botminds.aiRequest a demo
SystemContracting, Procurement & Oilfield Services

Local Content Plan Compliance

Local content compliance for an operator's local content plan: each supplier claim tested against the records, and a number moves to proven only when two people accept the evidence.

See the demoBook a demo
Follow 19 welders from the form to the query ↓
The problem

Suppliers declare their own local numbers, and the operator signs the report

Each quarter, hundreds of suppliers send their local content forms: local payroll, local goods, local services, training. Every form looks different, and many tiers below the prime never report at all. The local content officer turns them into one plan report and signs it.

The forms are rarely tested against the records the operator already holds. Payroll, the yard gate log, invoices, registration and ownership papers sit with different teams. So a declared roster of local welders gets counted as given, and the gap surfaces when an auditor or a regulator asks for proof.

Built forLocal content officersContracts managersSupplier development leadsInternal auditors

The Problem Today

Suppliers declare their own local numbers, and the operator answers for them when the records disagree.

1,680 h
a year to match 8,400 documents by hand, at 12 minutes each our estimate

Checked by hand today

  • Payroll
  • Gate logs
  • Invoices
  • Papers
  • Every form is differentSpreadsheets, templates and scans, tier by tier
  • Claimed counts as provenDeclarations rarely meet payroll and gate logs

The Solution

  1. One formatEach supplier's form read into payroll, goods, services and training
  2. Followed through the tiersEach dollar traced from the prime contract down, counted once
  3. Claim against evidencePayroll against gate logs, papers against dates, shares against register
  4. Asks, never accusesA mismatch becomes a plain question to the supplier, with a clock

Built-in controls

  • Proven moves only when two people sign
  • Agents say mismatch, never forgery
  • Worker names stay in payroll

What You Get

The plan report shows proven apart from claimed, and each gap has a question the supplier can answer.

  • Two numbers, both explainedClaimed and proven, with the sum behind the difference
  • Questions, not accusationsWhat differs, and what would settle it
  • Supplier plans on paceFive-year commitments tracked against what was delivered
One quarter's check

Local content compliance on one package: 64 welders declared, 45 at the gate

An offshore processing facility is three-quarters spent, with 312 suppliers across 12 packages. At quarter end the local content officer checks the piping fabricator's declared roster before she signs anything.

demoSuppliers, people, the project and every amount are sample data, and the rules are sample policy.

  1. 0107:50

    41.2% local claimed on $1.4B, before any claim is checked

    Local content officer

    The flow shows where the money landed: each package on the left, local payroll, goods, services and training on the right, imports below. Claimed local value reads 41.2% against a 40% target line that the screen labels as sample policy, not a legal requirement. She replays the quarter's check to watch each band tested in turn.

  2. 0207:52

    Services and training checks bring it to 40.8% before payroll

    Spend tracer and paper checker

    As the agents work through the bands, the after-checks figure drops: three mismatches in local services, an unsupported training line, a local agent's pass-through invoice. Each mismatch becomes a question for the supplier. The payroll band is still waiting, because payroll against gate logs for the piping package is the largest test of the quarter.

  3. 0307:55

    All 64 welders are paid every month, and 19 never badged in

    People matcher

    The fabricator declares 318 local workers on the package, 64 of them welders. Payroll pays all 64. The yard gate log over the same months shows 45. Welders match at 70.3%, under the 85% line. Workers appear as ID tiles rather than names, and every other trade on the roster matches in full.

  4. 0407:58

    Proven falls to 38.7%, because a sample rule holds the whole signed roster

    Score keeper

    The 19 welders account for $1.98M. The other $27.42M is the rest of the same signed roster, held under the sample rule for a trade that matches below the line, the way an auditor stops relying on a population after a failed test. Proven reads $541.8M of $1,400.0M, $18.2M under the target line, and the screen says why.

  5. 0508:05

    She reads the gate log herself before writing to the supplier

    Local content officer

    The yard gate log summary for the package roster: IDs on the roster, IDs badged in at least once, IDs with no badge-in, and the days on site of a matched welder. The record notes it covers the main yard only. That matters for the next step: the 19 may work at a second yard or offshore, which is exactly the question to put to the supplier before anything is held for good.

  6. 0609:14

    The query asks for proof, with no penalty and no accusation

    Local content officer

    The query writer drafted what the supplier should send: gate logs for any other yard these 19 work at, timesheets for the months in question, and welder qualification records. She keeps the draft as written, picks the reason that the evidence does not match, and proposes it to the contracts manager. A second person must countersign before anything reaches the supplier.

  7. 0709:15

    The contracts manager opens the same records and countersigns

    Contracts manager

    A summary is not enough for her. She opens the payroll extract and the gate log herself, compares the months with the roster the supplier signed, then countersigns and sends. The query now sits with the supplier, with a due date, and the payroll stays out of proven until two people accept new evidence.

  8. 0809:20

    Seven mismatches hold $35.0M, each saying what would settle it

    Local content officer

    The mismatch list shows each supplier, what differs, how much is held back, how strong the evidence is and where it stands. Training courses billed with no attendance sheets, a catering invoice claimed at two tiers, a local agent's invoice that passes through to an overseas vessel owner. None proposes a penalty. Each query is sent by one person and checked by another before it leaves.

  9. 0909:30

    303 of 312 declarations read into one format, and 9 are late

    Declaration reader

    Behind the numbers sit the supplier forms in four shapes: the reporting form, the operator's supplier form, suppliers' own spreadsheets and scanned PDFs. Each column's mapping is shown, three wait for a person to agree, and nine suppliers have not declared yet. Blanks stay blank until a person fills them.

How claimed $576.8M became $541.8M proven this quarter

The score keeper's arithmetic, as the screens show it.

Local value claimed by suppliers41.2% of $1,400.0M spent$576.8M
Package 7 roster, held under the sample rule$1.98M for the 19 welders, $27.42M the rest of the roster− $29.40M
Six smaller mismatches− $5.60M
Proven, accepted by two people$541.8M

demoSample data, from the working solution.

Around the plan

Local content compliance across tiers, rosters, plans and the quarter report

The supplier development lead, the auditor and the officer work from these.

Suppliers by tier312 suppliers: 1 prime, 11 package suppliers, 214 at tier 2 and 86 at tier 3, each with what was paid and what it claims.
PeopleLocal workers declared by package against those matching payroll and gate logs. Workers are shown by ID only.
Supplier development plansFive-year commitments tracked against what was delivered, with pace at quarter end and the next step to agree.
Evidence by type2,108 documents this quarter: 1,961 matched clean, 147 under question, all of them behind the seven mismatches.
Quarter report, before signingClaimed, proven under the sample rules, and what is held back, line by line, with sampled lines to open. The filing waits while mismatches are open.
Audit trailEvery proposal, signature, send-back and agent finding in order, including the countersigned query.

demoSample data, from the working solution.

Two signatures before any number counts as proven

One person proposes, another opens the same records and countersigns.

Local content officer
Sees
Flows, mismatches and the records behind them
Signs
Proposes queries and outcomes, and prepares the report
Contracts manager
Sees
The same records, opened by her
Signs
Countersigns queries, outcomes, the report and settings
Supplier development lead
Sees
Five-year plans and their pace
Signs
Agrees next steps and helps small suppliers answer
Internal auditor
Sees
Each decision with the records behind it
Signs
Downloads the trail and changes nothing
The agents

Declaration reader to plan tracker: what each agent will not say

They read, trace, match and draft. People decide what counts.

Declaration reader

Reads each supplier form into one format, with each mapping shown.

  • Never fills a blank
Spend tracer

Follows the money through the tiers and counts each invoice once.

  • Never counts imported content in a local invoice
People matcher

Lays payroll against gate logs by ID and by trade.

  • Never uses a name
  • Never says forged
Paper checker

Checks dates, heat numbers, shareholdings and attendance.

  • Never judges a paper false
Score keeper

Keeps claimed and proven, with the sums open.

  • Never moves proven without two signatures
Query writer

Writes what the supplier should send next.

  • Never sends on its own
  • Never proposes a penalty
Plan tracker

Tracks five-year plans, pace and report lines.

  • Never reports self-declared value as proven

Calls on local content that stay with the officer and the contracts manager

Agents test and draft. These decisions need named people.

Moving a dollar into provenTwo people open the evidence and sign. The score keeper only does the arithmetic.
What a supplier is askedThe query writer drafts; the officer proposes and the contracts manager countersigns before it is sent.
Whether a gap is closedThe supplier's answer is read by both people, and what it cannot show stays out.
Changing the rules that decide what countsA proposal in settings, signed by the contracts manager, and logged.

What local content officers ask about local content compliance

What is local content compliance?

Local content compliance means showing that the local payroll, goods, services and training a project reports are backed by records. This solution reads supplier declarations into one format, tests them against payroll, gate logs, invoices and papers, and keeps proven value apart from claimed for the local content plan report.

How is proven different from claimed?

Claimed is what suppliers declare. Proven is what two people accepted after opening the evidence. A gap stays out of proven until the supplier answers and both sign.

Does it accuse suppliers of fraud?

No. Agents say a record does not match and stop there. A mismatch becomes a plain question with what would settle it, sent only after a second person countersigns.

Are workers' names exposed?

No. Rosters and gate logs are matched by ID and trade, and names stay in payroll.

Whose rules decide what counts as local?

Yours. The rules on screen are sample policy, not a legal requirement, and are changed in settings with a proposal and a countersignature.

Does it prepare the quarter's local content reporting?

It prepares the quarter report with claimed, proven and held-back value line by line. The contracts manager signs it, and open mismatches show on it.

Contracting, Procurement & Oilfield Services

More for projects and supply chain

All 9 solutions →
EPC Tender Response

Hidden scope reaches the estimate before the bid closes.

1-min demoEPC Contract Risk Review

Risky clauses priced, and no priced risk reaching the bid before a person signs it.

1-min demoSupplier Qualification

Certificates read for what they cover: this product, from this plant.

1-min demo

Choose one package
and its supplier declarations.

Bring one package's forms, payroll and gate logs, and we test the declared roster together.

Book a demoBrowse solutions