DARA methodology
DARA gives each reviewed document a Consistency Grade. It shows how closely the document aligns with the client brief, legislation and the other reference materials DARA successfully reviewed.
The grade helps you understand whether the document is broadly consistent, requires revision or contains issues that make it unsafe to rely on in its current form.
What the grade measures
Alignment between the reviewed document and the law, instructions and firm sources supplied for that review. Only validated findings affect the grade.
Review scope
DARA compares the document with the materials supplied for that review. The checks performed depend on the documents available.
How the grade is determined
Every review begins with a score of 100. Validated Hard Conflicts and Omissions deduct 10 points each; validated Soft Conflicts deduct 3 points each. The resulting score determines the grade.
A
90–100
Strong consistency
No significant conflicts or omissions were identified. Review any remaining minor findings before finalising the document.
B
80–89
Generally consistent
The document is broadly aligned with the supplied materials. A limited number of issues should be corrected before finalisation.
C
60–79
Material revisions required
Several findings affect the completeness or reliability of the document. The identified issues should be addressed before the document is relied on.
D
30–59
Substantial reliability concerns
The document contains serious conflicts or omissions requiring significant revision. Begin with the highest priority findings.
E
1–29
Severe reliability concerns
The document contains numerous or significant issues. It requires a comprehensive review before it can be relied on.
NR
0 or below
Not reliable in its current form
The findings are too serious or numerous for the document to be relied on in its present form. Start with the Hard Conflicts and highest priority Omissions, revise the document and run the review again.
Finding categories
Only validated consistency findings are included. Each independent root issue receives the category deduction below.
A statement in the document materially contradicts the client brief, legislation or another supplied reference.
For example, the document states that no licence is required when the supplied legislation establishes a licensing requirement.
The document fails to address a material issue required by the client’s question, the agreed scope or the supplied legal authorities.
For example, a memorandum explains a licensing process but does not address a mandatory capital requirement relevant to the client’s eligibility.
A statement is incomplete, unclear, inconsistently expressed or missing an important qualification, without directly contradicting a material source.
For example, the document uses different versions of the same defined term or states a correct principle too broadly.
Calculation principles
01
Only findings that pass Dara’s validation process affect the Consistency Grade. Findings that cannot be supported safely are not included in the customer-facing calculation.
02
The same underlying issue may appear in several parts of a document. Where several findings arise from one underlying problem, Dara groups them and applies one deduction while keeping every affected location visible within the finding.
Genuinely independent issues receive separate deductions. Five paragraphs using the same incorrect licensing threshold may be one Hard Conflict affecting five locations; five unrelated errors about different legal requirements are five separate findings.
03
Dara continues reviewing the document after the calculated score reaches zero so the user still receives all validated findings and can correct the entire document.
When the calculated score is zero or below, Dara displays NR instead of a numerical score. NR means the number or seriousness of the findings makes the document unreliable in its current form; it does not mean that every statement is incorrect.
04
The Consistency Grade depends on the materials Dara successfully processes. A result may be complete, qualified or withheld depending on whether every material source was available for review.
Complete
All material documents were reviewed successfully, so Dara can issue a complete grade.
Qualified
Part of a source could not be processed. Dara may qualify the result and explain the limitation.
Withheld
A principal document, client brief or necessary legal authority could not be processed. Dara may withhold the grade and ask for the affected document to be replaced or uploaded again.
05
After addressing the findings, select Reanalyse. Dara reviews the revised document against the supplied materials and issues an updated Consistency Grade.
Resolved findings should no longer reduce the grade unless the underlying issue remains elsewhere in the document.
Professional judgment remains essential
The grade is based on the documents and reference materials DARA successfully processed during the review.
It does not certify that a document is legally accurate, complete or suitable for every purpose. DARA supports legal review and does not replace professional legal judgment.
Every document should be reviewed by a qualified lawyer before it is finalised or relied on.
