SAMPLE ASSESSMENT — modeled company, not a client
Meridian Pediatric Group 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.

Meridian Pediatric Group

Healthcare  ·  Assessment vs Validation  ·  every company here is fictional
Assessment · questionnaireNo overall score — self-reported44/44 answered · 0 documents · 17 capped at 6
Validation · documentsNo overall score — insufficient documents2 documents ingested

Where the answers and the notes diverge

Nothing flagged. This owner's answers and their own written notes agree throughout. The verification layer is silent here because there is nothing to verify against — which is what makes a flag worth reading on the companies that have one. No divergence is invented to fill this space.

Both complete reports are below, exactly as published — these frames load the same files the links above open, so nothing here can drift from the reports it shows.

The Assessment report, in full

Scored from the owner’s forty-four answers. No documents reviewed.

The Validation report, in full

Scored from the document set. Findings cite the file they came from.

What moves you from one to the other

Both tiers declined to publish a number for this company, and that is the whole point of the pair. The self-report was withheld because an answer cannot corroborate itself; the Validation run was withheld because 2 documents are not an evidence base either. Nothing here is broken — evidence is simply the only thing that produces a score, and there was not enough of it on either side.

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.