Methodology

We do the groundwork. You do the judgment.

Six steps turn a raw, high-volume coparenting record into a de-identified, source-linked, professional-review-ready package. Below: what happens at each step, why, and — just as important — an honest account of what the step cannot claim.

The pipeline

Six steps, in this order.

Each step takes a defined thing in and hands a defined thing on. Select a step to open it: what it is given, what it produces, and what it does not claim.

Select a step below. Arrow keys move between steps.
Texts App logs Email ONE RECORD
Diagram — three source types, one working record.
STEP 01

Intake

Texts, co-parenting-app logs, and email are collected from the sources counsel provides and normalized into a single working record, preserving each entry's original sender, timestamp, and platform.

What comes out of this step is not a deliverable on its own. It is the one working record every later step reads from, which is why the three facts that let a reader place an entry — who wrote it, when, and on what platform — are carried forward from the beginning rather than reconstructed at the end.

Goes inMessage exports, app logs, and email threads, in the formats counsel provides
Comes outOne working record; each entry keeps its original sender, timestamp, and platform
The same six steps, as a table

What each step is given, produces, and does not claim.

The third column is the page's own language, unchanged. The row for the step you have open is marked.

Read left to right: the input a step receives, the artifact it hands on, and the limit that travels with it.
StepWhat goes inWhat comes outWhat this step does not claim
01Intake Message exports, app logs, and email threads, in the formats counsel provides One working record; each entry keeps its original sender, timestamp, and platform Intake normalizes those formats — scanned images and screenshots are not machine-read; we refuse to guess at text rather than present a guess as a source record, so those are handled with you directly.
02De-identify The working record from step 01 The same record, with consistent opaque tokens standing in for identities De-identification is thorough, not infallible — a human review pass remains part of every delivery.
03Chronologize The de-identified working record A verbatim, timestamp-ordered chronology, each line bound to its source record Each line binds back to its exact source record — nothing is summarized or paraphrased at this layer.
04Hash-seal The chronology and the source records behind it A fingerprint per source record, a manifest, and one fingerprint over the bundle Independent verification against deliberate alteration requires comparing that bundle fingerprint to a copy held outside the package; we will provide it on request.
05Bates-number The source-linked chronology Numbered exhibits, an index, and topics surfaced for human review Literal-term recall surfaces likely-relevant entries; it is not an exhaustive review and does not replace counsel reading the full chronology.
06Deliver The finished package and its manifest Delivered through the Professional Portal, in a space set up for that matter Two-factor sign-in and per-matter isolation are configured on our ShareFile account; we have not yet completed our own end-to-end verification of those settings, so we describe them as configured rather than proven — see Security for exactly how far we have taken it.

The record is normalized, tagged, and structured by established natural-language-processing components that organize and label it for human review. None of their output is published as a score, rating, or assessment of a person, and none of it appears in a deliverable as a finding.

Honest limits

What the Pyra Report is not.

The Pyra Report makes no determinations, scores, risk ratings, or parenting assessments, and it does not rank a parent. It organizes the record — it does not adjudicate it.

0
scores, risk ratings, or credibility assessments produced
FRE 107
illustrative aid — not a certified summary under FRE 1006
Counsel
determines admissibility, relevance, and use — Pyra does not

Outputs are litigation-support work product, not evidence, legal advice, or a custody recommendation. Literal-term recall surfaces likely-relevant entries for human review; it does not certify that every relevant entry has been found, and it is never a substitute for counsel reading the full record.

FRE 901FRE 902(13)–(14)FRE 107Wis. Stat. §907.02
Illustrative walkthrough

A matter, start to finish (synthetic example — not a real case)

"2,953 messages across five years, two apps, and one email thread — organized into a single chronology, every line hash-bound to its source, delivered before the pretrial conference." Illustrative composite, built from synthetic data for demonstration only.

A matter like this typically arrives as a mix of exported app logs and forwarded email threads. Intake normalizes those formats — scanned images and screenshots are not machine-read; we refuse to guess at text rather than present a guess as a source record, so those are handled with you directly. De-identification runs before anything is chronologized, and the finished Record, Dashboard, and Exhibit set are delivered through the Portal, in a space set up for that matter; as above, those Portal settings are configured rather than independently verified by us. See the full package →

A few common questions
Is the Pyra Report admissible in court?
Admissibility is counsel's determination, not Pyra's. The Report is built as an FRE-107 illustrative aid with authentication data (FRE 901/902) attached to support counsel's own foundation — it is not offered as a certified FRE 1006 summary or as evidence in itself.
How is the data de-identified?
Names and identifying details are replaced with consistent opaque tokens before the record is chronologized. A human review pass is part of every delivery — see Security & data protection for the full picture.
Does Pyra score or rate either parent?
No. The Report and Dashboard are descriptive only — counts, timing, and structure, shown symmetrically for both parents. There are no scores, risk ratings, or parenting assessments anywhere in the deliverable.
What happens to the raw source files afterward?
Source files you send are held in the matter's own space in the Professional Portal and are used only to build that matter's package; they are never emailed and never used for anything else. Retention is set in your engagement terms — tell us how long you need us to hold the source material and when you want it destroyed, and we will confirm it in writing. See the Professional Portal and Security for access detail; retention is set in your engagement terms and we will confirm it in writing.
Read the full FAQ →

Ready to see what's inside?