Typical Technical Evidence
What problems were found?
- Scanner output
- Issue counts
- Technical recommendations
- Developer-facing detail
- Possible remediation proposal
Refer a founder who is about to be trusted with somebody else's money.
Trust Before Ship gives investors a bounded evidence record of the identified build, the positive findings located, the obligations that failed or remain unverified, and the limits of the examination.
We do not decide whether a startup will succeed. We help determine whether the supplied software evidence supports the technical milestone being claimed.
And when the evidence does not support the milestone, the brief says so— including “insufficient evidence to decide.”
Automated tools and specialist reviewers can provide valuable technical evidence. Trust Before Ship applies those evidence sources to a different decision: whether the identified software and declared examination support an investor’s stage-gate assessment.
AI-assisted development can produce visible progress very quickly. The unresolved question is whether the current software actually supports the milestone described to the investor.
Features may appear complete while critical logic, failure paths or controls remain absent or unverified.
Late defect discovery can require investigation, rework, regression testing and additional verification.
Inefficient model calls, retries, infrastructure and architectural decisions may weaken future economics.
The investor may not know which build was examined, what was excluded or which claims remain unsupported.
The proposed capital-gate model applies at four possible checkpoints. It is pending investor validation and has not yet been used in an investment engagement.
Establish the identifiable build, supplied scope, technology inventory, major findings and material unknowns.
Compare the stated milestone with the identified build, located findings, failed or unverified obligations, supplied evidence and declared coverage.
Identify material trust blockers, unresolved conditions and technical areas that require additional evidence.
Compare the revised build with the original baseline: fixed, still open, newly introduced and unverified.
We report located, reproducible findings. Absence of a finding is not evidence of absence; areas outside the stated scope are marked unverified, never passed.
A concise investor-facing decision record supported by a deeper evidence register for technical review.
Whether the identified build supports the claimed milestone within the declared scope.
Failed, gap and unverified results for the technical obligations agreed for examination, together with any positive evidence that can be stated on a bounded, per-instance basis.
Where the most material security, reliability, maintainability and business-logic risks appear.
A bounded range for investigation, repair and retesting effort. Trust Before Ship does not perform or quote for the remediation work identified.
What was not supplied, could not be examined or remains outside the assurance claim.
The technical conditions that may need to be met before the next stage or tranche.
The example below illustrates the format. It is not a rating of any actual startup or investment.
The examination located material findings and failed obligations. Any capital-release decision should account for the stated remediation conditions and the areas that remain unverified.
Trust Before Ship does not assess the full viability of the company and does not recommend whether an investor should invest.
Trust Before Ship does not perform or quote for the remediation work it identifies. That preserves independence — we have nothing to gain from the length of the list — and it deliberately gives up repair revenue.
Independent technical evidence to support investment review and portfolio conversations.
A consistent evidence layer across investment and portfolio-review checkpoints.
Cohort or milestone assurance before demo day, follow-on introductions or programme completion.
Technical stage-gate evidence across internally developed or externally built applications.
No code or confidential investment material is required for the first conversation. We begin by clarifying the milestone, decision, available evidence and appropriate review boundary.
No source code, confidential investment documents or portfolio-company credentials are required at this stage. We begin by clarifying the milestone, decision and appropriate evidence boundary.
Two fields: your name, and who we should speak to. We will take it from there.