Clear about what the evidence shows—and what it does not.

Evidence you can stand behind

When a decision depends on a report, proposal, strategy, public claim, or funding case, you need to know where the record is strong and where it is not. Jim helps leaders trace important claims to their sources, test the reasoning, and make unresolved limits visible before the work reaches a board, funder, regulator, partner, or the public.

(Talk with Jim)

When the claim matters

The biggest problems are often ordinary ones: a source no one can reopen, a claim that grew stronger with each revision, or a review process that left important questions unasked. Any of these can undermine a funding decision, policy position, partnership, public statement, or implementation plan. The Evidence Integrity Process separates the work of finding sources, verifying them, interpreting them, and approving the final conclusion, so another qualified reviewer can follow the reasoning and see where judgment or uncertainty remains.

A practical first step

Evidence Integrity Diagnostic

Two-week engagement; fees start at $15,000.

We review one existing report, proposal, strategy, public claim, or funding case, along with the process behind it. The goal is to find unsupported or overstated conclusions, missing or inaccessible evidence, traceability gaps, and weaknesses in review before they affect the decision.

What you receive

  • A clear scope and evidence cutoff
  • A claim-to-source review
  • A practical inventory of gaps, failures, exceptions, and open questions
  • A prioritized repair plan
  • An executive readout and discussion

The final scope and fee depend on the number of reports, source volume, systems involved, and any expert review the work requires.

If you need a repeatable process

Build it into the work

Jim can adapt the evidence ledger, source rules, review gates, operating procedures, templates, and training to fit your team.

Keep the process honest

Ongoing support can include source audits, independent review, adjudication, and release checks. When possible, the reviewer is someone other than the person who made the claim; conflicts and practical limits are documented.

Train a team

Training and organization-wide use are scoped around the team and its systems. Formal certification is not offered and would be considered only after independent validation.

How it works

Agree on the question, scope, and evidence cutoff.
Decide what counts as evidence.
Separate the source record from interpretation.
Review important claims and resolve disagreements.
Release conclusions with limits and open questions visible.

Who it is for

This work is for leaders whose reports, proposals, strategies, or funding cases must hold up before boards, funders, regulators, partners, or the public.

Health and public-health organizations
Public-benefit and policy organizations
Foundations and philanthropic organizations
Research and evaluation teams

What this work can—and cannot—do

The process is designed to reduce unsupported, overstated, or irreproducible findings, but no review can guarantee that every relevant source or every error will be found. Each engagement states what is in scope, when the evidence record closes, what access and expert review are available, and how far the conclusions can reasonably go. Pine Lake Policy Group provides evidence review and decision support—not legal, investment, patent, clinical, or other regulated professional advice.

Start with one piece of work

Bring one important claim, report, or funding case

Choose the report, proposal, strategy, public claim, or funding case that matters most right now, along with the decision it needs to support. The diagnostic will show what the evidence can support, what needs repair, and what should happen next.

(Contact Jim)