What evidence do auditors commonly ask for on PI-02 Contractual agreements for the provision of data?

Contract or annex specifying data format, scope and the return period on termination; Clause naming the moment customer access ends and erasure commences; Written statement of what the customer must do to cooperate during exit; Review note confirming the exit terms still match current legal requirements.

What is the most common gap auditors find on PI-02?

Terms promise data return without naming a format, leaving the choice to provider discretion

BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue) · C5: Portability and Interoperability

`PI-02` Contractual agreements for the provision of data

Fix in the contract what data is returned when the relationship ends, in which format and scope, the period allowed for handover, the point at which customer access ceases and deletion begins, and the customer's own cooperation duties.

Source: BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue), PI-02. The statement above is our statement of the clause, read from the published text and cited so you can check it against the official text, not the instrument verbatim. Open BSI C5 (121-criteria catalogue) in the compliance library.

The edition of the catalogue is not stamped here; check the edition your attestation is issued against.

artefacts

held by a system

at each review

hard

to go live

Document repository

where the evidence lives

teal = a system already holds it · olive = produced at each review. To go live: easy when half or more of the artefacts are already held by a system, moderate from a quarter to a half, hard below a quarter.

These are the artefacts auditors commonly ask for on this requirement, our guidance rather than text from the standard. Your assessor decides what is sufficient in your context, and asks for samples across the period when a report covers one.

system holds itEvidence a system already holds

none for this control

periodic reviewEvidence produced at each review

Review note confirming the exit terms still match current legal requirements · Document repository

governing documentDocuments that govern the control

Contract or annex specifying data format, scope and the return period on termination · HR system / LMS
Clause naming the moment customer access ends and erasure commences · Document repository
Written statement of what the customer must do to cooperate during exit · Document repository

First move

No system holds this evidence for you: it is people and documents. Reminders and routing to the owner still save time. Put the document under version control with an owner and review date, and log each review as a record with reviewer and date.

Common gaps auditors find

Terms promise data return without naming a format, leaving the choice to provider discretion
No deadline stated between the end of the relationship and the handover of data
Customer obligations left undefined, so exit stalls the moment customer action is needed

Do this for your whole sheet

Paste the rows you run your controls from and get this mapping for every control at once, with the periodic-review ones flagged and a first move per row. No account for the first run.

Build my evidence sheet

PI-01 Documentation and safety of input and output interfaces · PI-03 Secure deletion of data