Sample work
See what an assessment makes clearer.
The sample below illustrates the Reporting Clarity Assessment. Northstar Advisory is fictional and is not an ORGA client. Its records demonstrate the deliverables without implying customer results.
INSIDE AN ASSESSMENT · SYNTHETIC EXAMPLE
One report. A $15,000 difference explained.
A fictional agency’s monthly report counts an invoice twice and omits a credit. Inspect the records and see how each check changes the result.
Start with the evidence
| Row | Invoice | Project | Amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | INV-101 | P-10 | $18,000 |
| 02 | INV-102 | P-20 | $12,000 |
| 03 | INV-103 | P-30 | $9,000 |
| 04 | INV-102Repeated ID | P-20 | $12,000 |
Separate credit export: CR-103 reduces INV-103 by $3,000.
Inspect the measure definition
Measure: net invoiced amount for the selected period. Sum distinct invoice IDs in August 2026 and subtract approved credit notes linked to those invoices; exclude tax.
This is an operational invoicing measure. It does not establish cash collected or accounting revenue. Date treatment and approval rules require the client’s finance owner to agree.
TRY THE REVIEW STEPS
- Raw export total
- $51,000
- Repeated invoice removed
- −$12,000
- Credit applied
- −$3,000
An explained reporting difference is not recovered revenue or a customer result.
Check invoice IDs before joining exports, include approved credits, and assign an owner to confirm the reporting-period rule.
The source map, agreed definition, reconciliation findings, and an ordered action plan. Unresolved questions stay visible.
All records are invented for this example. This illustrates the method and deliverable; it is not an ORGA client engagement, live integration, or guarantee of findings.
A possible later engagement
Explore the larger application model.
A custom application is outside the assessment scope and requires a separate agreement. In this fictional example, change roles and select a measure to inspect the definition, sources, and calculation.
Strategy in view.
The commitments, measures, and decisions leadership owns.
Where a later implementation could lead.
Illustrative starting point
Leaders reconcile separate spreadsheets, dashboards, definitions, slide decks, and meeting notes. The same measure can change meaning between teams, and the reasons behind decisions disappear into email or memory.
Possible implementation
An agreed implementation could connect priorities, measure definitions, source data, role-specific views, reporting, and decision records. The assessment identifies what is worth building first.
What this proves—and what it does not.
The sample assessment demonstrates the format of the findings. The larger demo shows an inspectable interface with composite measures calculated consistently across roles.
It does not claim a paying customer, production deployment, certification, savings, adoption result, or live AI connection. All facts and decisions shown here are illustrative.
Production integrations, a new application, ongoing monitoring, and correcting every discrepancy are outside the assessment scope.
Reporting Clarity Assessment
Start with one report worth getting right.
$1,500 fixed fee. One report · up to three source exports · up to three key measures. Agree the fit and scope before payment.