Our Analytical Approach

Every claim presents its own facts, circumstances, and unanswered questions. Our approach is designed to examine those questions systematically separating what is reported from what can be verified and what the evidence reasonably supports.

CAG applies disciplined investigative analysis without replacing the carrier's claims process, accessing internal systems, or making coverage decisions.

How We Approach The File

Understand the claim before drawing conclusions.

We begin by examining the information provided, the reported circumstances, supporting documentation, timelines, and identified areas of concern.

The objective is to understand the file as presented and determine where closer analysis may be warranted.

Review

1

2

Test material information against available evidence.

Relevant details are independently examined using appropriate public-source information, open-source intelligence, document analysis, metadata, and other available verification methods.

We distinguish between information that is reported, information that can be independently verified, and information that remains unresolved.

Verify

3

Look beyond individual facts to the relationships between them.

Verified information is evaluated alongside timelines, documentation, claim circumstances, and identified inconsistencies.

The analysis considers whether the available evidence supports the reported narrative, raises additional questions, or identifies areas requiring further clarification.

Analyze

4

Document

Preserve the reasoning behind the analysis.

Material findings, verification efforts, inconsistencies, limitations, and analytical observations are documented clearly and objectively.

Facts are separated from professional analysis so the reader can understand not only what was identified, but how the assessment was reached.

5

Turn investigative information into usable insight.

Our objective is not to create more information. It is to make the information that matters easier to understand.

Each assignment is designed to provide claims and SIU professionals with a clear, structured analytical perspective they can evaluate alongside the broader claim file.

Clarity

Evidence Leads the Analysis

CAG begins with questions, not conclusions.

Fraud indicators, inconsistencies, unusual documentation, or unresolved circumstances may justify closer examination, but they do not establish an outcome.

Our role is to follow the available evidence, test what can reasonably be verified, identify what remains unresolved, and document the resulting analysis without forcing the facts toward a predetermined conclusion.

Plausibility is not verification. Suspicion is not evidence.

Technology can accelerate research, organize information, identify patterns, and support investigative work. Experienced professional judgment remains central to every CAG analysis.

Evidence is evaluated in context. Inconsistencies are considered against the broader file. Alternative explanations are considered where appropriate. Analytical findings are developed through professional reasoning rather than relying solely on automated scoring, generated summaries, or predetermined models.

Technology can support the investigative process. The analytical judgment behind CAG's work remains accountable to experienced professionals.

Experienced Judgment at the Center

The Objective Clarity that strengthens the file.

A stronger investigative record is not necessarily the one containing the most information.

It is the one that clearly establishes what was reported, what was examined, what was verified, what remains unresolved, and how the evidence supports the analytical findings.

CAG brings those elements together through structured verification, experienced judgment, independent analysis, and clear documentation — providing a comprehensive investigative perspective when a claim demands a closer look.

That is the discipline behind every CAG assignment.