A statewide services directory, checked against its sources.
We helped a three-person nonprofit check 1,457 service listings against providers' own websites and delivered reviewed records with the evidence behind each decision.
- Nonprofit services
- Agent operations
The situation
The nonprofit runs a statewide directory of housing, employment, treatment and other services for people leaving incarceration. Someone using it may need to know whether a program will accept them, what documents to bring and how to apply. A correct address or phone number is only part of what makes a listing useful.
The directory contained 1,457 listings, many of which had not been edited in years. The three-person team needed to establish which information was still supported by the providers themselves. Some website links no longer worked, and others led to the wrong organization. Before the team could make reliable updates, it needed a way to check the details and reconnect listings to the right sources.
What we decided
We made the provider's own website the source for any new or corrected information. The evidence needed to describe the particular service and location in the listing. A parent organization's general description, for example, would not establish the entry requirements for a specific local program.
We used automation to gather and compare information. Every change to details affecting access to a service, such as eligibility or required documents, went to a person for review. We also recorded where a source could not establish an answer, keeping that information distinct from verified material.
What we built
We first tested the review process on a smaller set of listings and refined the rules for accepting information. We then applied the same rules across the full directory. For each listing, the system saved text from the provider's website, compared it with the existing record and attached the relevant evidence to its proposed decisions.
The review covered 54 types of information per listing, including eligibility, application requirements and service restrictions. Alongside the individual review of consequential changes, we checked samples across the results for unsupported updates and useful details the system had missed. When those checks found a problem, we corrected the review rule before continuing.
Broken or incorrect website links required their own investigation. We searched for the right provider, checked that the organization, program and location matched the listing, and recovered 135 official sources. We then assembled the reviewed records into a dataset for the nonprofit, with supported values, their evidence and separate follow-up needs. Every listing received a documented decision: use source-supported information, retain existing text, record an inaccessible website or exclude the listing. Older information was kept distinct from newly verified material.
What changed
The nonprofit received a completed review of the entire directory, including supported information for 1,244 listings and 8,959 individual details backed by official website evidence. Staff can trace those details to the provider's own pages. The remaining listings were accounted for through documented decisions about retaining information, inaccessible sources and exclusions.
The reviewed records give staff both usable information and a clear account of what each source established. Where the provider's website did not answer a question, the record identifies that question and the evidence checked. The work gave a small team a documented basis for maintaining a large directory and deciding when a direct conversation with a provider is needed.
Impact
- 1,457 service listings reviewed across 54 types of information
- Saved ~490 hours of first-pass manual review through directory verification and enrichment automation
- 8,959 individual details backed by official provider website evidence
- 135 missing or incorrect official website sources recovered
More of the work
A shared system for repeat client analysis.
Client information, instructions for recurring AI tasks and a history of completed work brought together for a consultancy's team.
Read the case studyA shared view of shipping delays and customer follow-up.
Store orders and parcel-tracking updates brought together for delivery reporting, delay review and customer email drafts requested by staff.
Read the case studyAgentic systems and automation
Agents that carry the routine steps of a workflow and stop for a named person at every judgment call, with the limits written down before anything gets built.
See the serviceStart withthe businessproblem.
Thirty minutes. You describe what's slow, manual, or opaque today. We tell you honestly whether we're the right firm to fix it.
30 minutes