Corporate identity and authority
- Exact legal name, registry and site
- Authorized commercial contact
- Authority to offer the product
- Relationship and intermediary roles
- Relevant licenses and limitations
Buyer diligence checklist
Qualify the entity, the lot and the route separately.
A credible medical-cannabis supplier screen connects corporate authority, current supply, product evidence, destination responsibilities and comparable economics. It does not turn one certificate, one COA or one relationship into an automatic pass.
For licensed and otherwise authorized commercial operators. Not for patients or consumers. Print-friendly; not legal, regulatory, quality or medical advice.
Qualification spine
Six gates before a protected introduction.
“Pass” should mean there is source-backed evidence for the exact criterion. “Unknown” means obtain evidence or stop; it does not mean likely acceptable.
Current executable supply
- Lot/batch ID and status
- Harvest/manufacturing date
- Unallocated kg and MOQ
- Availability confirmation date
- Allocation/exclusivity restrictions
Specification and evidence
- Cannabinoids with unit and basis
- Treatment and irradiation status
- Microbiology/contaminants
- Packaging, storage and shelf life
- Lot-linked reports and media
Destination responsibilities
- Origin/export authority
- Importer and destination permissions
- Processing/manufacturing party
- Testing and release roles
- Shipment-specific approvals
Comparable economics
- Price, currency and unit
- Incoterm, version and named place
- Quote date and validity
- Included and excluded work/costs
- Payment, inspection and rejection terms
Disclosure and relationship
- Permitted anonymous summary
- Document-sharing permission
- Fee/relationship protection
- Prior relationships and exceptions
- Approval before named disclosure
Lot record
A capability is not current inventory.
| Field | Minimum useful record | Risk if missing |
|---|---|---|
| Identity | Internal lot ID, supplier entity, source message/document and confirmation owner | Wrong entity, duplicate or untraceable claim |
| Availability | Offered kg, allocated kg, MOQ, lead time, confirmation timestamp and next recheck | Catalogue or sold stock treated as executable |
| Price | Amount, currency, unit, Incoterm, named place, quote date/validity and inclusions | False like-for-like comparison |
| Testing | Report ID, lab, dates, method/basis and lot linkage | Representative sample treated as this lot |
| Standards/route | Entity, issuer/source, scope, status/expiry, responsible importer/manufacturer/release party | Certificate or partner claim overextended |
| Permissions | Supplier disclosure consent and applicable commercial protection | Identity or documents released without authority |
Evidence labels
Use words that show what is actually known.
The named registry record was reviewed on the stated date. Scope and entity still need to match the transaction.
A document was inspected for a stated purpose. It remains evidence from its issuer, not certification by Provenance.
A party supplied the fact; independent or documentary support has not yet been established.
A working conclusion drawn from sources and clearly identified as an inference.
No adequate basis exists yet. Ask for the decisive evidence or exclude the option.
The evidence is outside its validity or freshness window for the present decision.
Decision rule
Mandatory fail excludes. Unknown requests evidence.
Score every candidate against the buyer's latest source-backed mandatory fields. Do not rescue a failed origin, treatment, specification, route, quantity or timing criterion with optimistic narrative.
Pass
The current evidence supports the exact criterion and its source/date are recorded.
Fail
The current option conflicts with a mandatory requirement and is excluded unless the buyer changes it.
Unknown
The answer is material but unsupported. The output names the missing evidence and owner.
Return no more than a small number of credible candidates unless the buyer asks for more. A no-fit result is more useful than an undigested supplier list.
Primary-source checks
Validate the standards and records at source.
- EMA: GACP guideline and current version
- European Commission: EudraLex Volume 4
- EudraGMDP: manufacturing/import authorization and GMP records
Use the issuing authority or registry, not a screenshot alone. Record the source URL, entity, scope and check date. Absence from one database is not automatically proof that an authorization does not exist; escalate uncertainty to the responsible party or adviser.
Use the checklist
Apply it to one current buyer requirement.
Provenance will compare the requirement with a small number of permitted capabilities and show the decisive gaps.