Law · Free tool
Policy Acknowledgment Tracker
When a new security, conduct or expense policy goes out, someone has to chase the people who have not acknowledged it. This tracker compares the list of who must sign with the list of who has signed and returns the names still outstanding. It is an organizing aid for HR, compliance and team leads; it is not a signature system and not legal advice.
- OutputWho has not signed
- No sign-up
- Copy or print the result
- How it works ↓
Your entries stay in this browser. Use Fill example to see a finished page first.
What this law tool gives you
The output leads with the policy name and three counts: must sign, signed and outstanding. Below that, each outstanding name is listed on its own line. Copy the list into a reminder email or read it out at a team meeting, then update the signed list as acknowledgments come in.
What you enter
- Policy name: the policy being acknowledged
- Who must sign: names separated by commas, semicolons or new lines
- Who has signed: names separated the same way
Worked example
For the example Information security policy, Avery Chen, Sam Okonkwo and Priya Shah must sign, and Avery Chen and Priya Shah have signed. The tracker shows Must sign: 3, Signed: 2, Outstanding: 1, and lists Sam Okonkwo as outstanding, the one name to chase before the policy is fully acknowledged.
How does the tracker find outstanding signatures?
Both name lists are split on commas, semicolons and new lines. Extra spaces are trimmed and duplicate names are removed. Matching ignores capitalization, so "priya shah" and "Priya Shah" count as the same person.
Outstanding = names on the must-sign list that do not appear on the signed list. Signed counts only people who are on both lists; a name that signed but was never on the must-sign list is ignored. The policy name is required before the counts appear.
Tips before you use the result
- Spell names the same way on both lists. Matching ignores capitalization but not spelling, so "Sam Okonkwo" and "Samuel Okonkwo" will not match.
- Paste the must-sign list straight from your HR system or distribution list to avoid missing new joiners.
- Keep the actual acknowledgments, such as signed forms or e-signature records, as your evidence; this tracker only compares lists.
- Run a separate tracker for each policy version so a new revision starts from zero signatures.
Frequently asked questions
How do I track who has acknowledged a company policy?
Keep two lists: everyone who must acknowledge the policy and everyone who has. Comparing the two lists gives you the outstanding names to chase. This tracker does that comparison for you, counts each group and lists the outstanding people, so the follow-up email can go out the same day.
Does name matching care about capitals or spacing?
It ignores capitalization and trims extra spaces, and it removes duplicates within each list. It does not correct spelling or match nicknames, so "Alex" and "Alexander" are treated as different people. Use the same name format as your employee directory on both lists.
Is this tracker a valid record of policy acceptance?
No. It compares two lists of names you typed and is not a signature system. Whether an acknowledgment is valid, and what records you must keep, depends on your policies and local law. Keep the original acknowledgments separately; this page is orientation, not legal advice.
Do I need an account to keep my lists?
No. The policy name and both lists are held in local storage in your browser, on your device only, and they are still there when you reopen the page. Clear wipes them, which is worth doing on a shared computer because the lists contain employee names.
More Law tools
Law guides on Kurums
Legal Writing in Plain English: Contracts, Memos and Briefs Your Business Will Actually Read
A Kurums Book Taste review of Legal Writing in Plain English for in-house counsel and legal team leads who need documents that executives, counterparties and judges understand on the first read.
Beyond Winning: The Harvard Playbook for Lawyers Who Negotiate Deals and Disputes
A Kurums Book Taste review of Beyond Winning for general counsel, in-house lawyers and deal leads who need negotiations that settle the matter without burning value, budgets or relationships.
US Midterm Elections on November 3, 2026 Put AI Data Centers on the Ballot: Notes for Law
Voters head to the polls on November 3, 2026 in U.S. midterm elections where AI data-center siting, power costs and regulation feature in multiple state and local contests. Legal teams should prepare for potential shifts in federal oversight and local permitting.
Meta Indefinitely Delays Commercial Terms Update, October 28, 2026: Notes for Legal and Marketing
Meta said on October 28, 2026, that it may delay its revised commercial terms beyond November 20 pending further consultation with publishers and industry groups.
AI-Washing and the Bubble Debate: A Disclosure Audit Guide After the SEC’s Warning
The SEC says it is watching corporate AI disclosures. Here is a five-step audit framework to inventory AI claims and build the evidence file.
SEC Enforcement Director Flags AI Corporate Disclosures, October 30, 2026: Notes for Law
On October 30, 2026, SEC Enforcement Director David Woodcock said the agency is monitoring AI corporate disclosures amid bubble concerns. Legal teams should reconcile AI claims with actual capabilities.
This tool is an orientation and checklist aid, not legal advice. Results depend on the figures you enter; check them against your own records before you rely on them. Last updated: October 2026 · Kurums editorial team.