Framework mapping guide
Map the Framework to the Evidence You Actually Hold.
Start with the exact framework, jurisdiction, reporting entity and decision. Then connect each required statement to controlled records, calculations, review evidence and approval.
Classify the framework before mapping data
Teams often place mineral disclosure, impact reporting, due diligence and permit obligations in one table. That obscures who is accountable and what “complete” means. First classify the obligation:
- Mineral disclosure: public statements about exploration results, mineral resources or reserves under a market or securities regime.
- Impact reporting: disclosures about an organisation's effects on the economy, environment and people.
- Due diligence: a process for identifying, prioritising, preventing, mitigating, tracking and communicating risks or impacts.
- Operating obligation: a binding requirement from law, a granted instrument, authority direction, agreement or approved plan.
A single operational event may support several outputs, but each output needs its own scope, calculation, review and approval trail.
Selected official frameworks and the evidence question
| Framework | Primary purpose | Evidence-design question |
|---|---|---|
| JORC Code, 2012 Edition | Public reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves in its applicable context. | Can the Competent Person trace material statements to suitable documentation and address relevant Table 1 criteria on an “if not, why not” basis? |
| National Instrument 43-101 | Canadian standards of disclosure for mineral projects, with forms and companion policy. | Does the issuer's workflow use the currently effective instrument, required form, qualified-person responsibility and source technical report for the disclosure? |
| GRI 14: Mining Sector | Sector reporting on mining organisations' impacts, used with GRI Universal and Topic Standards. | Can each reported topic, disclosure and omission connect to the reporting boundary, methodology, source records and review decision? |
| OECD responsible mineral supply-chain guidance | Government-backed due diligence recommendations for mineral supply chains. | Can the organisation show how risks were identified, prioritised, addressed, tracked and communicated—not merely that a policy exists? |
Publisher pages can contain current instruments, amendments, proposals and supporting guidance at the same time. The Alberta Securities Commission page, for example, distinguishes effective NI 43-101 materials from proposed changes. Record the effective status and retrieval date rather than copying a document title into a permanent template.
Create an evidence crosswalk
- Pin the source: record publisher, instrument, version, status, effective date, link and stored controlled copy.
- Define applicability: identify entity, project, jurisdiction, exchange, audience, period and triggering activity.
- Decompose requirements: map clauses or disclosures without paraphrasing away qualifications and exceptions.
- Assign accountability: distinguish data owner, preparer, qualified reviewer, approver and publisher.
- Map lineage: connect source observations and documents through transformations, calculations and judgements to the final statement.
- Record gaps: preserve unknown, not applicable, omitted, disputed and awaiting-review states with reasons.
- Revalidate: trigger review when sources, project facts, methods, ownership, reporting periods or material information change.
Decision checklist
- Is the framework current, effective and applicable to this output?
- Can a reviewer identify every transformation between source evidence and disclosed figure or statement?
- Are professional judgements attributed to the correct qualified person rather than to software?
- Are reporting boundary, period, units, methods, assumptions, exclusions and restatements explicit?
- Can the published package be reproduced with the exact source versions and approvals used at the time?
Limitations
This is a comparison method, not an interpretation of any framework and not a complete list. Market rules, national laws, permit conditions, assurance standards and contract requirements may add or override duties. Framework names and documents change; use the official publisher, regulator and qualified adviser as the authority. OreLynx cannot certify a report or guarantee acceptance.
Continue the evidence review
Connect this crosswalk to the obligation evidence workflow, the HSE, ESG and community workflow, and the trust evidence questions.