When you hire someone to manage Facebook page content, the handover should make it clear which posts are written, which images belong with them, which versions are approved, and where each post has appeared. Agree on four outputs for every post:

  • Complete copy: the opening, main message, and a suitable call to action, exactly as intended for publication.
  • Accompanying images: usable image files that match the copy, with a clear basis for using them.
  • The approved version: the exact text-and-image combination, its approver, and any outstanding changes.
  • Schedule and publication record: the planned date and time, actual status, and the live post link once published.

This lets you check the work even if you do not write the posts yourself. The sections below cover what to agree before hiring, a complete sample handover, and checks at each stage.

Agree on scope before comparing quotes

“Facebook page management” can mean many things. State whether you are commissioning copywriting, image preparation, and ordinary Facebook posts. That is also the scope of Mạch's Facebook content service. Paid advertising, inbox coverage, comment moderation, video, and seeding are not included.

Ask questions tied to the deliverables you will receive:

  • What does one post include? Text alone, or finished images and publication too? Agree on the number of images for any carousel or image series.
  • Which Facebook page is it for? Record the correct page URL, topic, and audience. Website content is a separate scope to agree.
  • Who prepares the images? Will the provider create suitable visuals or work with business-supplied material? If a photo must show the actual product, who supplies and verifies it?
  • Who approves and who publishes? Choose one person to consolidate feedback, identify the final approver, and assign publication.
  • What counts as complete? Delivery of copy and images, approval, or publication and a final check? Specify how volume is counted, how postponed posts are treated, and how pending work is recorded.

The same number of posts can represent very different outputs. If publishing is included, check what evidence of publication you receive. If you hire only a writer, someone else must own images, approval, and the schedule.

Prepare source material and identify who checks the facts

A writer can organize information, find the right wording, and suggest an angle. Business-specific facts still need confirmation from an authorized person. A concise brief should cover four areas:

  • Verified information: product or service names, relevant features, and prices and conditions if mentioned. Identify the reference and responsible person; omit irrelevant fields.
  • Image material: which images show the actual product, which are illustrations, their sources, and permitted uses. Check permission before publishing customer- or partner-supplied images.
  • Brand voice: forms of address, consistent terminology, things to avoid, and approved posts as references.
  • Approval contacts: the person who verifies business facts, the final approver, and when feedback is available. One person can fill several roles if responsibility is clear.

A beautiful image does not verify a product's material, dimensions, durability, or function. Mark unsupported details “awaiting verification,” narrow the content, or reschedule. Do not invent prices, promotions, stock availability, or product promises to make a post look finished.

Also agree whether the handover includes publication-ready exports or editable design files. They serve different purposes. Delivery of source files and reuse rights should be clear before work begins.

A complete handover for one Facebook post

Fictional example created by Mạch Nội Dung: Lá Giấy is an imaginary stationery shop. Post LG-FB-01 features a cream bookmark with a green leaf design beside an open book. The shop, product, approvals, and schedule below are fictional. The image was generated with GPT for illustration; it is not a photograph of stock for sale or a client record. The actual sample remains a draft and has not been scheduled or published on Facebook.

Card 1: Copy for LG-FB-01

  • Purpose: suggest a use for the bookmark and ask about readers' design preferences.
  • Copy version: C02.
  • Information used: cream coloring, green leaf design, and marking a reading place. No price, specifications, offer, or stock claim.

Complete caption:

A bookmark for a pause between pages.

A cream background and green leaves add a quiet detail beside your open book. Slip the bookmark into the page where you stop, ready to find your place next time.

Do you prefer a bookmark with small leaves or one striking leafy branch?

Deliver the caption in full so the approver sees precisely what would appear. The closing question asks about preference; it does not establish that the shop stocks two designs.

Card 2: The image paired with caption C02

  • Image version: A02; delivered filename: bai-mau-bookmark.webp.
  • Image brief: a cream bookmark with a green leafy branch beside an open book. Show the entire bookmark and design clearly, with an uncluttered composition and warm tones. No price, logo, or promotional text.
  • Purpose: show the design described in the caption and the bookmark in use.
  • Checks: color, shape, and design match the caption, and the key detail remains visible on a phone.
Illustration of a cream bookmark with a green leafy branch beside an open book.
A cream bookmark with a green leafy branch beside an open book. In sample LG-FB-01, image A02 is paired with copy C02 for handover review.

For a real product post, replace the illustration with imagery that accurately represents the item and check the copy against confirmed facts. A brief establishes the direction; if image preparation is part of the commission, you must also receive the finished file to review and use.

Card 3: The final package and approval record

  • Package ID: LG-FB-01-R02, containing caption C02 and image A02.
  • Fictional approver: the owner of Lá Giấy.
  • Illustrative approval record: “R02 approved,” at 16:00 on 6 October 2026, Vietnam time (UTC+7).
  • Sample approval wording: “I approve LG-FB-01-R02, comprising caption C02 and image A02, for publication on the Lá Giấy Facebook page at 09:00 on 7 October 2026, Vietnam time (UTC+7).”

R02 ties the text and image together. If A02 is replaced or the caption changes after approval, update the version and obtain confirmation of the changes before publishing. A standalone “looks good” is difficult to interpret when a conversation contains several versions.

Card 4: Planned schedule and actual status

  • Sample destination: the Lá Giấy Facebook page; its URL is blank because the brand is fictional.
  • Illustrative publishing time: 09:00 on 7 October 2026, Vietnam time (UTC+7). This simply fills the sample; it is not a best-time-to-post recommendation.
  • Responsible role: content publisher.
  • Package to use: LG-FB-01-R02, containing C02 and A02.
  • Actual status: illustrative draft; not scheduled in a publishing tool and not published.
  • Actual publication time: blank.
  • Live post URL: blank; no public post exists.

For real work, enter the correct Facebook page URL, owner, and agreed time. Once the post appears, open and check it before adding the URL and changing its status. A time written in a calendar does not prove that a post is scheduled or live.

Check the work at each stage

When receiving material for approval

Open the text and image together, compare them with the original brief, and check observable details:

  • Right question and audience: does it meet the agreed purpose, or could the generic introduction fit any brand?
  • Correct facts: do names, prices, conditions, links, and text within images match confirmed sources?
  • Consistent copy and images: does the image show what the caption describes? Is it the correct product and version?
  • Readable on mobile: is the text easy to follow, is important imagery cropped out, and is any text in the image legible?
  • Usable files and clear rights: can the image file be opened, is its source known, and are required permissions resolved?

Make feedback specific. “Image A02 shows the old price; replace it with the price confirmed in the new document” is more actionable than “the image isn't right.” Distinguish a failure to meet the brief from a new request, and agree on handling and timing before proceeding.

Before publishing or scheduling

The publisher needs the correct approved package, exact Facebook page URL, date, time, and timezone. Recheck caption links. If anything changes after approval, label the old version as not for use so it is not selected from a folder or calendar.

If facts or approval are missing, keep the item pending and explain the gap. An agreed schedule does not replace content approval. Agree on late or rescheduled posts rather than publishing an unfinished version.

After publication

Open the live post through its direct link. Check the page, copy, images, image order where relevant, and links. Record the actual publication time and any discrepancies to fix. Screenshots may add context; the URL lets the recipient reopen the post for comparison.

For a post that is only scheduled, use “Scheduled” and leave the public URL blank until it exists. Record a publishing failure or postponement accurately with the next step. Do not label every state “Done.”

Reconcile the work using evidence-based statuses

At handover, give each post ID one clear status so the recipient knows what remains open:

  • Content accepted: copy and images meet the brief, with an approved version ID.
  • Revision needed: specify the issue, affected file, owner, and agreed recheck point.
  • Awaiting input or approval: identify the gap and who must supply or confirm it.
  • Scheduled: record the actual scheduled time and content package entered in the tool.
  • Published and checked: include the real publication time, working URL, and comparison with the approved version.

Writing and images may be complete while publication is pending. The point at which work is counted or paid for follows the original agreement. Accurate statuses prevent unfinished, unapproved, or unpublished work from being mistaken for a completed post.

Keep the handover in one shared location with appropriate access. At the end of the engagement, recipients should be able to open the content, in-scope image files, and post-link list without hunting through multiple conversations.

Assess performance after checking delivery

Acceptance asks whether the provider delivered the agreed work and quality. Performance review asks whether the content helped readers understand, respond, or take the intended action.

With suitable data access, both parties can review metrics tied to the post's purpose, recording the source and period. Leave unavailable figures blank. Do not attribute every message or order that day to the new post without evidence.

A post with little response may warrant a different angle or presentation next time. That is separate from identifiable delivery errors such as the wrong image, missing agreed information, or an unapproved version. Keeping the two distinct makes feedback more precise and prevents likes from becoming the only acceptance criterion.

A good handover leaves a clear record from brief to published post. For writing, image preparation, and Facebook publishing on an agreed schedule, see Mạch Nội Dung's Facebook content service.