Provide the actual revised arrangement for review before starting work in reliance on the old description. Identify who will control the work and whether the deliverable changed.
Reassess the placement on current facts
Have any implications for the petition or admission process assessed individually. An approaching client deadline does not resolve the third-party restrictions. Keep contracts and supporting descriptions consistent with the work that is actually planned.
A statement of work drafted for commercial purposes typically says nothing about supervision, and a client's standard terms may even assert day-to-day direction over contractor personnel, which is exactly what the petition must disprove. At an unaffiliated site, document that the petitioner directs the worker and that the arrangement is not labour-for-hire. Document the petitioner's actual control through concrete practices, such as who conducts performance reviews, who assigns and schedules the work, and who supplies the tools or equipment the employee uses. Separate any feedback channel the client uses to raise business requirements from genuine day-to-day supervisory authority, since the two are easy to blur in practice even when the underlying arrangement is sound. Ask the client for a short written acknowledgment confirming that operational direction remains with the petitioner even though the client sets commercial requirements, since that kind of confirmation is more persuasive than the petitioner's own description alone. Keep these records current as the arrangement continues, not only at the point of filing, since supervision that drifts toward the client's control over time can undermine a case that was accurate when it was first prepared.