Check an intake file without hiding rejected or corrected records Skill Workbench · 2026-10-23 · Original fictional teaching material Apply a fixed data contract, quarantine conflicting records, then reconcile a documented correction. Build a release review that accounts for every input row. For someone preparing small operational files. Read text IDs as text and use a calculator; no spreadsheet formulas or SQL are required. - Separate a valid zero or text identifier from a value that violates the stated contract. - Hold duplicate-key conflicts and unmatched references without silently selecting or deleting rows. - Reconcile the original and corrected totals against a source document before releasing a new version. CASE CONTRACT 1. All records and source documents are fictional. Keep raw rows and their row IDs; do not overwrite them while reviewing. 2. For unit 1, account_code must contain exactly four ASCII digits, including leading zeros. quantity must be a whole number from 1 through 9. 3. For unit 2, a repeated event_id holds every row sharing that ID. A row with an account absent from the supplied unique account list is also held. Only rows passing both checks may be released. 4. For unit 3, the verified source-document quantity is the authorized correction input. Retain original and corrected quantities, document ID and revision; do not silently overwrite an issued file. 1. Apply the contract and keep a hold list Classify a row before allowing it into the accepted total. A data contract states what a field is allowed to contain. It does not tell you to make an invalid value look plausible. In this exercise an account code is four digits stored as text, so 0012 and 12 are different representations. Preserve the raw code, validate its shape and keep the row ID beside any decision. Check presence, format and range separately. A missing account needs clarification; an explicit quantity of 0 fails this particular contract because the allowed range starts at 1. A decimal quantity fails the whole-number requirement. These outcomes come from the supplied contract, not a universal rule that zero or fractional quantities are always bad data. Build accepted and held lists before summing quantities. A calculation over all rows can be numerically correct yet include records that are not ready for use. Report why each held row was excluded from the accepted total. Keep every input row represented in the review so a rejected record does not disappear from the handoff. A hold is a work item, not a correction. Assign a follow-up to confirm the source value rather than filling a blank or rounding a number by guesswork. The final release can be smaller than the intake file while still accounting for all rows. This audit trail is the useful output of this unit. Worked example: preserve the identifier Account 0047 with quantity 3 passes the four-digit text and whole-number checks. Account 047 with quantity 3 fails the account format. Padding it to 0047 might identify a different account, so hold it for source confirmation instead of changing it automatically. Classify the six rows under the unit-1 contract. Sum only quantities on accepted rows. Raw intake rows row_id | account_code | quantity D1 | 0012 | 4 D2 | 0345 | 0 D3 | | 3 D4 | 0123 | 2.5 D5 | 0456 | 2 D6 | 0789 | 7 YOUR EXERCISE Accepted row IDs: __________________ Row IDs with a missing account: __________________ Row IDs with a whole quantity outside the allowed range: __________________ Row IDs with a fractional quantity: __________________ Accepted quantity total: __________________ Your explanation: Write a handoff naming the accepted total and a source-confirmation action for each type of held row. FEEDBACK AND WORKED SOLUTION Accept D1, D5 and D6, total 13. Hold D2 for the zero quantity, D3 for the missing account and D4 for the fractional quantity. Three accepted plus three held equals all six input rows. Accepted row IDs → D1, D5, D6. D1, D5 and D6 have four-digit account text and whole quantities from 1 to 9. Row IDs with a missing account → D3. D3 has no account code; do not invent one. Row IDs with a whole quantity outside the allowed range → D2. D2 contains an explicit 0. It fails the range but is not a blank. Row IDs with a fractional quantity → D4. D4 has 2.5; the contract requires whole quantities. Accepted quantity total → 13. 4 + 2 + 7 = 13. Held rows do not enter this total. TRANSFER QUESTION If a new contract allowed quantity 0, which decision would change and which raw evidence should remain unchanged? 2. Quarantine conflicts before joining to a reference list Avoid choosing a convenient duplicate or hiding an unmatched reference. A syntactically valid row can still be unsafe to combine with other rows. The event ID in this unit is meant to identify one event. When the same ID appears with two different quantities, selecting the first record is a business decision disguised as a technical shortcut. The exercise therefore holds every row sharing a repeated event ID. Check the supplied account reference separately. It is a unique list, and a missing match means that the account needs investigation. An inner join that simply drops unmatched rows would make the resulting report look clean while concealing the unresolved record. Keep the row ID and a clear unmatched-reference reason in the hold list. Apply both checks to the original batch, then release only rows with a unique event ID and a known account. Keep row-level decisions separate from the accepted quantity total. If a row fails more than one rule, record all applicable reasons without counting it as two different input records. Reconciliation is the final control: accepted rows plus held rows must cover the batch exactly once. A separate count of distinct event IDs can help explain duplicates, but it is not interchangeable with row count. Your note should make clear whether a number describes records, events or quantities. Worked example: a duplicate is not resolved by sorting Rows K1 and K2 both claim event V8 but show quantities 2 and 5. Under this unit’s policy, both are held. Reordering the file does not resolve the disagreement, and adding them would turn one disputed event into seven accepted units. The reference list contains 0012, 0345 and 0789, each exactly once. Classify the batch using repeated event IDs and account membership. Events awaiting reference checks row_id | event_id | account_code | quantity J1 | E10 | 0012 | 4 J2 | E11 | 0345 | 2 J3 | E11 | 0345 | 3 J4 | E12 | 9999 | 1 J5 | E13 | 0012 | 5 J6 | E14 | 0789 | 2 YOUR EXERCISE Rows held for repeated event IDs: __________________ Rows with an unmatched account: __________________ Rows that can be released: __________________ Released quantity total: __________________ Number of held input rows: __________________ Your explanation: Explain why keeping the first E11 row or dropping 9999 in a join would hide an unresolved decision. FEEDBACK AND WORKED SOLUTION Hold J2/J3 for E11 and J4 for unknown account 9999. Release J1/J5/J6 with quantity 11. The row count reconciles: three released plus three held equals six. Rows held for repeated event IDs → J2, J3. Both E11 rows are held; neither is selected as authoritative. Rows with an unmatched account → J4. 9999 is absent from the supplied reference list. Rows that can be released → J1, J5, J6. These rows have unique events and known accounts. Released quantity total → 11. 4 + 5 + 2 = 11. Number of held input rows → 3. J2, J3 and J4 are three held records, not two. TRANSFER QUESTION What evidence would be needed to authorize one E11 value before either row could move out of quarantine? 3. Release a documented correction and reconcile its effect Preserve the old value and show why the new total changed. A source check can turn a hold into an authorized correction. The verification table below records the original quantity, the checked source quantity and a document ID. Compare the values explicitly. Do not label an entire file verified merely because one disputed record was checked. Calculate the original total and the source-verified total separately. The difference is the correction effect, not new operational activity. A negative change means the previous intake overstated quantity. Showing both totals helps the receiving team distinguish a revision from an additional delivery or transaction. Keep a correction log containing row ID, old value, new value, document reference and version. If the previous output was already distributed, a new filename alone does not tell recipients which data supersedes which. Identify the affected row and tell the owner to confirm the replacement before downstream use. This exercise provides the authority to use the verified source quantity only. It does not authorize inventing a missing document, merging unrelated accounts or changing an operational system. The portfolio should retain enough evidence for another reviewer to reproduce the revised total and see the release decision. Worked example: separate correction from new activity A draft shows 9 units, while its checked document shows 6. The correction is −3 units. Record old=9, new=6 and the document reference; do not enter a separate negative shipment and a new positive shipment unless the operational system’s rules actually require that workflow. All IDs and accounts in this new three-row fixture are valid and unique. The verified source quantity is authoritative for this exercise. Report corrected minus original for the change. Document-verified correction evidence row_id | event_id | original_quantity | verified_quantity | document_id R1 | F10 | 4 | 4 | DOC-1 R2 | F11 | 6 | 2 | DOC-2 R3 | F12 | 1 | 1 | DOC-3 YOUR EXERCISE Row IDs whose quantity changes: __________________ Original intake total: __________________ Source-verified total: __________________ Corrected minus original quantity: __________________ Which release note is appropriate?: __________________ silent: Overwrite the previous file without identifying the changed row. versioned-correction: Issue a versioned correction naming R2, DOC-2 and the −4 total effect. new-activity: Describe the −4 correction as a new physical delivery. Your explanation: Write the correction note with R2’s old/new values, its source document, the total effect and the owner who must confirm replacement. FEEDBACK AND WORKED SOLUTION R2 changes 6→2 using DOC-2. Original total 11; verified total 7; effect −4. Preserve the original draft and issue an identified corrected version with recipient confirmation. Row IDs whose quantity changes → R2. R2 changes from 6 to the verified 2. Original intake total → 11. 4 + 6 + 1 = 11. Source-verified total → 7. 4 + 2 + 1 = 7. Corrected minus original quantity → -4. 7 − 11 = −4; this is the effect of a correction. Which release note is appropriate? → Issue a versioned correction naming R2, DOC-2 and the −4 total effect.. The revision needs an evidence trail and a clear supersession notice. TRANSFER QUESTION What extra action is needed if the receiving team has already imported the earlier draft? PORTFOLIO REVIEW Keep all three exercise records and explanations. Fixed checks can be scored; explanations are ungraded. Do not infer occupational certification. SOURCE O*NET 43-9021.00 task 11402 · 08/2018 · Compile, sort, and verify the accuracy of data before it is entered. O*NET 43-9021.00 task 11403 · 08/2018 · Compare data with source documents, or re-enter data in verification format to detect errors. https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/43-9021.00 O*NET 31.0, USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0. Skill Workbench authored the teaching and fictional practice; no endorsement.