Tool & guide

Delaware Statutory Trust Sponsors: Key-Person Dependency Worksheet

By Sequoia ResearchPublished Read as Markdown

Key-Person Dependency Worksheet

Users map critical functions to named people, backups, and documented succession arrangements. The output highlights functions with unverified continuity and produces targeted follow-up questions.

For an export, select Download in the tool, then Save file when it appears below. Your entries stay in your browser.

Author: Sequoia Research

What Is This Article About?

This guide explains a worksheet for mapping critical DST functions to people, backups, and continuity records. You enter what you know, leave gaps visible, and receive questions for further review. A fictional four-function example shows how one person can appear in several roles and how missing evidence can overlap. The tool organizes a research record; it does not rate a sponsor or prove that a succession plan will work.

Table of Contents

What the Key-Person Dependency Worksheet Does

The worksheet helps answer a practical question: if the person who handles an important task is unavailable, what does the record say happens next? You choose one to twenty functions. For each, enter the current person, any backup, the arrangement described, and its source. The tool then shows gaps and questions tied to each function.

It also groups matching person-and-organization labels across rows. This reveals when one person is primary for several functions, backup for several, or primary in one place and backup in another. These patterns may deserve discussion. They do not establish that the person is overworked, lacks skill, or cannot cover the duties.

There is no score, ranking, or pass certificate. A row can have no field-based flags and still require careful review. Naming a backup does not prove that the person agreed, has time, or can use the needed systems. A source reference does not prove that the source is correct or legally effective.

The worksheet runs within the page. It does not fetch documents, check registration, contact anyone, or verify a person. It does not store the work automatically. Use the JSON or text download to keep a copy before closing the page. Both formats preserve the entered facts and the questions produced from them.

Define the Sponsor and Offering Scope

Begin with a clear worksheet label and scope. Identify the sponsor entity and proposed offering, along with the work you are reviewing. A broad brand name may hide several firms with separate duties. If the scope covers only one reporting process, say so. The output should not appear to assess the whole business when the entries cover a small part.

Choose the review date. It cannot be later than today. The tool compares evidence-check dates and follow-up targets with that date. It does not treat the review date as the date a plan was adopted or tested. Put any such detail in the source reference or arrangement summary, using the actual record.

The label and scope lock after the first function is saved. They remain locked even if all function rows are later removed. This keeps old evidence from being carried into a newly named sponsor or offering by accident. To change the identity or scope, download the old review if needed and use Start new worksheet.

Choose the Critical Functions to Review

A function is a defined job, not a person or title. “Approve major repair spending” is more useful than “chief officer.” It states what needs to happen and lets you ask who has authority. Add a short explanation of why the function matters to this offering. That explanation appears beside the questions in the result.

Other possible functions include reviewing property reports, answering investor questions, or approving a manager change. These are examples, not a required list for every DST. Choose the work that matters under the actual structure. Ask the responsible parties and advisers whether another task belongs in the review or whether two tasks should be kept separate.

Use a distinct name for each function. The tool rejects names that differ only in letter case or spacing. This prevents one task from being counted twice by mistake. It does not detect every duplicate meaning. “Review monthly results” and “Check monthly reports” could overlap even though the labels differ, so read the list before relying on its counts.

A twenty-row limit keeps the worksheet manageable. It does not mean every sponsor has twenty critical functions or that twenty rows make a complete review. If the work requires separate maps, label their scopes clearly. Do not add the counts from overlapping maps and present the sum as a larger set of independent duties.

Record the Primary Person and Backup

For a known primary person, enter both the name and organization. If the person is unknown, leave both fields blank. The resulting flag asks who owns the function and with what authority. A blank should mean the information is missing from this record, not that the sponsor has no one doing the work.

Backup status has three choices: Unknown, No backup identified, and Named backup. Unknown means the question has not been settled in your record. No backup identified records the answer or finding you have so far. It does not prove that no informal or undisclosed coverage exists. A named backup requires a name and organization.

The tool rejects the same normalized name-and-organization pair as both primary and backup for one function. A person cannot provide a second-person backup to themselves in this map. Across separate functions, the same pair is allowed and appears in the shared-person review. That is useful for asking whether the duties could be covered together.

Keep Names Consistent Without Guessing Identity

Matching ignores letter case and repeated spaces. It preserves punctuation, suffixes, and organization names. “Alex Reed” at one firm and the same name at another remain separate labels. An initial and a full first name also remain separate. The software cannot determine whether they refer to the same human being.

Resolve aliases outside the tool, then use a consistent label where the evidence supports it. Keep the identity basis in your notes. Do not merge two people because their names look similar. Also avoid adding personal details that the task does not need. The map needs a work identity and role, not private health, family, or account information.

Distinguish a Reported Plan From a Document

Continuity evidence has three states. No arrangement recorded means no plan summary is entered. Reported arrangement means someone described a plan and you have a source for that statement. Document reference recorded means you entered a reference to a document. The last label does not say that the tool reviewed or approved the document.

A reported or document-based arrangement needs a summary, source reference, and checked date. The checked date cannot follow the worksheet's review date. Use the date you checked the evidence, not a guessed publication date. If a document has its own date or version, put that information in the source reference so another reviewer can locate it.

For an unrecorded arrangement, leave those evidence fields empty. Use Notes to describe what remains unknown. This prevents an unanswered item from looking like a documented plan simply because a few fields contain text. If you later obtain a plan, remove the old row and enter a new row with the full current record.

Keep the summary specific. What absence or event starts the handoff? Who takes over? Which work is included? Which approval or limit still applies? A sentence such as “the team has coverage” leaves too much open. The source may contain a useful answer, but the worksheet needs a clear reference and an accurate account of its scope.

Read the Flags and Shared-Person Map

The result counts functions with an unknown primary person, no named backup, no document reference, and a past follow-up target. These categories overlap. One row can appear in several counts. The separate “functions with one or more flags” count reports how many distinct functions have at least one flag from the entered fields.

A past target means the entered follow-up date is earlier than the review date. A target on the review date is not counted as past. The tool does not infer that a contract expired, a person failed a duty, or a plan became invalid. It asks what happened by the chosen target and what remains open.

The people map lists matching labels with multiple roles. It shows the function IDs for primary and backup work. Ask whether the person could cover those duties at the same time and who would cover that person. This is a prompt for practical review, not a mathematical limit on how many functions one person may handle.

Every function gets follow-up questions. Even a row with a document reference and two named people still gets a question about authority, access, training, and the handoff. That avoids turning complete form fields into a promise of operational continuity. Review the actual plan and the relevant contracts with the right people.

Work Through the Fictional Example

The example contains four functions for an invented sponsor and offering. Alex Reed, Sam Vale, Jordan Lee, the firms, and all source references are fictional. The review date is October 16, 2026. Use the example to learn the controls, then start a new worksheet before entering a real research record.

Function Primary Backup Evidence entered
F1: Approve major repair budget Alex Sam Document reference
F2: Review monthly property results Alex Sam Reported arrangement
F3: Handle investor reporting questions Jordan None identified No arrangement
F4: Authorize a replacement manager Unknown Unknown No arrangement

The result has one function with an unknown primary, two without a named backup, and three without a document reference. F2's follow-up target is October 15, one day before the review date, so it adds one past-target flag. Three distinct functions have flags. The four category counts add to seven because several issues sit in the same rows.

Two people appear in the multiple-role map. Alex is primary for F1 and F2. Sam is backup for both. The tool does not call either person a bottleneck or decide that the arrangement is weak. It asks whether Sam could take both jobs together and what would happen if Sam were also unavailable.

F1 has no field-based flags. It still needs review. The fictional source says a backup takes over after a defined absence, but the reviewer must check the actual trigger, limits, consent, and access. The example shows why “no flags” and “proven continuity” are different claims. No result gives the named people real authority.

Follow Up on Authority and Practical Access

A backup may be willing to help but lack a required approval or access right. Keep those questions separate. Who can authorize the action? Who can use the relevant system? Who has the current records? The answers may sit in different documents and with different people. A name in a plan does not settle them all.

Ask for the steps between the primary person's absence and the backup's first action. Who notices the need? Who contacts the backup? What information is handed over? What must be approved before work starts? This sequence can expose a gap that a simple organization chart would miss. It can also show where an existing process already supplies coverage.

FINRA's 2010 private-placement notice discusses reviewing management's background, expertise, and changes, as well as recording the investigation. Its scope is broker-dealer duties. This worksheet borrows no regulatory approval from that guidance and does not replace a firm's required work. FINRA Regulatory Notice 10-22

The later 2023 notice discusses reasonable investigation and new material developments. It also addresses checking issuer claims. That supports keeping evidence and dates clear in a professional review. It does not make every worksheet flag a legal violation or require this particular form. FINRA Regulatory Notice 23-08

Correct Records and Download the Review

Saved rows are fixed. To correct a person, arrangement, source, or date, remove the whole row and add a new one. Removal requires an on-page confirmation. Cancel keeps the row unchanged. Removing a row removes all its linked evidence and follow-up fields, so a new person's name cannot silently inherit another person's plan.

Save or clear an unfinished function before reviewing or removing saved rows. A failed save leaves prior rows unchanged. Changing an input clears the displayed result and disables export until the saved record is reviewed again. This prevents an old download from appearing to reflect new values. Clearing unsaved fields does not change saved rows.

The JSON download preserves the full structured record, counts, flags, people map, and questions. The text download puts the same research context into a readable format. Neither verifies the source references. There is no import or saved version history. If a change matters, keep the earlier download and label the new review clearly.

Start new worksheet and Load fictional example both require confirmation because they replace the current record and unsaved fields. Cancel preserves the work. Starting over unlocks the scope and label. The example replaces the page with invented data; it should never be shared as evidence about a real sponsor.

Use the Results Within a Broader Sponsor Review

This map addresses one part of sponsor research: the people and evidence attached to selected functions. It does not assess finances, property quality, fees, conflicts, or investment fit. A sponsor could have a detailed continuity plan and still present other risks. Keep the map's narrow conclusion beside the broader work rather than allowing one to stand in for the other.

The SEC's private-placement bulletin, updated September 21, 2026, explains that disclosure can be limited and investors need enough information to understand the purchase. An unanswered continuity question is an evidence gap. It should not be filled with a favorable assumption or treated as proof of misconduct. Record the response and discuss its significance with the appropriate adviser. SEC private-placement bulletin

Frequently Asked Questions

Does the worksheet rate a DST sponsor's succession plan?

No. It counts entered fields and produces questions. It does not test the plan, inspect contracts, or verify that people can act. A complete row is still a user-entered record that needs review.

Can the same person be a backup for several functions?

Yes. The tool permits this and shows the shared role. Ask whether the duties could arise together and whether the person has capacity and authority. It does not assign a safe maximum number of functions.

What does “No backup identified” mean?

It means this record does not identify a backup. It does not establish that the firm has no coverage. Preserve what was asked and answered in Notes, and seek a clear response through the appropriate channel.

Does a document reference mean the plan was verified?

No. The tool requires a summary, reference, and checked date, but it never opens the source. The reviewer still needs to assess the document's identity, scope, authority, and practical steps.

Why can the flag counts exceed the number of functions?

One function can have several gaps. The example has seven category flags across three affected functions. Use the distinct-function count when asking how many rows have an issue, and read each issue separately.

How do I correct a saved person's name or source?

Download the old result if needed, remove the row, and add a complete new row. Saved rows cannot be renamed or edited in place. This prevents a changed identity from retaining evidence attached to the prior entry.

Are my entries saved or sent to the sponsor?

No. They remain in the current page until you leave or reset it. Nothing is sent, and no reminder is scheduled. Download JSON or text to retain a copy and share it through your chosen process.

About Sequoia Research

Sequoia Research, LLC provides independent research on DSTs and other real estate investment offerings. This educational worksheet helps readers organize questions and evidence. It does not recommend an investment or determine a legal, tax, or regulatory outcome.

Sources

Sources checked October 16, 2026. All example names, functions, arrangements, and source references are fictional. The worksheet's fields and questions are original research aids, not a regulator-prescribed form or a verified assessment of any sponsor.