Public consultation analyzer

Buyer

Policy teams handling public consultations

Problem

Large submission volumes hide distinct minority perspectives.

Format

Evidence-backed analysis and reporting workspace

Also fits

Operations; Writers; Science and Research

USP

Auditable synthesis that retains disagreement and source traceability.

The product

Key screens: Submission themes, evidence explorer, review log. Open with a compact overview and filters for the relevant period or segment. Let users drill from each theme or metric into underlying records. Keep source definitions and missing-data notes near the result. Use an action panel to assign investigations and record what was learned. In this product, the first view is submission themes, followed by evidence explorer and review log.

Core functionality

1. Classify responses.
2. Preserve minority views.
3. Detect duplicates.
4. Link quoted evidence.
5. Distinguish frequency from importance.
6. Export transparent summaries.

Customer workflow

Agree definitions, import authorized data, validate coverage and identifiers, compute transparent measures, group relevant evidence, review findings, assign investigations or improvements, and repeat on a comparable period. Start with authorized submissions and consultation questions and finish with consultation evidence report.

AI and human review

Classify text, summarize evidence and propose explanations to investigate. Compute financial or operational measures with deterministic code. Separate observed patterns from causal claims and preserve examples that contradict the summary.

What the customer puts in

Authorized submissions and consultation questions

What the customer gets

Consultation evidence report

Accounts and administration

Dataset permissions, field mappings, metric definitions, source drill-down, saved filters, reviewer annotations, recurring reports and action ownership.

MVP scope

Begin with policy teams handling public consultations and one recurring use case. Build the first two modules: classify responses; preserve minority views. Provide operator assistance for the third module: detect duplicates. Deliver consultation evidence report through a manual review queue. Perform other necessary full-scope functions manually during the pilot. Include all applicable access, accuracy and professional-review controls from the start.

After the MVP is validated

After paid pilots establish value, automate the remaining modules: link quoted evidence; distinguish frequency from importance; export transparent summaries. Add one validated source integration, reusable customer configuration and recurring delivery. Expand to additional teams, document formats or languages only after testing the new scope.

Build dependencies

Stable identifiers, consistent metric definitions, deterministic calculations, source lineage and representative review samples. Poor coverage must remain visible.

Integrations and data access

Official publications, agency document stores and approved service workflows. Read-only business data exports, reporting databases and task trackers. Reconcile source totals before scheduling recurring data refreshes. These are candidate integration categories, not verified supported connectors.

Defensibility

Domain-specific definitions, trusted source mappings and a history connecting findings to actions and observed results. For this idea, build around auditable synthesis that retains disagreement and source traceability. This advantage requires execution and accumulated customer trust; the base model alone is not a defensible asset.

Alternatives and positioning

Analysts, business intelligence dashboards, spreadsheets and general text summarization tools. Differentiate on this specific proposed advantage: auditable synthesis that retains disagreement and source traceability. Test it against the buyer's current method on the same task. Competitor coverage and uniqueness have not been established.

Revenue model and test pricing

Test USD 500-2,000 for an initial analysis of one bounded dataset. Offer USD 250-1,000 monthly for repeat reporting at agreed volume. Data cleanup and specialist analysis are separately priced. These are test ranges.

Main delivery costs

Data preparation, reconciliation, classification, expert interpretation, customer-specific definitions and recurring reporting support.

Marketing message to test

Public consultation analyzer for policy teams handling public consultations. Auditable synthesis that retains disagreement and source traceability. Demonstrate the claim through an analysis of a published historical consultation.

Acquisition channels

Public-sector research consultancies

Lead magnet

An analysis of a published historical consultation

The first 30 days of marketing

1. Week 1: interview five prospective buyers in this segment: policy teams handling public consultations. Ask to see a recent example of the problem and their current process.
2. Week 2: prepare this demonstration using authorized or synthetic material: an analysis of a published historical consultation.
3. Week 3: present it through public-sector research consultancies and seek one narrowly scoped paid pilot.
4. Week 4: review reviewer agreement, evidence coverage, total delivery effort and a concrete renewal decision before increasing scope.

Paid pilot and validation

Analyze one historical period and review findings with the responsible domain owner. Reconcile headline measures, inspect counterexamples and ask the buyer to choose a concrete follow-up action. For this idea, use authorized submissions and consultation questions and evaluate consultation evidence report. Agree success thresholds with the buyer before starting; collect a baseline for reviewer agreement, evidence coverage. A positive signal is payment and repeat use with acceptable quality and delivery cost, not a favorable demo reaction alone.

Success metrics

Reviewer agreement, evidence coverage

Retention and expansion

Repeat the same definitions each reporting period and track whether findings lead to useful action. Expand data sources without breaking historical comparability.

Operating controls and limitations

Preserve official source versions, accessibility and audit records. Confirm agency-specific procurement, records and data handling requirements during discovery. Validate source access and reviewer availability during the pilot. Maintain customer-level access, data deletion controls and a record of final approvals.

Investment indication

What it would take to build, from a first MVP to the full product. A planning range to start the conversation, not a quote. Running costs (model usage, hosting, reviewer hours) come on top.

Brand style (concept)