Read it before you rely on it.

The planned membership model would ask people to pay for a work product before seeing one. That is a bad trade to offer, so the samples are simply published. If the work is not good enough to be judged on, it is not good enough to sell.

Sample answers

Two published answers showing the format and the source density. Both carry a notice on their face that TASFGA is in formation and that they are illustrations of the format rather than delivered research — that notice is part of the sample, not a disclaimer bolted on.

• Deep Research: When Must a Zoning Board Member Recuse? Deep research · Municipal Governance MEMBER FORMAT
• Quick Lookup: Condominium Election Quorum Requirements (NY) Quick lookup · Residential Community Governance

Sample standards and methodology

The rubric is the more useful sample, because it shows the reasoning rather than a result: the dimensions scored, what feeds each, the letter bands, and the bias controls.

• Focus 1 Governance Rubric (v1.0) — Residential Community Governance Standard · Residential Community Governance
• Model Financial Disclosure Standard for Community Associations (v0.1) Standard · Residential Community Governance
• The seven review practices Every review point we would apply, published in advance

Sample field work

Per-building and per-firm profiles are published continuously by the Focus 1 arm rather than sampled here. Those are live work on named entities, not illustrations: condoscoopsnyc.org.

A format you would find useful and do not see here is worth asking for — contact@tasfga.com. Everything TASFGA has actually published is listed, dated, on The Record.