Every engagement follows the same structure: a FREE initial evaluation, a scoped written agreement, and independent execution. The process is deliberate. It protects your time, our judgment, and the integrity of the science we deliver.
Every engagement begins with a FREE evaluation. We are selective: we only accept projects we believe can be completed to publication standard, in our areas of methodological expertise.
To request an evaluation, you provide:
You receive, within approximately two weeks: a written evaluation report. If we believe the project is salvageable, the report is accompanied by a proposal — scope, timeline, price, and authorship terms. If we decline, the report explains why, and what we believe would be required to complete the work elsewhere.
The evaluation is genuinely free, and a decline is not a failure. An honest assessment of what a project requires has value of its own.
If the evaluation results in a proposal, we discuss the work together — your priorities, target journal or venue, constraints, and any aspects of the project that need particular care. We then deliver a written engagement agreement.
The agreement includes:
Authorship is handled here, in writing, before execution begins. We do not take on engagements where authorship has not been agreed in advance.
Once the agreement is signed, execution proceeds independently. We do the analytical work required to produce the agreed deliverable — typically a submission-ready manuscript with reproducible code, data, and figures.
Depending on the project, this may include:
During execution: we do not run review-and-revise cycles with the PI. Consultation is limited to specific predefined questions — domain knowledge unique to the project, decisions about which claims the PI is prepared to defend, and permission to contact original collaborators where required. The final manuscript is delivered for sign-off when complete.
This boundary is what allows us to deliver work on time, at the agreed price, and with analytical integrity.
Selectivity at the front, not the back. A free evaluation lets us decline projects that cannot be completed before money changes hands. It is better for everyone to know early.
Independent re-implementation. Inheriting legacy analysis code creates two problems: it costs more time to debug than to rewrite, and it blurs responsibility for analytical decisions. We work from the data forward, building an analysis we can fully defend. Your original code remains yours; ours is independently reproducible.
No revision cycles during execution. Open-ended consultation is how research projects stall in the first place. By agreeing scope in writing and working independently within it, we deliver a finished manuscript on a predictable timeline — and you receive an analysis that has not been pre-shaped to expectation.
Have a project that may be a fit?
jdong@boundaryconditions.net