Evidence ConfidenceStrong
Recent evidence and high completion support the result. Coverage is lower because some controls were described but not fully demonstrated.
Confidence Calculation
Five weighted checks
Response consistency · 30%82
Evidence coverage · 25%69
Completion · 15%97
Inter-rater consistency · 20%73
Evidence recency · 10%94
Participants
Six management respondents
- MDManaging Director
- FMFinance Manager
- DDDevelopment Director
- HSHead of Sales
- PMProject Delivery Manager
- OPOffice & People Manager
Evidence Reviewed
Documents and operating records
- ▤Business plan and acquisition papers
- ▤Management accounts and cash forecast
- ▤Project trackers and cost reports
- ▤Customer, pipeline and supplier records
- ▤Cyber, continuity and role information
Scoring MethodA governed score, with AI used only to support evidence handling
The assessment uses approved questions and fixed scoring rules. AI helps organise evidence and draft explanations. It cannot alter the score.
01Approved framework45 factors · up to 135 scored items
→02Deterministic scoreDesign 30% · Adoption 35% · Outcome 35%
AI cannot changequestions, answers, weights, maturity bands, risk rules or the final calculated score.
About this sampleMerit Developers Limited, its responses, evidence, scores and findings are fictional. This interface demonstrates the intended structure and presentation of a BHGI report. It is not an assessment of a real company.
