An RFE evidence map needs more than a list of exhibits. Every row should have an acceptance test that another reviewer can reproduce.
Start with one narrow factual claim. Then record:
Claim under review: the exact fact the response needs to establish
Source and locator: the exhibit, page, paragraph, timestamp, or public record
Acceptance test: what the reviewer must confirm from that source
Result: pass, partial, stale, contradictory, or missing
Limit and owner: what remains unsupported and who owns the next check
The result field matters. A source can be relevant and still provide only partial support. Keeping that limit visible is stronger than writing a complete-sounding summary around it.
For a second review, give the reviewer only the officer finding and the cited source first. Ask whether the proof statement still holds without the surrounding narrative. If it does not, narrow the claim or find better support before drafting expands around it.
Final-merits inferences need a separate test from the underlying fact. A verified achievement does not automatically establish field-wide significance. Evidence organization can expose that gap; qualified immigration counsel should own the legal conclusion and response strategy.
This is an evidence-organization method, not legal advice or an approval prediction.