VERSION 1.0
Research Methodology
Check Their Integrity (“CTI”) helps consumers make more informed decisions when hiring businesses and contractors. Each Report follows a consistent research framework intended to promote fairness, transparency, and careful editorial judgment.
No methodology can eliminate uncertainty or predict future performance. A Report should be used alongside interviews, references, licensing and insurance verification, contracts, and other appropriate due diligence.
1. Core principles
Independence
Businesses cannot purchase favorable findings, suppress unfavorable findings, or influence assessments through advertising, sponsorship, referrals, or payment.
Consistency
Each Report uses the same core research categories, with coverage adapted to the Business, jurisdiction, and information reasonably available.
Accuracy
We seek to represent reliable information accurately as it appeared when research was performed.
Transparency
Reports explain material findings, identify sources when practical, and disclose important limitations or unavailable information.
Fairness
Historical events may remain relevant, but verified dismissals, satisfactions, corrections, or other resolutions are included when reasonably appropriate.
2. Research coverage
Subject to jurisdiction, relevance, and availability, CTI evaluates these categories:
- Business identity and registration
- Owners, principals, and relevant related-business history
- Licensing and professional credentials
- Civil litigation
- Judgments, liens, collections, and bankruptcy
- Regulatory actions and sanctions
- Local permits or jurisdiction-specific filings
- Public news and business web presence
Not every jurisdiction maintains equivalent records. A category may therefore be marked reviewed, limited, unavailable, or not applicable. Not every Report will contain a finding from every category.
3. Sources
Depending on the Business and jurisdiction, sources may include Secretary of State filings, professional and contractor licensing agencies, civil courts, bankruptcy courts, judgment and lien records, regulatory and sanctions databases, local permit systems, government databases, Business websites, and reliable public news reporting.
Reviews, social media, customer statements, forums, anonymous allegations, private messages, hearsay, and unverifiable screenshots may guide further research, but they do not support a concern finding unless the relevant information is independently verified through a reliable source.
4. Identity verification
Before substantive research, CTI attempts to identify the intended Business using reasonably available identifiers such as its legal and trade names, location, website, telephone number, registration, and licensing information. CTI may request clarification or decline an order when the Business cannot be reliably identified.
5. Owners and principals
CTI may consider documented and verifiable public information about an owner, principal, or related business when it is materially relevant to operating the Business or to the risk of entrusting money or work to it. CTI excludes unrelated personal matters, protected characteristics, and information prohibited by law.
6. Evaluating findings
CTI applies editorial judgment rather than a numerical score. Relevant factors include:
- Severity: the practical significance of the matter.
- Recency: recent events generally receive more weight than older events.
- Frequency: repeated similar events may indicate a pattern.
- Resolution: pending and unresolved matters generally raise more concern than verified dismissals, satisfactions, or resolutions.
- Relevance: the connection between the information and the Business or the customer’s contemplated decision.
No factor has a fixed weight, and examples do not guarantee a particular assessment.
7. Concern assessments
No concern identified
No significant public concern was identified in the research performed. This does not mean the Business is risk-free or guarantee future performance.
Notable
One or more matters may warrant additional questions or verification before proceeding.
Elevated concern
Multiple concerns or a notable concern may materially increase project risk, making further due diligence especially important.
Significant concern
Serious public indicators may substantially increase legal, financial, operational, or reputational risk.
Assessments are editorial opinions, not declarations that a Business or person is honest, dishonest, competent, or incompetent.
8. Information changes
A Report is a snapshot. Licenses may change, cases may be dismissed, judgments may be satisfied, ownership may change, and new matters may arise. A Report should not be treated as permanently current.
9. Corrections
Businesses and Customers may request correction of factual inaccuracies using the process in the Terms of Service. CTI distinguishes verified factual corrections from disagreements with editorial judgment. A correction may result in an updated or supplemental Report; disagreement alone does not require a change.
10. Methodology changes
CTI may update this methodology to improve consistency and clarity, incorporate reliable sources, or respond to legal and operational changes. Revisions apply prospectively and do not automatically cause earlier Reports to be reissued. Reports identify the methodology version used when that information was recorded.
11. Limitations
CTI cannot guarantee that every relevant record will be located, every database will be available or complete, every record will be accurate, every jurisdiction will offer equivalent information, or any Business will perform satisfactorily. The purpose is to improve decisions, not eliminate uncertainty.
12. Our commitment
We do not accept payment to alter findings or remove accurate public information because it is unfavorable. We strive to correct verified factual errors. Our goal is not to label a Business “good” or “bad,” but to present reliable information consistently so customers can make better-informed decisions.