What's on it
Four numbers, each one designed to resist being misread as good news.
Control effectiveness, honestly scored
The strongest control in place for each open hazard, scored by where it sits on the hierarchy of controls, then averaged across every open hazard, not just the ones you've fixed. A hazard with nothing in place scores zero and still pulls the average down.
High-priority risks, defined by a formula
Open entries scored by likelihood x severity x exposure x (1 minus controls / 5), so a hazard has to be both likely and severe, not just one, to surface here.
Emerging patterns, flagged automatically
Near-identical concerns raised more than once within a rolling 30-day window are clustered and surfaced as a signal, before they'd otherwise be noticed as a pattern.
Where your controls actually sit
A breakdown of every implemented control by hierarchy tier, so leadership can see how much of the response is structural versus how much is policy and training.
Why it's different
Most dashboards are built to reassure. This one is built to be right.
A couple of well-controlled hazards sitting next to a pile of unaddressed ones should read as weak, not strong. Most dashboards average that into something comfortable. PsychProof deliberately doesn't.
What most dashboards do
- A single health score, easy to read as reassurance
- Survey completion rate as the headline metric
- No visibility into what kind of controls are actually in place
- Patterns only noticed if someone happens to spot them
What PsychProof does
- A score designed to look bad when hazards sit unaddressed
- Control effectiveness, not survey completion, as the headline
- A tier breakdown showing structural versus administrative controls
- AI-flagged patterns surfaced automatically, before someone has to notice