SAMPLE ASSESSMENT — modeled company, not a client

Helix Health Technologies is a modeled business created to demonstrate this assessment. Both sides of this comparison are synthetic: the owner's answers were authored to demonstrate the questionnaire, and the source documents behind the Validation column were generated to a spec. Both are scored by the same engine, against the same criteria used for real engagements — so the method is real and the company is not. Nothing here describes an actual business, and this is not a case study of client work.

Helix Health Technologies

Technology / MSP · Assessment vs Validation · every company here is fictional

Full Assessment report →Full Validation report →See the full side-by-side →All samples →

Assessment · questionnaireNo overall score — self-reported44/44 answered · 0 documents · 19 capped at 6

Validation · documents5.8/10 verified11 documents ingested · 8-domain blend

Where the answers and the notes diverge 5

Every row below is computed from the owner's own submission: the answer they selected, the phrase in their own note that sits against it, and the record that would settle which is right. None of it is written by us, and none of it is an accusation.

cq_03answered 10/10

Owner reportedYes — signed, current, and reviewed for change-of-control terms

…but their own note said“Standard MSA on all new logos. A couple of the 2019 accounts are handshake renewals.”matched: handshake

Self-reported transferability answer and the owner's description may not align — confirm executed agreements carry assignment terms.

Settled by sample_customer_contract, customer_contract_set

owr_03answered 10/10

Owner reportedIt runs without me — someone else already makes the calls

…but their own note said“The team runs the day-to-day. Anything client-facing they still check with me — I am on every renewal call and I sign off on every scope change.”matched: check with me

Self-reported owner-independence answer and the owner's description may not align — confirm decision authority is documented below the owner.

Settled by org_chart, management_bios, succession_plan

fr_02answered 8/10

Owner reportedModest add-backs — owner comp to market, a clear one-time item or two — all documented

…but their own note said“Add-backs are my above-market salary and the 2023 conference spend. A few are paid in cash and I have not itemised them.”matched: paid in cash

Self-reported add-back answer and the owner's description may not align — confirm against an itemised add-back schedule and the filed tax return.

Settled by add_back_schedule, tax_returns_3yr, gl_export

lc_04answered 8/10

Owner reportedThe entity owns the core; minor gaps in registration or assignment

…but their own note said“We own the platform. A contractor built the reporting module in 2020 and there is no assignment agreement I can find.”matched: no assignment agreement

Self-reported IP-ownership answer and the owner's description may not align — confirm assignments place ownership with the entity.

Settled by ip_assignment_agreements, systems_access_ownership_inventory

tm_01answered 8/10

Owner reportedYes, with one or two things still on a personal login

…but their own note said“Mostly on company accounts, though the AWS root is still under my login.”matched: my login

Self-reported systems-ownership answer and the owner's description may not align — confirm credentials are entity-held and transferable.

Settled by systems_access_ownership_inventory, technology_stack_list

The eight domains, both ways

The Assessment column is what the owner reported and how urgently it reads for them. The Validation column is what the documents support. Where Validation is blank, the evidence did not reach the threshold to score it.

Domain	Reported	Owner’s priority	Verified
Diligence Risk	5.7	High	5.3/10
Owner Risk	6.0	Moderate	5.0/10
Customer Quality	8.2	Low	6.8/10
Operational Scalability	7.2	Moderate	4.5/10
Financial Readiness	7.8	Moderate	6.2/10
Legal & Regulatory Compliance	8.2	Low	6.5/10
Technology & Systems Maturity	6.9	Moderate	5.5/10
Human Capital	5.8	High	5.7/10

What moves you from one to the other

The Assessment names what to work on from what the owner reported. Validation substantiates each of those against the documents — 11 of them here — scopes the remediation to what the records actually show, and computes the valuation gap from real EBITDA. That is how 5.8/10 came to be a number worth quoting rather than an assertion.

Severity below is calculated from what you reported, not from what your scores were held to. A criterion answered strongly is treated as strong here even where the score was capped for want of a document — the cap is a statement about evidence, not about your business.

Validation verifies each of these against your documents, scopes the remediation to what your records actually show, and computes your valuation gap from your real EBITDA — the substantiation and the figures a self-reported assessment cannot produce. Engagement pricing comes out of a scoping conversation, once there is a document set to scope against.