Research-only, neutral assessment. A financial relationship does not by itself establish wrongdoing. Record verified facts, disclosures, competing explanations and gaps. No account, backend or automatic saving. Do not enter confidential or personal information.

1. Decision under review

Organization or project

Decision or contract being reviewed

Decision date (if known)

Reviewer label (no personal identifiers)

Intended beneficiaries and expected improvementAlternatives considered and selection criteria

2. Financial and decision relationships

Record one relationship at a time. Use neutral labels, factual descriptions, and traceable references. Do not infer motives.

Relationship category

Parties or roles (avoid private identities)

Amount or financial arrangement (if documented)

Documentation status

Documented facts or specific unanswered question

Evidence reference / document identifier

Source date (if known)

Alternative explanations, safeguards, or limitations

Recorded relationships and evidence

No records yet.

3. Incentive–outcome alignment

Compare how money flows with the outcomes the decision was intended to improve. An observation is not a finding of improper influence.

What activities or results trigger payment?

What verified outcomes were achieved?

Outcome metrics, period and evidence

Unresolved questions and additional records needed

4. Evidence verification and records-to-request

Classify what has actually been checked. A citation or uploaded reference is not automatically verified. The checklist identifies follow-up work, not wrongdoing.

Relationship record

Verification status

Verification method and reviewer notes

Specific record to request

Prioritized follow-up checklist

5. Funding and influence map

An exploratory map of reviewer-entered relationships, not a determination of influence or misconduct. A directional arrow is shown only when you explicitly enter roles separated by → or ->. Otherwise, the map shows a record card without asserting direction.

Solid line: documented / disclosedDashed line: potential, reported, unknown, or not identifiedSelect a node or relationship to inspect its evidence

GOAT OF THE MOAT

Decision Integrity Review · Provisional factual record · Not a determination of misconduct

Neutral decision integrity report

This report records the reviewer's statements and references; it does not independently verify them. A potential conflict is not a finding of corruption, improper motive, or unethical conduct. No GOAT OF THE MOAT index points are added or deducted.

Local-only working session. Export JSON before closing this tab; browser printing is used for PDF. No authentication or server-side storage.