BCG portfolio submission — how detailed does the case study evidence need to be?
I'm preparing my BCG certification portfolio and I'm genuinely unsure how granular the evidence needs to be for the case studies. I've been doing genealogical research for 11 years, but putting together a formal portfolio is a completely different skill set. The BCG standards document says evidence must demonstrate “reasonably exhaustive search,” but what that means in practice is still fuzzy to me.
Right now my case study is running about 38 pages with 94 source citations. My genealogical proof summary covers a 5-generation lineage with a DNA triangulation component. I've been working on this specific portfolio for about 14 months, which I know is on the longer end, but I wanted the research to actually be solid before submitting.
The part I'm most unsure about is the negative evidence sections. I've documented 23 repositories where I searched and found nothing relevant, but I'm not sure if I need to explain methodology for each one or if a summary table is acceptable for the minor repositories.
Anyone who's gone through the BCG review process — did evaluators come back with major revision requests, or is it usually minor clarifications? I'd love to hear what actually tripped people up.
The 14 months is not unusual at all. I know people who took 2 years to get their portfolio to a level they felt confident submitting. BCG evaluators are thorough but they're fair — they're looking for rigor, not perfection in presentation style.
I submitted in 2023 and got through with minor revisions. The negative evidence question is real — my evaluator specifically mentioned that summary tables are fine for minor repositories as long as you've explained your search strategy clearly for the major ones. Don't overcomplicate it.
38 pages with 94 citations sounds solid. My accepted portfolio was 41 pages and the DNA triangulation component was actually a strength — just make sure your chromosome mapping explanation would be understandable to a non-DNA genealogist reviewer.