# Keep late survey answers outside a frozen report until revised

Define a collection cutoff and an explicit report revision when answers arrive after a snapshot.

If nothing was unclear or difficult, say so. Skip questions about steps you did not experience; use not applicable where appropriate.

## 1. Where does the invitation explain the collection deadline?

Answer: ____________________

## 2. What would you expect if an answer arrived after that deadline?

Answer: ____________________

## 3. Which report date would tell you whether a later answer was included?

Answer: ____________________

## 4. What explanation would distinguish a correction from a later collection update?

Answer: ____________________

## Author notes / illustrative keys where applicable

1. Locate respondent-visible cutoff information.
2. Test expectations without promising automatic inclusion.
3. Check whether version and collection period are understandable.
4. Separate error correction from legitimate later evidence.

Interpretation caution: A later answer does not automatically invalidate a frozen report. Resolve cutoff evidence and an authorized revision policy before replacing totals.


## Illustrative finding and follow-up

Observation: Five answers belong to the issued cutoff; two later answers belong to a later collection state.

Action to test: Preserve v1 and write whether v2 is an update or correction before changing a count.

Follow-up: Reconcile the next snapshot’s cutoff, arrival records and version note using fabricated cases.


## Collection protocol

When and whom to ask: Before collection closes, show volunteers the actual deadline and a fabricated late-answer scenario.

Decision owner: The survey owner defines cutoff; the reporting reviewer authorizes a later version.

Follow-up: Reconcile the next snapshot’s cutoff, arrival records and version note using fabricated cases.

Response handling: Use invented timestamps and counts, not actual answer content or identities.

## Decision workshop

Synthetic examples only. Manual worksheet; no automatic import or product writes.

### Synthetic pilot and reporting records

Timing | Synthetic valid answers | Reporting treatment
--- | --- | ---
17:00 UTC | 5 | Snapshot v1
18:00 UTC | 2 additional | After cutoff
Explicit later snapshot | 7 total | v2 only if revision is authorized

### Version changes

Boundary | Draft | Revised
--- | --- | ---
Snapshot | Original count silently replaced | v1 retained, later evidence separate
Revision | No new cutoff | Authorized v2 with stated cutoff

### Draft or earlier version (review its limits)

The original five-answer report always contained seven answers.

### Revised example

Snapshot v1 contains five answers through 17:00 UTC. Two later answers are separate; an authorized v2 can include seven with its new cutoff disclosed.

### Decision situations

- Answers genuinely arrived after the cutoff: Retain the issued snapshot and decide an explicit update.
- Eligible answers existed but were omitted: Investigate a correction and preserve the reason and version.
- Arrival timing is unknown: Hold the inclusion decision until timing is established.

### Complete message drafts (review before use)

#### Later-answer note

The issued report contains five valid answers through 17:00 UTC. Two more arrived later. Please approve whether to issue a clearly dated update rather than silently replace the original snapshot.

#### Correction inquiry

Were the disputed answers eligible and already received before the published cutoff? Please check that evidence before calling this an omission correction.

### Method references

- AAPOR survey best practices: https://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/best-practices/ — Pretesting and transparent sample context.