A buyer can assess a software delivery by tracing requirements to reproduced evidence, running the project outside the builder's environment, and confirming control of every account and asset needed to operate it.
Freeze the delivered state and the acceptance basis
Record the repository, commit or release tag, deployed version, requirement set, change orders, known-defect list, demo environment, and delivery date before testing begins. A moving branch or edited scope makes later findings difficult to reproduce. If the parties disagree about which document governs, record that dispute and ask the buyer's counsel or procurement owner to resolve it before treating the item as a technical requirement.
Create one ledger row per requirement. Each row should cite the source, describe observable acceptance evidence, link the test or demonstration, record the reproduced result, identify defects or missing proof, and leave a disposition for the buyer. NIST's software-acceptance guide emphasizes traceability between requirements, test cases, acceptance criteria, and test documentation. Name the person who supplied each requirement and the role authorized to resolve ambiguity, so the reviewer does not silently convert a technical observation into a new contractual criterion.
Run the delivery outside the builder's environment
Clone the named repository into a clean environment and follow only the delivered instructions. Record runtime versions, installation, migrations, fixtures, build, tests, and start commands. Hidden global packages, undocumented environment values, private registries, or manual database edits become findings because the buyer cannot reproduce the delivery from the supplied assets.
Verify the deployment path separately. Confirm the target account, source branch, build artifact, approval step, secret ownership, observable health check, logs, and rollback information. A working website does not prove the buyer can rebuild or redeploy it after the delivering party leaves.
Confirm ownership surfaces and unresolved defects
Inventory source repositories, domains, cloud accounts, app-store records, package registries, analytics, payment services, databases, design files, licensed assets, backups, and vendor contracts. The review can verify technical access and transfer evidence but should not decide intellectual-property or contract rights. Those questions go to the buyer's advisers with the missing record named clearly.
Handback Review prepares the technical ledger through Reality Contact, LLC. The buyer decides whether to accept the delivery, require repairs, or withhold acceptance or payment where the contract permits, and retains responsibility for legal and payment decisions.
Where the service stops
Reality Contact, LLC performs technical verification and document preparation, but does not interpret contract rights as legal advice, determine payment entitlement, certify security, conduct penetration testing, contact the delivering party, or make the buyer's acceptance decision. The buyer reviews the evidence with any advisers needed and chooses whether to accept the delivery, require repairs, or withhold acceptance or payment where the contract permits. This is technical verification and document preparation; it does not replace legal, security, procurement, intellectual-property, or contractual review. We do not promise that the software is defect-free, that every requirement is testable, or that any technical finding determines payment or acceptance rights.
Sources: NIST Guide to Software Acceptance; GitHub deployment-environment documentation.