This is a complete Verify report, reproduced in full, so you can see exactly what a commissioning organisation receives.
One of three sample reports. This one reaches CLEAR.
This sample is provided solely to demonstrate the structure and assessment treatment of a Verify report. It does not concern a real commission and must not be presented as evidence of an assessment carried out for an actual person or organisation.
| Report reference | INTEGRI-VFY-2026-0003 |
| Report version | 1.0 |
| Assessment date | 14 May 2026 |
| Assessment period | 15 May 2021 to 14 May 2026 |
| Commissioning organisation | Stanebridge group selection panel |
| Subject | Priya Okafor |
| Role or appointment | Prospective councillor, Elmfield Ward, Stanebridge Unitary Authority |
| Agreed scope | Publicly accessible material relevant to candidacy for election as a councillor |
| Report reliance period | 12 August 2026, being 90 days after issue, in accordance with Terms section 3 |
| Overall conclusion | CLEAR |
This report assesses publicly accessible material relating to Priya Okafor within the agreed scope and the assessment period of 15 May 2021 to 14 May 2026. One finding is recorded, classified LOW.
The subject maintains a professional presence on LinkedIn, which is the source of the single finding. The public Companies House record for Meridian HR Consultancy Ltd was reviewed and did not give rise to a reportable finding.
The overall conclusion is CLEAR.
| Ref | Finding | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| F01 | Dismissive framing in a post about a named national organisation | LOW |
Commission scope. The commission was to assess publicly accessible material bearing on the subject's exposure to scrutiny as a prospective councillor for Elmfield Ward, Stanebridge Unitary Authority. The subject is a director of a private company, and the public record of that company falls within scope where it is relevant to the role sought.
Assessment period. The standard assessment period applies: the five years ending on the assessment date, being 15 May 2021 to 14 May 2026. No extension was agreed and none was required. Material outside that period was not routinely searched for or assessed merely because it may be discoverable.
Source boundary. The assessment considered publicly accessible material within the agreed scope and assessment period, including relevant social media, press and news sources, public records and publicly available official material. Private, restricted or credential protected sources were not accessed.
Third party approaches. Verify does not involve contacting third parties to obtain information about the person assessed.
Assessment basis. Each reportable finding is assessed for material relevance to the agreed role and scope. Where a relevant external governance or legal framework genuinely applies, it is identified. The absence of an external framework reference does not by itself exclude a finding where the report states a clear role specific assessment basis.
| Significance | LOW |
|---|---|
| Source | Subject's LinkedIn profile |
| Date of material | 17 January 2024 |
Finding. On 17 January 2024 the subject published a post on LinkedIn commenting on a report by a national business organisation on flexible working practices, describing it as 'yet another example of out-of-touch thinking from an organisation that clearly hasn't spoken to an actual employee in years.' The post received 43 likes and 12 comments, predominantly supportive.
Assessment. The substance of the comment is unexceptional and the organisation criticised is an institution rather than an individual. The finding is recorded for context only, because the framing is marginally below the measured register expected of an elected representative commenting publicly on a named organisation. It does not by itself indicate substantial governance or reputational risk and no action follows from it.
Assessment basis. Role specific relevance only. No external framework applies.
No material reputational risk was identified within the agreed scope as at the assessment date.
One finding is recorded, classified LOW and included for context. A CLEAR conclusion is an assessment of the material examined within the agreed scope and assessment period. It is not a statement about the subject, and it is not a guarantee that no relevant material exists or that none will later emerge.
No client considerations arise. The single finding is classified LOW and is recorded for context only.
| Ref | Source | Public date | Accessed | Used for |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S01 | Subject's LinkedIn profile | 17 January 2024 | 14 May 2026 | F01 |
| S02 | Companies House public record, Meridian HR Consultancy Ltd | Public record | 14 May 2026 | Executive summary |
This report is an advisory reputational due diligence assessment of publicly accessible material within the agreed scope and assessment period. It does not constitute legal advice, a judicial or regulatory finding of fact, a compliance certification, a determination of suitability or fitness, or a recommendation for or against selection, appointment, disciplinary action or removal. The commissioning organisation retains responsibility for its own due diligence, human judgement and final decision, and must not rely on this report as the sole basis for that decision.
This report is issued subject to the Integri Terms of Service, including the liability provisions at clause 8. Nothing in this report excludes or limits any liability that cannot lawfully be excluded or limited.
| Issued | 14 May 2026 |
| Report reference | INTEGRI-VFY-2026-0003 |
| Report version | 1.0 |
| Authorised by | Integri Limited |
| Status | Issued Verify report |
This report has been prepared by Integri Limited on a politically neutral basis.
Integri Limited | 124 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX | ICO Registered ZC029967 | Illustrative sample, fictional subject