The deliverable
A Claim Readiness Assessment
A written, dated working file that says which of your claims survive review, which do not, and exactly what is missing from the ones that do not. It is built by a named human against the public rules, and it is yours to forward to a retailer, a regulator or counsel.
What’s in it
Section titles are the report’s own — this table is generated from the same section map the report and the PDF are built from, so it cannot describe something the engine does not produce.
| Section | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Claim Passport | The decision on one page: readiness, the publish call, and the verification hash. This is what leadership reads. |
| Three Conclusions | The three things that actually decide the outcome, stated before any evidence detail, in the order they matter. |
| Current Publish Decision | Publish, hold, or publish with qualification — for the exact wording assessed, in the markets assessed. |
| What You Cannot Support | The claims you cannot currently make, named. The section most buyers say they needed first. |
| Fastest Route Forward | The shortest path from the current position to a defensible claim — not everything possible, the fastest thing. |
| Remediation Board | Every gap as a tracked item: what is missing, who provides it, and its priority. A work list, not a lament. |
| Evidence X-Ray | Every criterion, its evidence state, what you submitted, and the limitation on it. The layer counsel and retailer reviewers read. |
| Source Ledger | Every source relied on, with its date and its status. If a finding is challenged, this is what answers it. |
Eighteen sections in total, across two tiers — an executive decision that is complete on its own, and the evidence record behind it. The eight above are the ones buyers name when asked what they read first.
See a real one
Public sample · flexible packaging
“100% recyclable”
A complete assessment of a real claim, generated live by the production engine every time the page loads — not a screenshot, not a mock-up, and not the flattering example. It reaches HOLD: the claim as written does not survive review, and the report says so in full. That is what a neutral finding looks like.
Read the sample assessment Download the PDF
No email, no form, no account. An ungated sample is the signal.
Scope
Three shapes an engagement takes. They are not price tiers — there are none. No two claim sets are the same, so every scope is priced on what it actually contains. What drives the quote →
Single claim
One claim, one product, the markets you name. Everything above is delivered for that claim. The usual starting point when artwork is already in motion.
Quoted in writing
Product line
Several products sharing evidence — the same certificate or footprint answering the same question across SKUs. Shared evidence is assessed once and carried, which is where a line costs less than the sum of its claims.
Quoted in writing
Full range
Every claim across the range, with the evidence map maintained as products and rules change. Usually an ongoing programme rather than a one-off assessment.
Quoted in writing
Every scope is quoted in writing, all-in, with your calendar delivery date confirmed in it — and no payment is requested until you approve it.
What we don’t do
Every line here is a commitment already made elsewhere on this site. None of it is new, and none of it is negotiable in a scope.
- We are not a certification bodyNo mark, no seal, no certificate. An assessment tells you whether your claim would survive scrutiny; it does not confer anything on the product.
- We do not issue legal adviceThis is decision support. No attorney–client relationship is created, and the report says so on its own face.
- We do not test materialsNo laboratory, no compostability trial, no fluorine screen. We read the test reports you already have and tell you what they do and do not cover.
- We do not write your LCAWhere a footprint or comparative LCA is the missing evidence, the report names the standard it has to meet and who can produce it.
- We do not sell the verdictThe result never depends on who paid. If the claim does not hold, the report says so — the public sample deliberately shows an unfavourable finding.
- We decline work we cannot do wellSome claim families require an independent specialist before reliance, and some we do not currently accept at all. The scope matrix is public.
Every paid assessment is founder-led: Abhishek Singh, PhD — a materials and packaging scientist — applies Evisentra's published rubric to your evidence and is named in your report as the reviewer. On request, Evisentra arranges a named, conflict-checked independent specialist opinion — identity, scope, fee, and delivery date confirmed in writing before any payment. You may also bring your own expert; Evisentra coordinates. The full scope matrix is public →
Check one claim. Decide about us after.
No account. No payment until you approve a written scope.