Compare the evidence that exists
Inspect names, aliases, available identifiers, and source-specific facts together. See both supporting matches and known conflicts before reaching an identity conclusion.
Sanctions match investigation and case review
See why a record matched. Explain the decision you make.
Give analysts the matched fields, known conflicts, and source references behind a potential match. Record decisions and notes in a shared compliance dashboard connected to your API and batch results.
API and compliance dashboard included in every plan.
SanctionsKitIllustrative workflow
Potential match
Your subject
Names & aliases
Available identifiers
Dates & locations
Source record
Names & aliases
Available identifiers
Dates & locations
Compare supporting facts and conflicts.
Record the evidence behind your decision.
Open Confirm or dismiss with a note
What this helps your team do
Move the investigation beyond a name and a score.
Preserve the reasoning
Append open, confirmed, or dismissed review decisions with notes. The organization’s judgment stays separate from the original screening outcome.
Work from the same case history
API, dashboard, and batch potential matches share the review queue. Another reviewer can follow the evidence and decisions already recorded.
A practical use case
A matching name needs an identity review, not an automatic conclusion.
Available dates, document identifiers, aliases, and source facts can support or challenge the match. The case keeps that comparison connected to the eventual decision.
- 01
Open the potential match
Inspect the selected source, original record references, and the fields behind the screening result.
- 02
Resolve the identity question
Compare supporting facts and known conflicts. Escalate missing information or uncertainty through your organization’s review process.
- 03
Record what you concluded and why
Append a decision with a useful note. Keep identity confirmation separate from analysis of the applicable legal restriction.
For the people behind the process
One capability. Useful to the whole team.
Compliance teams
The facts at the center of the review
Compare identities and explain your reasoning without losing the original source context.
Explore your workflowDevelopers
A review queue comes with the API
Your application can preserve a screening reference while analysts investigate in the included dashboard.
Explore your workflowOperations
A consistent process across entry points
Individual checks, batches, and API matches follow the same review model and shared workspace.
Explore your workflowEvaluate the details
Case review: practical questions.
Does confirming a match determine whether a transaction is prohibited?
No. Review labels express your organization’s identity assessment. A confirmed identity may still require separate analysis of the source restriction, applicable rules, and the proposed activity.
Does opening a case or adding a decision consume a screening?
No. Inspecting a retained result or recording a review decision does not consume another screening unit. A new completed screening or monitoring rescreen does.
What should a review note contain?
Describe the evidence compared, your identity conclusion, and any uncertainty or escalation. Avoid irrelevant personal information. Notes follow the evidence retention policy, so use your approved recordkeeping process when longer preservation is required.
See SanctionsKit in action
Try a potential-match review with a synthetic example.
Try the interactive demo with synthetic examples. Compare plans for your team’s screening volume.