--- title: "Checking data for a review: part 6 (effective date)" description: How we check the date a data extract is “as at”, why the same month can give different numbers, and what that means for recons, KPIs and review results. image: https://riskinsights.com.au/hubfs/checking-data-part-6.png --- [Skip to content](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-6#main-content) [![Risk Insights - Logo - (RGB, Horizontal, Small)](https://riskinsights.com.au/hs-fs/hubfs/Risk%20Insights%20-%20Logo%20-%20(RGB%2c%20Horizontal%2c%20Small).png?width=200&height=40&name=Risk%20Insights%20-%20Logo%20-%20(RGB%2c%20Horizontal%2c%20Small).png)](https://riskinsights.com.au) - [Articles](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog) - [Approach](https://riskinsights.com.au/approach) Show submenu for Approach - [Commissions (Accuracy)](https://riskinsights.com.au/broker-partner-commission-accuracy-reviews) - [Claims Fraud (Fairness)](https://riskinsights.com.au/claims-fraud-fairness-reviews) - [Fees and Charges (Accuracy)](https://riskinsights.com.au/fee-and-charge-accuracy-reviews-risk-insights) - [About](https://riskinsights.com.au/about) - [Contact](https://riskinsights.com.au/contact) Open main navigation Close main navigation - [Articles](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog) - [Approach](https://riskinsights.com.au/approach) Show submenu for Approach - [Commissions (Accuracy)](https://riskinsights.com.au/broker-partner-commission-accuracy-reviews) - [Claims Fraud (Fairness)](https://riskinsights.com.au/claims-fraud-fairness-reviews) - [Fees and Charges (Accuracy)](https://riskinsights.com.au/fee-and-charge-accuracy-reviews-risk-insights) - [About](https://riskinsights.com.au/about) - [Contact](https://riskinsights.com.au/contact) --- 13 Nov 2026 # Checking data for a review: part 6 (effective date) ![Picture of Yusuf Moolla](https://riskinsights.com.au/hs-fs/hubfs/Yusuf_Moolla_Headshot-transformed.png?width=50&name=Yusuf_Moolla_Headshot-transformed.png) [Yusuf Moolla](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/author/yusuf) Share: [linkedin-in icon](http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-6) [envelope icon](mailto:?body=https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-6) **TL;DR** • The sixth in a series on checking data before using it for a review. • Effective date: checking the date the extract is “as at”. • Calculations can differ depending on when the data was extracted, affecting recons, KPIs, and review results.   This is the sixth article in a [series on the checks we run](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-1) before using data for a review.   ## Why this is relevant day to day (not just in a review) Many calculations, including those used for monitoring (e.g. KPIs), are carried out as at a particular date. But data can change after that date, so the results can be different if run later. Comparing one month’s figure with another is only reliable if both were measured at the same point after month end.   ## What we check, and what it can find For a review, we confirm the "as at" date of the extract, whether every table was extracted as at the same date, and whether that date matches the figures we’re reconciling to. Reasons this can cause differences include: - records that were still open at the extract date, like undecided claims or applications - transactions posted after the period but dated within it, like backdated adjustments and reversals - tables extracted on different days, so the records in one don’t line up with the other - control totals, like finance figures, taken as at a different date to the extract. A bank might charge a fee in September, then refund it in early October, backdated to September. A 30 September extract shows the fee as charged, so a fee accuracy test will find an error that has already been fixed. An extract taken in mid-October shows the refund, but it won’t reconcile to September’s finance figures. We need to understand this for the review, and decide which extract we need, depending on the objective of the review. In insurance, claims referred for investigation, and not yet decided, remain open. If some groups of customers are more likely to be referred, a fairness analysis of decline rates can leave out many of their claims. The comparison between groups can change once those claims are decided. This can average out over time, but we need a specific approach for dealing with such claims (e.g. leave out any claim lodged within the last x weeks).   --- Disclaimer: The info in this article is not legal advice. It may not be relevant to your circumstances. It was written for specific contexts within banks and insurers, may not apply to other contexts, and may not be relevant to other types of organisations. ---     ## Related posts [![Checking data for a review: part 4 (data ranges)](https://riskinsights.com.au/hs-fs/hubfs/checking-data-part-4.png?height=200&name=checking-data-part-4.png)](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-4) ## [Checking data for a review: part 4 (data ranges)](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-4) [Read more](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-4) [![Checking data for a review: part 2 (completeness)](https://riskinsights.com.au/hs-fs/hubfs/checking-data-part-2.png?height=200&name=checking-data-part-2.png)](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-2) ## [Checking data for a review: part 2 (completeness)](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-2) [Read more](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-2) [![Checking data for a review: part 3 (accuracy)](https://riskinsights.com.au/hs-fs/hubfs/checking-data-part-3.png?height=200&name=checking-data-part-3.png)](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-3) ## [Checking data for a review: part 3 (accuracy)](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-3) [Read more](https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-3) We acknowledge Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the Traditional Custodians of the lands on which we live and work. We pay our respects to Elders past and present, and honour the rich diversity of the world's oldest living cultures. [View our LinkedIn page](https://www.linkedin.com/company/riskinsightsap) [email us](mailto:info@riskinsights.com.au) [Call us](tel:+61408946143) 2026 Risk Insights Pty. Ltd. | [Privacy](https://riskinsights.com.au/privacy-policy) | [Disclaimer](https://riskinsights.com.au/disclaimer) ```json { "@context" : "https://schema.org", "@type" : "BlogPosting", "author" : { "@type" : "Person", "name" : "Yusuf Moolla", "url" : "https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/author/yusuf" }, "dateModified" : "2026-11-12T20:29:59.984Z", "datePublished" : "2026-11-12T20:29:59.000Z", "headline" : "Checking data for a review: part 6 (effective date)", "image" : [ "https://riskinsights.com.au/hubfs/checking-data-part-6.png" ], "mainEntityOfPage" : { "@id" : "https://riskinsights.com.au/blog/the-checks-we-run-before-using-data-for-a-review-part-6", "@type" : "WebPage" }, "publisher" : { "@type" : "Organization", "logo" : { "@type" : "ImageObject", "url" : "https://riskinsights.com.au/hubfs/Risk%20Insights%20-%20Logo%20-%20(RGB%2c%20Horizontal%2c%20Small).png" }, "name" : "Risk Insights Pty. Ltd." } } ```