Customer records with the gaps filled

Opted-in Australian consumer records: around 20 million current profiles, drawn from a universe of roughly 2 billion records covering an estimated 85% of the Australian consumer population.

Every appended field carries its source and the date it was last verified. That provenance is not decoration: a mobile number confirmed last month and one last seen in 2019 warrant different levels of confidence, and a record that does not distinguish them invites you to treat both as current.

The fields decisions and contact attempts depend on:

• Mobile number — appended and connectivity checked
• Email address — appended and deliverability checked
• Address — GNAF-verified current
• Demographics — age band and household context

Appended contact details are validated as part of the same run, which is the point most enrichment services skip. Appending a phone number that turns out to be disconnected has filled a gap in the record without making the customer any more reachable.

Matching runs on multiple keys (name, address, date of birth and existing contact points), and an append only happens above a confidence threshold.

Ambiguous matches are returned for review, not applied. This is the more conservative choice and the right one, because a wrong append is considerably worse than a gap left unfilled.

A missing phone number is a known unknown: staff can see the field is empty and act accordingly. A wrong phone number looks exactly like a right one, and it will be used to contact someone about another person's account. That turns a data quality issue into a privacy incident.

Only opted-in records are used for appends, and the opt-in status travels with the field instead of being stripped on the way in.

That means an enriched record tells you not just what the contact point is but what you are permitted to do with it. Records washed against the Do Not Call Register are flagged before you contact them.

The distinction matters because enrichment is often run for service reasons (reaching a customer about arrears or a change to their account) and the resulting fields must not silently become a marketing list. Preserving consent state per field is what keeps those two uses separate.

Both, and most clients do both.

The usual pattern is an initial full-file enrichment to close the accumulated gaps, then monthly or quarterly runs to keep pace with people moving house and changing numbers. Field mapping is configured once and reused for every subsequent run.

Scheduling is what stops the problem reappearing. Contact data decays continuously, so a file enriched once and then left alone will have drifted materially within a year or two.

Yes, and where it fits, it is the better option. The API enriches a single record in real time.

This is most useful in call centres and on web forms, where a partial record can be completed while the customer is still present and, crucially, where anything uncertain can simply be confirmed with them directly. An append validated by the customer in the moment is stronger evidence than any probabilistic match.

Enhance Record Plus and the phone, email and address endpoints handle per-record enrichment. Caspar covers individual records that need a closer look, with address history, contact points and household context in one view.

CSV and the common delimited formats, uploaded through Insiight or delivered by SFTP.

Results return in your original layout with a field-by-field report of what was appended and where it came from, so the file loads back into the source system without a transformation step.

Field mapping is set once and reused for every run, which means a recurring enrichment needs no configuration after the first one.