Nexus Evaluation
Evaluate Nexus on One of Your Cases
An evaluation tests one recurring question from the first record to a reviewed finding. The scope, cost, and duration are agreed in writing before access begins.
What We Agree Before Access
Ten items go into the written agreement. Each one removes a way for an evaluation to end without an answer.
The Question
One recurring question, with its subject and the decision it supports.
Authorized Sources
The source packet and provider access you are permitted to use, and what the evaluation includes.
Your Current Process
How the work is done today, so the comparison is against a real alternative.
Investigator and Reviewer
The person who works the case and a second person who reads the finding.
Scope and Configuration
The Nexus configuration, the enrichment and data the case needs, and any Scout search or monitoring.
Costs
The fee or an explicit waiver, how any subscription is treated, and provider charges.
Assistance
What DigitalStakeout does, what your team does, and where services begin.
Output
The finding or report the reviewer needs to see.
Duration
Start and end dates and the review meeting. No standard length is assumed.
The Decision
Who decides, and the three outcomes: buy, extend for one named question, or stop.
How the Result Is Judged
The review compares the result with the criteria your team set. It records practical improvement separately from readiness to buy.
A second small case or a later wave of evidence shows how much of the first result came from preparation. Time savings are not claimed from comparing a rehearsed demonstration with an unfamiliar process.
- The required research can be performed within the agreed source access and scope.
- Relevant source context reaches the case accurately through the supported process.
- The case keeps candidate identities and allegations apart from supported relationships.
- The investigator can inspect and respond to a proposed correction through the product controls.
- The reviewer can find the basis for the significant findings without rebuilding the investigation.
- A monitoring brief identifies meaningful follow-up where it applies. No monitoring needed is an acceptable result.
- Effort, provider charges and remaining manual work are recorded.
- No material error identified in the review remains in the accepted output.
The Decision Memo
Your sponsor receives a memo built from what was observed. It covers the decision, the job tested and the improvement seen. It also states what stayed manual, the full cost and a recommendation.
Buy
The workflow improved the recurring job enough to justify the full cost.
Extend
One named question still needs testing before a decision.
Stop
The current approach is sufficient, or a requirement was not met.
Evaluation Questions
Start With One Recurring Question
Tell us the question, the sources you need, and who reviews the finding. We will say whether an evaluation makes sense.