A DAT provider agreement should reach the Board with more than a headline fee.

Board / Audit Committee

• Is the provider's role comparable to the peers being cited?
• What cash, equity, warrant, milestone or success-fee economics sit outside the headline rate?
• Are there related-party, ownership or Board relationships that affect comparability?
• How long is the mandate and what rights survive a change in provider?
• What public outcomes exist for renegotiation, internalization or termination?

CFO / Finance

• What exact denominator drives the recurring fee?
• What has actually accrued or been paid in the latest reporting period?
• How does the target dollar exposure change at different treasury sizes?
• What minimums, expenses, success fees, warrants or equity grants sit outside AUM?
• What is the earliest ordinary exit path and disclosed economic consequence?

Before approval or amendment

Freeze the current agreement, normalize same-role peers and identify terms that cannot be understood from the fee percentage alone.

Before a recurring-fee or related-party review

Update the public comparator set, verify realized fees and separate factual relationship evidence from fairness or fiduciary conclusions.

Before renegotiation, internalization or exit

Map notice, cause, acceleration, liquidated damages, surviving rights and public realized outcomes before the decision becomes urgent.

When the original exhibit may be stale

Reconstruct original agreement → amendments / restatements → current filing → termination / replacement so a superseded contract is not benchmarked as current.

Decision evidence

• 1-page decision evidence summary
• Current contract / amendment ledger
• 5–7 verified primary comparables
• Fee and denominator normalization
• Term, renewal and exit map

Control evidence

• Equity / warrant / success-fee economics
• Related-party and governance facts where public
• Relevant realized outcomes
• Unknowns and non-comparability notes
• Primary-source ledger for material claims