Reading Gap-Review Reports
How to interpret gap-review results, use report history, and export reports.
Report structure
Once a gap review completes, the report shows:
| Field | Description |
|---|---|
| Status | Pending (running), Completed, or Failed |
| Gaps | Areas where your policy falls short of Nia best practice |
Each gap entry includes:
| Field | Description |
|---|---|
| Area | The topic being assessed — for example "Grievance Channels" or "Climate Targets" |
| Finding | What is missing or weak in your current policy |
| Severity | High, Medium, or Low |
| Suggestions | Actionable recommendations — for example "Add quantified KPI targets" or "Reference IFC Performance Standards" |
Interpreting severity
- High — significant gap, typically reflecting a material misalignment with best practice or a missing required element.
- Medium — incremental improvement opportunity.
- Low — minor enhancement or optional addition.
Your team decides which gaps to prioritize. The report is a structured input to your policy improvement process, not a mandatory action list.
Report history
If you run multiple gap reviews on the same document — for example after updating the policy — all reports are saved and dated. Use the dropdown selector to switch between historical reports.
Exporting a report
Click the Export button and choose your format:
- Word (.docx) — for editing and sharing with your team
- PDF — for distribution or record-keeping
- Excel (.xlsx) — for structured data analysis
The file downloads directly to your computer.
If a review fails
If a review encounters an error, the status will show Failed with an error message. The AI run is still counted toward your monthly usage — it is reserved when the review starts and is not refunded on failure. You can retry the review (this uses another run). If the problem persists, contact the Nia team with the document name and the error message shown.