Methodology

Evidence status is part of the record—not hidden in the prose

This method is intended to reduce false certainty. A source saying that something exists is not the same as a competent person seeing and assessing it on site.

Professional reviewing evidence and project documents in a site office.Controlled pilot scope

What the workflow is intended to deliver

01

Provenance at fact level

02

Conflict and gap detection

03

Targeted verification

04

Controlled human decision

The working sequence

A bounded, reviewable journey

Each stage leaves a record that can be checked. Where the information is unknown or a competent assessment is required, the workflow should say so.

01

Document-evidenced

A supplied source supports the fact at a recorded location.

02

User-confirmed

An identified person explicitly confirms the fact.

03

Site observation

A person records what they observed; AI never fabricates this status.

04

AI suggestion

A proposed interpretation or control awaits human confirmation.

05

Unknown

The fact remains open and requires assessment.

Evidence carried forward

What should remain traceable

The record is useful only when the source, version and human decision remain connected.

  • Source identifier
  • Location or page
  • Capture method
  • Fact status
  • Reviewer decision

Important boundaries

Assistance without false assurance

  • SiteHQ supports a controlled process; it does not approve or certify construction safety.
  • The customer remains responsible for project facts, suitability, competent-person review and approval before use.
  • AI-assisted drafts may be incomplete or wrong and must not be treated as physical site observations.

One controlled founding pilot

One contractor. One active project. A supervised first journey.

£195 + VAT per month · two-month minimum · manual invoice · no automatic renewal.

Discuss fit with SiteHQ