlistEntryId and /reports/ban-appeals to connect the words on the page to the screen, file, service route, or record that people actually use.
3. Watch for side effects when the state changes: Keep Network ban appeals, Appeal revisions, and Watchlist entries in view so the work stays tied to the records or contracts it can affect.
4. Keep the history clear for the next reviewer: Before handing off, save proof such as report ID, saved status, revision history, person profile, evidence note, reminder, reviewer decision, and handoff owner so another reviewer can understand the facts without relying on memory.

The Lifecycle Is Clear When

You are ready to use the rest of this page when the purpose, owner, affected information, and proof are all clear enough for a second person to review.

1. Scope is named: The work is tied to the correct page, event, report, route, file, person, or record.
2. Impact is understood: The operator can explain the effect on people, privacy, fairness, evidence, and the trustworthiness of the record.
3. Proof is findable: The handoff points to evidence that another reviewer can understand the facts without relying on memory.

End-to-end operator runbook

Use this numbered runbook when you need to operate this area without getting stuck. Read the purpose of each step, do the action in order, and use the final sentence as the checkpoint before continuing.

1. Step 1 - Identify the report and scope. Open the appeal record and linked original report or restriction. This anchors the work to the correct scope before any record changes.
2. Step 2 - Read the existing facts before acting. Confirm the appellant, deadline, decision being appealed, and reviewer authority. Pause here and confirm the note is factual, fair, and reviewable.
3. Step 3 - Make the smallest factual update. Review original evidence and the appeal statement separately. This keeps the report useful to the next reviewer instead of only to the person writing it.
4. Step 4 - Check fairness, privacy, and risk. Record the review decision and whether restrictions are upheld, changed, paused, or removed. The next action should still protect privacy, evidence, and due process.
5. Step 5 - Verify the saved record and history. Update linked report, profile, watchlist, or ban state so records agree. A later reviewer should be able to understand this step from the saved record.
6. Step 6 - Hand off the next responsibility. Send the outcome using approved wording and keep the decision note in the system. This leaves a handoff trail another operator can understand.

Appeal stages

Stage	Meaning	Responsible role
Submitted	The appellant has sent an appeal.	Appellant and system.
Under review	Authorized reviewer is checking the record.	FPH admin or permitted reviewer.
Denied	Restriction remains.	Reviewer.
Approved	Restriction should be changed or removed.	Reviewer and record support lead.
Resubmitted	Appellant added new information after a decision or edit.	Appellant and reviewer.

Review checklist

Before deciding:

1. Action 1. Read the appeal text. Pause long enough to confirm the record says only what is known.
2. Action 2. Read the source watchlist or ban entry. Check the saved value before adding more context.
3. Action 3. Read the source report if available. Use the report history as the source of truth before continuing.
4. Action 4. Check whether identity is correct. Pause long enough to confirm the record says only what is known.
5. Action 5. Check whether the action is still proportionate. Check the saved value before adding more context.
6. Action 6. Check whether new evidence changes the decision. Use the report history as the source of truth before continuing.
7. Action 7. Write a decision note. Pause long enough to confirm the record says only what is known.

What approval can mean

Approval does not always mean “the original report was false.” It can mean:

• The restriction expired or is no longer proportionate.
• The wrong person was linked.
• Evidence was misunderstood.
• The person completed a required process.
• Network scope is no longer needed, but local scope remains.

Decision notes

Good decision notes are short but specific:

• “Denied because source report includes verified screenshots and the network ban remains within the review period.”
• “Approved because identity link was incorrect; watchlist entry should be removed from this person.”
• “Partially approved: network scope removed, local partner restriction remains.”

After decision

Verify that:

• Appeal status reloads correctly.
• Appeal revision history is kept.
• Any required watchlist or ban change is made.
• The source report records the important decision context.