Methodology
How we work, and what we will not do.
The standard predates the marketing. Editorial discipline runs through every stage of the work, from the discovery call to the delivered document.
The starting frame
Most prospect research can be summarized: it answers what is true. The harder work, and the work that decides outcomes in transformational philanthropy, is judging what matters. The Discretion Standard is the gate that runs through every stage. A finding that is true but not relevant, not respectful, not actionable, or not defensible does not enter the deliverable.
The five tests appear in full at /about.
How a Brief is produced.
Each Brief begins with a discovery brief from the institution. Stage of the relationship, what the conversation is for, what the team already knows, what is missing, and the room the document will be read in.
Research follows. Public filings, regulatory disclosures, philanthropic databases, regional press, peer benchmarks, and network-confirmed intelligence are gathered, dated, and sourced separately from any interpretation. Confirmed fact is one column. Inference is another.
Synthesis is the editorial act. Findings are selected against the Discretion Standard, ordered for the room, and shaped into a document that names the moment, the alignment, the posture, and the recommended next move. Adjectives are earned. Confidence is named. What is unknown is named.
Review is human. A senior advisor reads every line of every Brief. The five tests are applied finding by finding. Anything that fails returns to research or is removed.
Delivery is paper-first. The Brief is set in the editorial format, numbered, and prepared for the named reader. The conversation that follows is part of the engagement.
What sources we use, and what we do not
The source list is editorial, not exhaustive. The discipline is in selection.
- SEC filings and regulatory disclosures
- Property records and county assessor data
- Foundation 990s and grantmaking history
- Philanthropic databases of public record
- Regional and trade press of credible standing
- Public corporate filings and proxies
- Court records of public matter
- Board and trustee disclosures
- Peer institution benchmarks
- Network-confirmed intelligence with consent
What we do not use
- Purchased wealth-screening scores
- Scraped social media profiles
- Undisclosed third-party data brokers
- Predictive scoring without basis
- Information shared in confidence by other institutions
Judgment supported by tooling
Tooling supports the work. It does not replace the work. We use modern systems for source aggregation, citation tracking, dating, and consistency review. We use them because the alternative is slower and lower-quality, not because the brand is technology.
No Brief and no Signal alert ships without a senior advisor reading every line. Tooling cannot apply the Discretion Standard. Judgment is the deliverable. The system is invisible.
We do not describe vendors, models, or pipeline architecture in client materials. The brand is the standard, not the stack.
How Signal coverage is built.
Coverage begins with a watchlist drawn from the institution’s portfolio at principal-gift altitude. Names, households, foundations, and operating entities are scoped, dated, and routed.
Nineteen vectors are scanned across credible public sources on a continuous cadence. Volume is the easy part. Selection is the discipline.
Each candidate alert is held against the Discretion Standard before it ships. The relevance test is the most active gate: does this change posture, timing, or preparation? If the answer is no, the alert does not send.
Routing is named. Each alert states who needs to know, and what the next move is. A Signal alert is a sentence about a person, not a notification about an event.
The five tests, in operation
A worked example. A candidate finding emerges during research on a hypothetical donor. It moves through the five tests in order. The verdict is the deliverable.
Candidate finding: “Donor M.’s spouse was photographed at a recovery event for a chronic illness.”
Sourced.
The image is from a public social account, attributable. The chronic-illness association is the donor’s spouse, not the donor.
Relevant.
The finding does not change capacity, timing, posture, or preparation. The conversation we are advising on does not require it.
Respectful.
The donor would not want this written. The spouse is not the principal of the relationship. The frame turns a private health matter into intelligence.
Actionable.
No recommended next move follows. There is no posture, timing, or routing the team would change in response.
Defensible.
The finding fails respectful and actionable. It speculates about a family health matter that does not change the work.
Verdict: the finding does not enter the deliverable. The override holds. The relationship matters more than the research.
What we will not do
A short list of refusals. The relationship matters more than the research.
We do not surveil donors.
We do not predict capacity from social posts.
We do not speculate about health, marriage, or family dynamics.
We do not score donors against a proprietary index.
We do not build prospect lists.
We do not write what would not hold up if the donor were in the room.
Review and approval
A senior advisor approves every Brief and every block of Signal coverage before it ships. For each new client, the founders read every Brief in the first ten engagements and the first month of Signal coverage in full. The standard is held by reading the work, not by reviewing a checklist.
Where a finding cannot be defended, the override is the same: the relationship matters more than the research.
Begin a conversation.
If your team is evaluating Benefactor Intelligence, the methodology is the strongest place to start.
Request a sample Brief