UC35: Board Deck Fact-Checker

The Problem

Board presentations, investor slides, and earnings materials contain dozens of financial metrics, growth rates, and performance statistics drawn from different sources (trial balance, segment reports, KPI dashboards). Errors,mismatched numbers, outdated figures, inconsistent definitions,damage credibility and create audit findings. A typical board deck contains 30 to 50 financial assertions; manual verification against the audited trial balance consumes 10 to 15 FTE hours and is often incomplete due to time pressure before meetings. Inconsistencies between draft presentations and final financial statements discovered during printing create last-minute crises.

What the Agent Does

Ingests draft presentation files (PowerPoint, PDF) and financial source documents:
Board deck or investor presentation slides (PowerPoint or PDF)
Audited trial balance or final financial statements
Segment/product revenue reports from ERP
Non-GAAP metric definitions and calculations (EBITDA, Adjusted EBITDA, free cash flow, etc.)
KPI dashboard feeds (customer metrics, operational KPIs, market data)
Extracts all financial assertions from presentation:
Absolute numbers: "Revenue $500M", "Net income $50M", "Free cash flow $75M"
Ratios and margins: "Gross margin 60%", "EBITDA margin 25%", "Return on equity 15%"
Growth rates: "Revenue up 15% YoY", "Operating expense down 2%"
Segment data: "North America revenue $300M", "SaaS segment margin 40%"
Comparative/benchmark assertions: "Market share 25% vs. 22% prior year", "Peer average ROIC 12%"
Validates each assertion against authoritative sources:
Absolute numbers cross-referenced to trial balance with GL account reconciliation
Segment data matched to segment reporting or GL cost center reports
Non-GAAP metrics recalculated from trial balance using documented formulas
Growth rates confirmed from prior-period financial statements or KPI database
Peer benchmark data validated against published sources (if used)
Identifies and categorizes exceptions:
Critical errors: Number differs from source by >1% (e.g., "Revenue $500M" but trial balance shows $510M)
Definition errors: Non-GAAP metric calculated using different components than definition
Timing issues: Number from wrong period (Q2 vs. Q1) or reporting standard (accrual vs. cash)
Rounding inconsistencies: Percentages do not roll up correctly
Outdated data: Figure from draft financials, not final trial balance
Generates fact-check report:
Green flags: Numbers verified and accurate
Yellow flags: Rounding or immaterial timing differences explained
Red flags: Material errors with suggested correction
Summary: "45 assertions verified. 2 material errors found: Revenue should be $510M (not $500M), EBITDA margin should be 24% (calculation error in expense allocation)."
Produces corrected number annotations for PowerPoint (highlighting changes and reasons)

Data Requirements

Data Sources:

Draft presentation , PowerPoint or PDF file with financial assertions
Audited trial balance or final financial statements , GL account balances, segment data
Segment reporting , Revenue and operating income by business segment or geography
KPI database , Operational metrics (customer count, NPS, churn, etc.) with historical trends
Non-GAAP reconciliations , Documented formulas for Adjusted EBITDA, free cash flow, etc.
Benchmark database , Published peer financial data (market share, industry margins, etc.)

Data Classification:

Internal Structured: Trial balance, segment reports, KPI data, non-GAAP definitions
Internal Unstructured: Draft presentations, financial statement notes, management commentary
External Third-Party: Peer benchmark data (S&P, CapIQ, Bloomberg), industry margin surveys
Public: Published financial statements, market data

Data Quality Requirements:

Timeliness: Trial balance and segment data current within 2 business days; draft presentation prepared for verification
Completeness: All numbers in presentation must be traceable to a data source
Accuracy: Trial balance reconciles to GL control accounts; segment data matches GL allocation logic; non-GAAP formulas documented and approved

Integration Complexity: Medium , Requires PDF/PowerPoint parsing to extract text and numbers, GL query interface, segment reporting system integration, and non-GAAP calculation engine. NLP for identifying financial assertions is the primary complexity.

Score Breakdown

Criterion	Weight	Score (1-5)	Weighted
Time Recaptured	15%	5	0.75
Error Reduction	10%	5	0.50
Cost Avoidance	10%	4	0.40
Strategic Leverage	5%	4	0.20
Data Availability	15%	4	0.60
Process Clarity	15%	4	0.60
Ease of Implementation	10%	3	0.30
Fallback Available	10%	5	0.50
Audience (Internal)	10%	5	0.50
Composite	100%		4.20

Why It Scores Well

Risk reduction: Catching errors before board presentation prevents credibility damage and reputational risk. Time savings: Automating fact-checking reduces verification time from 10 to 15 hours to 2 to 3 hours. Compliance: Documented fact-check process supports SOX compliance and audit defense.

Regulatory Alignment

SEC Rule 10b-5 / Reg FD: Accurate financial metrics in presentations reduce disclosure liability
SOX compliance: Documented review process strengthens IT controls over financial reporting
Auditor coordination: Fact-check trail supports audit verification of presentation accuracy

Sprint Factory Fit

Sprint 2 (2 weeks)

Moderate complexity due to PowerPoint/PDF parsing and number extraction. Clear integration with GL and segment reporting systems. 2-week sprint with NLP library integration.

Comparable Implementations

Workiva , Presentation and disclosure management with fact-checking integration
Donnelley Financial Solutions , XBRL and disclosure verification for SEC filings
Workiva Connected Reporting

Deploy This Use Case with the Sprint Factory

From zero to a governed, production agent in 6 weeks.

Sprint Factory Schedule a Briefing

Related Use Cases

On-Demand General Ledger & Close

Intelligent Journal Entry Creator

Score: 4.1/5.0

On-Demand General Ledger & Close

Flux Analysis & Variance Commentary

Score: 4.05/5.0

On-Demand General Ledger & Close

Narrative Reporting Assistant (MD&A)

Score: 3.95/5.0