Genealogical Documentation

Family History Research Planning Skill

Version: 1.0.6 Last Updated: November 6, 2025

CRITICAL: Always Plan Before Researching

ABSOLUTELY PROHIBITED: DO NOT perform unsolicited web searches or research.

When a user mentions an ancestor or asks for help researching, you MUST follow this sequence:

1. Gather information from the user first - Ask what they already know about the ancestor 2. Define the research objective - Work with the user to clarify their specific goals 3. Create a research plan - Use the Research Planning Workflow below 4. Present the plan to the user - Give them a structured plan with prioritized sources and search strategies

NEVER jump immediately to web searches when a user mentions an ancestor.

The value of professional genealogy research is in systematic planning and methodology, not in rushing to find records. Always build a proper foundation through planning first.

AFTER creating a research plan: If the user explicitly requests that you execute the research (perform searches), you may do so, but ONLY by following the approved research plan systematically. Document all searches, findings, and citations as you go.

When to Use This Skill

Trigger this skill when users:

• Ask for help researching an ancestor → START with research planning workflow, gather known info, CREATE a plan first (do NOT search immediately)
• Plan or organize genealogy research projects → Use research planning workflow
• Need to create proper genealogical citations → Use citation workflow
• Have conflicting information from multiple sources → Use evidence analysis workflow
• Want to analyze evidence quality and reliability
• Need to build proof arguments for genealogical conclusions
• Ask for help with census records, vital records, or other historical documents → Provide guidance and analysis
• Need guidance on research strategies or methodologies → Teach concepts, create plans

Remember: Always START with planning. Web searches and research execution are permitted ONLY AFTER a research plan is created AND the user explicitly requests execution.

Core Capabilities

1. Research Planning and Strategy

Guide researchers through creating structured research plans that incorporate professional standards.

Key Process: 1. Define specific research questions (who, what, when, where) 2. Identify target individuals and relationships 3. List potential record sources and repositories 4. Develop search strategy using FAN principle (Family, Associates, Neighbors) 5. Create timeline with milestones 6. Establish success criteria and proof requirements

Output: Create a research plan document using the template in assets/templates/research-plan-template.md (simplified for practical use). For detailed guidance, examples, and checklists, refer to assets/templates/research-plan-guidance.md

2. Citation Creation

Generate properly formatted genealogical citations following Evidence Explained standards.

Supported Source Types:

• Census records (federal, state, territorial)
• Vital records (birth, marriage, death)
• Church records (baptism, marriage, burial)
• Land records (deeds, grants, tax records)
• Probate records (wills, estate files)
• Military records (service, pensions)
• Immigration records (passenger lists, naturalizations)
• Newspapers (obituaries, notices)
• Court records, city directories
• Online databases (Ancestry, FamilySearch, etc.)
• Published books and manuscripts

Citation Process: 1. Identify source type and access method 2. Gather core information (who, what, when, where) 3. Build full reference note citation using appropriate template from references/citation-templates.md 4. Create short form for subsequent references 5. Generate source list entry for bibliography 6. Assess source quality (original vs. derivative, primary vs. secondary)

Output: Citation entry using template in assets/templates/citation-template.md

3. Evidence Analysis and Conflict Resolution

Systematically analyze and resolve conflicts between genealogical sources.

Analysis Framework:

Step 1: Inventory Sources

• List all sources providing information about the fact
• Categorize by evidence type (direct/indirect/negative)

Step 2: Evaluate Each Source

• Source classification (original/derivative/authored)
• Information type (primary/secondary/undetermined)
• Informant analysis (who, relationship, knowledge level)
• Reliability factors (timing, bias, consistency)

Step 3: Compare and Identify Conflicts

• Create evidence comparison matrix
• Document specific discrepancies
• Assess significance of conflicts

Step 4: Assess Reliability

• Rank sources from most to least reliable
• Weight sources by quality, not quantity
• Consider corroboration patterns

Step 5: Resolve Conflicts

• Explore possible explanations for conflicts
• Apply evidence weight to determine preponderance
• Resolve conflicts or acknowledge if unresolvable

Step 6: GPS Compliance Check Apply the five GPS elements: 1. Reasonably exhaustive research 2. Complete and accurate source citations 3. Analysis and correlation of evidence 4. Resolution of conflicting evidence 5. Soundly reasoned, coherently written conclusion

Step 7: Build Proof Argument

• State conclusion clearly
• Assign appropriate proof level (proven/probable/possible/unproven/disproven)
• Write coherent proof argument explaining reasoning

Output: Evidence analysis report using template in assets/templates/evidence-analysis-template.md

4. Research Logging

Document research activities systematically to avoid duplication and track progress.

Essential Elements:

• Research session context (date, time, goal)
• Research questions addressed
• All sources searched (including negative results)
• Search strategies and variations used
• Positive findings with complete citations
• Negative results documented
• Evidence analysis and reliability notes
• Next steps and follow-up actions

Output: Research log entry using template in assets/templates/research-log-template.md

Default Workflow: Start Every Research Request This Way

When a user asks for help researching an ancestor:

STEP 1: Information Gathering (Always do this first)

• Ask what they already know (name, dates, locations)
• Ask what records they've already found
• Ask what specific questions they want answered
• Ask about any conflicting information they've encountered

STEP 2: Research Planning (Required before any searches)

• Work through the Research Planning Workflow (see below)
• Create a structured plan document
• Prioritize sources and strategies
• Present the plan to the user

STEP 3: Research Execution (ONLY if user explicitly requests it)

• Follow the approved research plan systematically
• Use appropriate tools (web_search, etc.) as directed by the plan
• Document all searches (including negative results)
• Create proper citations for all findings
• Log all research activities
• Report findings and analysis to the user

NEVER skip Steps 1 and 2 to jump directly to Step 3.

The user may choose to execute the plan themselves, or they may explicitly ask you to execute the research. Either approach is acceptable, but planning MUST come first.

Procedural Guidelines

Research Planning Workflow

To plan a new research project:

1. Define the objective - What specific genealogical question needs answering? 2. Formulate research questions - Break into 3-7 specific, answerable questions 3. Identify individuals - List primary subjects and associated family members 4. List record sources - Organize by category (vital, census, land, probate, military, etc.) 5. Develop strategy - Prioritize sources, plan FAN approach, work chronologically 6. Set timeline - Break into phases with milestones When executing steps 5-6 (Develop strategy & Set timeline):

• Provide links to research resources for the specific location
• Prioritize: FamilySearch Wiki and LDSgenealogy.com above all other resources
• Include links to relevant county/state pages
• Identify record repositories and their online availability

7. Apply GPS framework - Ensure plan addresses all five GPS elements 8. Define success criteria - What constitutes adequate proof? 9. Create next actions - List 5-10 immediate concrete steps

Reference references/research-strategies.md for detailed methodologies.

Citation Generation Workflow

To create a proper citation:

1. Identify source type - Census, vital record, land record, etc. 2. Determine access method - Original, microfilm, digital image, database, transcription 3. Gather information:

• Subject/individual name
• Record type and date
• Repository and collection
• Specific location (volume, page, entry)
• URL and access date (if online)

4. Select appropriate template - See references/citation-templates.md 5. Build full citation - Follow template for source type 6. Create short form - Abbreviated version for subsequent references 7. Generate source list entry - Formatted for bibliography 8. Assess source quality:

• Original, derivative, or authored?
• Primary, secondary, or undetermined information?
• Direct, indirect, or negative evidence?

9. Extract key information - Document what the source says 10. Link to research context - How does this answer research questions?

Evidence Analysis Workflow

To analyze conflicting evidence:

1. Define the research question - What specific fact is being analyzed? 2. Create evidence inventory - List all relevant sources 3. Evaluate each source individually:

• Apply source/information/evidence classification
• Analyze informant and reliability factors
• Assign reliability rating

4. Build comparison matrix - Show what each source says 5. Identify conflicts - Document specific discrepancies 6. Rank source reliability:

• Information timing (primary > secondary)
• Source type (original > derivative)
• Informant quality (direct knowledge > hearsay)
• Consistency (corroborated > standalone)

7. Identify agreements - Note corroborating evidence patterns 8. Apply conflict resolution framework:

• Evaluate each side of conflict
• Consider explanations (error, informant mistake, both partially true)
• Apply evidence weight
• Determine preponderance

9. GPS compliance assessment - Check all five elements 10. Write proof argument:

• State conclusion
• Assign proof level
• Explain reasoning from evidence

11. Document gaps and recommendations - What research remains?

Reference references/evidence-evaluation.md for detailed guidance.

Key Genealogical Concepts

Source Types

• Original Source - First recording in original form (courthouse deed book, original certificate)
• Derivative Source - Copy, transcription, or database entry
• Authored Work - Compiled or analyzed work (published genealogy)

Information Types

• Primary Information - Recorded at/near time of event by knowledgeable person
• Secondary Information - Recorded later from memory or hearsay
• Important: Original sources can contain secondary information! (e.g., death certificate shows birth date recorded 80 years later)

Evidence Types

• Direct Evidence - Explicitly states the fact needed
• Indirect Evidence - Implies fact when combined with other sources
• Negative Evidence - Expected information that's absent

Proof Levels

• Proven - Beyond reasonable doubt, no credible conflicts, GPS fully satisfied
• Probable - Preponderance of evidence supports, minor conflicts resolved
• Possible - Some evidence supports, significant gaps remain
• Unproven - Insufficient evidence
• Disproven - Evidence contradicts hypothesis

References

For detailed guidance on specific topics, load these reference files as needed:

• references/citation-templates.md - Complete templates for 14+ source types
• references/evidence-evaluation.md - Detailed frameworks for conflict resolution
• references/research-strategies.md - Advanced research methodologies
• references/gps-guidelines.md - Genealogical Proof Standard detailed requirements
• research-log-guidance.md - Comprehensive guidance with examples and best practices
• research-plan-guidance.md - Comprehensive guidance with examples and best practices

-

Templates

Output templates are available in assets/templates/:

• research-plan-template.md - Simplified research project planning (practical, day-to-day use)
• citation-template.md - Citation library entry
• evidence-analysis-template.md - Evidence analysis report
• research-log-template.md - Research session documentation

Best Practices

Creating Citations

• Cite what you actually consulted (if using database, cite both database and original)
• Include enough detail for others to find the same record
• Follow specific-to-general pattern (item → source → repository)
• Distinguish between original records and database transcriptions

Analyzing Evidence

• Quality matters more than quantity - one strong source beats three weak ones
• Always consider informant knowledge and proximity to event
• Look for independent corroboration, not derivative repetition
• Acknowledge conflicts honestly rather than ignoring them

Building Proof Arguments

• State conclusion clearly and precisely
• Choose appropriate proof level for evidence strength
• Explain reasoning transparently
• Address conflicts explicitly and show resolution process
• Acknowledge limitations and gaps

Research Strategy

• Apply FAN principle - research family, associates, and neighbors
• Document negative results - they're valuable research data
• Work chronologically or geographically in systematic way
• Consider collateral lines for clues about direct ancestors

Example Usage Patterns

User: "I found three census records that say my ancestor was born in Ohio, but his death certificate says Pennsylvania. How do I figure out which is right?"

Response: Load references/evidence-evaluation.md, apply conflict resolution framework. Evaluate each source for reliability (original vs. derivative, primary vs. secondary information, informant quality). Weight the three consistent earlier sources (John as likely informant) against single later source (unknown informant, secondary information). Analyze possible explanations. Determine preponderance of evidence. Create evidence analysis report documenting reasoning.

User: "Help me create a citation for a census record I found on Ancestry."

Response: Load references/citation-templates.md for census citation template. Gather: year, county, state, page number, household, database name, URL, access date, NARA microfilm info. Build full citation following Evidence Explained format. Create short form and source list entry. Assess source quality (derivative source with digital image of original, secondary information about birth, direct evidence of residence). Document key information extracted.

User: "I want to research my great-grandfather but don't know where to start."

Response: Guide through research planning workflow. Define objective (identify parents? determine birth location?). Formulate specific research questions. List known information and gaps. Identify potential sources (census, vital records, probate, military). Develop search strategy with priorities. Create timeline. Apply GPS framework. Generate research plan document with concrete next actions. Present the plan to the user. If the user then explicitly requests "please execute this research plan," proceed with Step 3 (execution) using web_search and other tools systematically while documenting all activities.

Writing Style

Follow genealogical professional standards:

• Use precise, objective language
• Cite sources consistently
• Acknowledge uncertainty appropriately
• Apply technical terms correctly (primary/secondary, original/derivative)
• Structure proof arguments logically
• Balance scholarly rigor with clarity

Always operate within the Genealogical Proof Standard framework, helping researchers build defensible, well-documented conclusions based on thorough evidence analysis.

Citation Library Entry

Date Added: [DATE] Citation ID: [UNIQUE ID] Researcher: [YOUR NAME]

---

Full Reference Note Citation

[Complete Evidence Explained format citation]

Example: 1870 U.S. census, Coshocton County, Ohio, population schedule, p. 15 (stamped), dwelling 112, family 115, John Smith household; digital image, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:S3HY-DRJ9-3YN : accessed 6 October 2025); citing NARA microfilm publication M593, roll 1215.

---

Short Reference Note Citation

[Abbreviated form for subsequent references]

Example: 1870 U.S. census, Coshocton Co., Ohio, p. 15, John Smith household.

---

Source List Entry

[Bibliography format]

Example: U.S. Census. 1870. Coshocton County, Ohio. Population schedule. Digital images. FamilySearch. https://www.familysearch.org. NARA microfilm publication M593.

---

Source Classification

Source Type:

• [ ] Original Record (first recording in original form)
• [ ] Derivative Record (copy, transcription, database entry)
• [ ] Authored Work (compiled/analyzed work)

Information Type:

• [ ] Primary Information (recorded at/near time of event)
• [ ] Secondary Information (recorded later from memory)
• [ ] Undetermined

Evidence Type:

• [ ] Direct Evidence (explicitly states the fact)
• [ ] Indirect Evidence (implies the fact)
• [ ] Negative Evidence (absence of expected information)

Reliability Assessment: [High / Moderate / Low]

Reasoning: [Explain reliability rating considering informant, timing, consistency, etc.]

---

Source Details

Subject/Individual: [Name of person this record concerns]

Record Type: [Census, vital record, deed, will, etc.]

Record Date: [When record was created]

Record Creator: [Who created the record]

Repository Information

Repository: [Full name of institution or database]

Collection: [Specific collection or record group]

Location Within Collection: [Volume, page, file number, etc.]

Call Number/ID: [If applicable]

Access Information

Access Method:

• [ ] Online database
• [ ] Digital image
• [ ] Microfilm
• [ ] Original record
• [ ] Transcription
• [ ] Published abstract

For Online Sources:

• Database/Website: [Full name]
• URL: [Complete URL]
• Access Date: [Date you viewed it]
• Image/Entry Number: [If applicable]

For Microfilm:

• Publication: [NARA publication number, etc.]
• Roll/Frame: [Specific location]

For Physical Records:

• Location: [Where physically held]
• Retrieval Information: [How to request]

---

Key Information Extracted

What This Source Documents: [Summarize what facts this source establishes]

Specific Information Found:

• [Name(s)]
• [Date(s)]
• [Place(s)]
• [Relationship(s)]
• [Other relevant details]

Exact Wording (if important): "[Quote relevant passages if exact wording matters]"

---

Research Context

Research Question(s) Answered: [Which questions does this source help answer?]

How It Relates to Research:

• [ ] Confirms known information
• [ ] Contradicts other sources
• [ ] Fills knowledge gap
• [ ] Raises new questions

New Questions Raised: [What new questions does this source generate?]

---

Related Citations

Related Sources:

• [List other sources about same person/event]
• [Sources that corroborate or conflict]
• [Sources from same record series]

Relationship Notes: [How sources relate - corroboration, conflict, context, etc.]

---

Tags

Person: [Tag by individual names] Location: [Tag by place names] Record Type: [Tag by source type] Time Period: [Tag by century/decade] Topics: [Tag by relevant themes]

---

Usage Tracking

Used In:

• [ ] Research log dated: [DATE]
• [ ] Evidence analysis dated: [DATE]
• [ ] Research report dated: [DATE]
• [ ] Shared with: [Names/dates]

---

Notes

[Additional observations, transcription challenges, quality issues, follow-up needed, etc.]

---

Citation Added: [DATE] Last Updated: [DATE] Status: [Active / Archived]

Evidence Analysis Report

Date: [DATE] Researcher: [YOUR NAME] Analysis ID: [UNIQUE ID]

---

Research Question

Primary Question: [What specific fact are you trying to determine?]

Subject Individual(s): [Who is this analysis about?]

Specific Fact Under Investigation: [Birth date? Birth location? Parentage? Marriage? Death?]

---

Evidence Inventory

Sources Analyzed

[List all sources that provide information about this fact]

1. [Source 1 - Full citation] 2. [Source 2 - Full citation] 3. [Source 3 - Full citation] 4. [Additional sources...]

---

Individual Source Evaluations

Source 1: [Name/Description]

Citation: [Full reference note citation]

Classification:

• Source Type: [Original / Derivative / Authored]
• Information Type: [Primary / Secondary / Undetermined]
• Evidence Type: [Direct / Indirect / Negative]

What It Says: [Exact information provided about the fact]

Informant Analysis:

• Who provided information: [Name/role]
• Relationship to subject: [Relationship]
• Knowledge level: [Direct knowledge / Secondhand / Unknown]
• Potential bias: [Any bias or motivation]

Reliability Factors:

• Timing: [How close to event?]
• Record keeper quality: [Professional / Amateur / Unknown]
• Condition: [Complete / Damaged / Clear / Faded]
• Consistency: [Agrees with / Conflicts with other sources]

Reliability Rating: [High / Moderate / Low]

Reasoning: [Explain rating]

---

Source 2: [Repeat for each source]

[Complete same evaluation format for each source]

---

Evidence Comparison Matrix

Pattern Analysis: [What patterns emerge? Agreement? Conflicts? Trends?]

---

Conflicts and Discrepancies

Conflict #1: [Description]

Sources Involved: [List conflicting sources]

Nature of Conflict: [What specifically do they disagree about?]

Significance: [Major conflict / Minor variation / Chronological issue]

Could Both Be True? [Yes/No and explanation]

---

Conflict #2: [Repeat for each conflict]

[Document each conflict systematically]

---

Source Reliability Rankings

Tier 1 - Highest Reliability

[List sources with reasoning]

Tier 2 - Moderate-High Reliability

[List sources with reasoning]

Tier 3 - Moderate Reliability

[List sources with reasoning]

Tier 4 - Lower Reliability

[List sources with reasoning]

Reasoning for Rankings: [Explain how you weighted sources]

---

Evidence Correlation

Points of Agreement

[What do multiple sources agree on?]

• [Fact 1]: Supported by [Source A, Source B, Source C]
• [Fact 2]: Supported by [Source D, Source E]

Corroborating Evidence

Direct Corroboration: [Sources that explicitly state same fact]

Indirect Corroboration: [Different facts that support same conclusion]

Independent Evidence Streams: [Are sources truly independent or derivative of each other?]

---

Conflict Resolution

Conflict #1 Resolution

Evaluation of Each Side:

• [Source favoring Version A]: [Reliability assessment]
• [Source favoring Version B]: [Reliability assessment]

Possible Explanations:

• [ ] Transcription/recording error
• [ ] Informant error / memory failure
• [ ] Both partially correct
• [ ] Changed information over time
• [ ] Different individuals
• [ ] Contextual factors

Most Plausible Explanation: [Which explanation makes most sense?]

Evidence Weight:

• Version A: [Percentage based on source quality]
• Version B: [Percentage based on source quality]

Preponderance: [Which version has preponderance?]

Resolution: [State resolved conclusion or acknowledge if unresolved]

---

Genealogical Proof Standard Assessment

Element 1: Reasonably Exhaustive Research

Sources Searched: [List all source types consulted]

Assessment:

• [ ] Fully exhaustive
• [ ] Substantially exhaustive
• [ ] Needs more research

Gaps: [What sources not yet searched?]

---

Element 2: Complete and Accurate Citations

Citation Quality:

• [ ] All sources properly cited
• [ ] Evidence Explained format used
• [ ] Sufficient detail to relocate sources

Issues: [Any citation problems?]

---

Element 3: Analysis and Correlation

Analysis Performed:

• [ ] Each source analyzed individually
• [ ] Sources systematically compared
• [ ] Reliability assessed
• [ ] Patterns identified

Correlation Methods: [How sources were compared and connected]

---

Element 4: Resolution of Conflicting Evidence

Conflicts Addressed:

• [ ] All conflicts identified
• [ ] Systematic resolution attempted
• [ ] Weighting explained
• [ ] Preponderance demonstrated

Resolution Status: [All resolved / Some unresolved / Explanation]

---

Element 5: Soundly Reasoned Conclusion

Conclusion Readiness:

• [ ] Logic clear and transparent
• [ ] Reasoning flows from evidence
• [ ] Limitations acknowledged
• [ ] Appropriate proof level

---

Conclusion and Proof Argument

Conclusion Statement

[Answer the research question directly and specifically]

Example: "John Smith was born in Ohio, circa 1820, most likely between 1818-1822. Birth location in Ohio is probable; specific county undetermined."

---

Proof Level

• [ ] Proven - Beyond reasonable doubt, no credible conflicts
• [ ] Probable - Preponderance of evidence supports, minor conflicts resolved
• [ ] Possible - Some evidence supports, significant gaps remain
• [ ] Unproven - Insufficient evidence
• [ ] Disproven - Evidence contradicts hypothesis

---

Proof Argument

[Write coherent narrative argument explaining reasoning]

Structure: 1. State conclusion 2. Present strongest evidence 3. Explain source evaluation 4. Address conflicts and resolution 5. Apply evidence weight / demonstrate preponderance 6. Acknowledge limitations 7. Justify proof level

Example: The preponderance of evidence supports John Smith's birth in Ohio around 1820. Three independent federal census enumerations (1850, 1860, 1870) consistently report his birthplace as Ohio, with ages progressing logically... [Continue with full proof argument as shown in examples]

---

Evidence Gaps and Limitations

Missing Evidence

[What expected sources weren't found?] [What information is absent from available sources?]

---

Research Limitations

[What prevented exhaustive research?] [What sources are inaccessible?] [What constraints affected research?]

---

Unresolved Questions

[What questions remain unanswered?] [What conflicts couldn't be resolved?] [What alternative explanations not ruled out?]

---

Recommendations

Additional Research Needed

1. [Specific source to search] 2. [Specific repository to contact] 3. [Specific record type to obtain] 4. [Follow-up action needed] 5. [Alternative strategy to try]

---

Sources to Prioritize

High Priority: [Sources most likely to resolve remaining questions]

Medium Priority: [Supporting sources]

Low Priority: [Supplemental sources]

---

Summary

Overall Evidence Quality: [Excellent / Good / Fair / Limited]

Strength of Proof: [Very Strong / Strong / Moderate / Weak]

Confidence Level: [High / Moderate / Low]

Risk Assessment: [Low risk of being wrong / Moderate risk / High risk]

---

Notes

[Additional observations, ideas for future research, related questions]

---

Analysis Created: [DATE] Last Updated: [DATE] Reviewed By: [If peer-reviewed] Status: [Draft / Final / Revised]

Family History Research Log

Date: [DATE] Researcher: [YOUR NAME] Session #: [NUMBER] Time Spent: [HOURS/MINUTES]

---

Research Session Overview

Research Goal: [What you set out to accomplish this session]

Project/Ancestor: [Which ancestor or research project does this relate to?]

Research Questions Addressed:

1. [Question 1] 2. [Question 2] 3. [Question 3]

---

Sources Searched

Key Finding: [Most important source result]

---

What I Found

Finding 1: [Brief description]

• Source: [Quick citation]
• Information: [Key details - names, dates, locations, relationships]
• Significance: [How this answers research questions]

Finding 2: [Repeat for each finding]

Sources with No Results

• [Source name] - [Why expected information not found]

---

Source Citations

1. [Complete Evidence Explained format citation] 2. [Citation] 3. [Citation]

---

Evidence Notes

Facts Learned:

• [Fact 1 with source]
• [Fact 2 with source]

Conflicts or Discrepancies:

• [Description of conflict if applicable]

---

Next Steps

Action Items:

• [ ] [Specific next action]
• [ ] [Action]
• [ ] [Action]

Priority: High / Medium / Low

Additional Sources to Search:

• [ ] [Specific source/database]
• [ ] [Source]

---

Session Notes: [Any observations, hypotheses, or patterns noticed]

Family History Research Plan

Date Created: [DATE] Researcher: [YOUR NAME] Project ID: [OPTIONAL ID/NUMBER]

---

Project Objective

Primary Research Question: [State your main genealogical question clearly and specifically]

---

Target Individuals

Primary Subject:

• Name: [Full name including variants]
• Birth: [Date and location, or "circa" estimate]
• Death: [Date and location]
• Marriage: [Date, location, spouse name]
• Key Life Events: [Brief summary]

Related Individuals:

• Parents:
• Siblings:
• Spouse(s):
• Children:
• Key associates/neighbors:

---

Current Knowledge Summary

What We Know: [List facts you've already established with sources]

What We Don't Know: [List gaps in knowledge that research should address]

Sources Already Consulted: [List sources you've already searched]

---

Research Questions

[List 3-7 specific, answerable research questions in priority order]

1. [Primary question - most important] 2. [Secondary question] 3. [Supporting question] 4. [Additional question] 5. [Additional question]

---

Time Period and Geographic Area

Time Period: [Date range for research]

Geographic Area: [Specific locations to research]

---

Record Sources to Search

Vital Records:

Census Records:

Land and Property:

Probate Records:

Military Records:

Immigration/Naturalization:

Court Records:

Newspapers and Publications:

Other Sources:

---

Repositories and Archives

Online Resources:

Physical Repositories:

Contacts/Notes:

---

Research Strategy

Search Priority: [List sources in order of priority]

Strategic Approaches: [Note any FAN principle, cluster research, geographic patterns, or chronological approach]

---

Next Actions

Immediate Steps (Next 1-2 Weeks): 1. [ ] 2. [ ] 3. [ ] 4. [ ] 5. [ ]

---

Research Log

---

Evidence Analysis

Key Findings:

Conflicts to Resolve:

Reliability Assessment:

---

Notes and Observations

[Add hypotheses, observations, ideas as research progresses]

---

Revision History

• [DATE] - Research plan created
• [DATE] -
• [DATE] -

---

Last Updated: [DATE] Status: [Active / Completed / On Hold]

Genealogical Citation Templates

Complete Evidence Explained citation templates for common genealogical source types.

Citation Structure Principles

Layered Citation Pattern

Citations flow from specific to general: 1. Item level (most specific) - The particular piece of information 2. Source level - The record or publication containing the item 3. Repository level (most general) - Where the source is held

Punctuation

• Commas separate elements within layers
• Semicolons separate major citation layers
• Colons introduce lists or sub-elements
• Parentheses enclose clarifications

Original vs. Derivative

• Cite what you actually consulted
• If using database, cite database AND original source
• Use "citing" to introduce the original source for derivatives

CENSUS RECORDS

Federal Census - Digital Image

Full Citation Template:

[Year] U.S. census, [County], [State], population schedule, p. [page number] ([stamped/printed]), dwelling [number], family [number], [head of household name] household; digital image, [Database Name] ([URL] : accessed [date]); citing [NARA microfilm publication], roll [number].

Example:

1870 U.S. census, Coshocton County, Ohio, population schedule, p. 15 (stamped), dwelling 112, family 115, John Smith household; digital image, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:S3HY-DRJ9-3YN : accessed 6 October 2025); citing NARA microfilm publication M593, roll 1215.

Short Form:

1870 U.S. census, Coshocton Co., Ohio, p. 15, John Smith household.

Source List Entry:

U.S. Census. 1870. Coshocton County, Ohio. Population schedule. Digital images. FamilySearch. https://www.familysearch.org. NARA microfilm publication M593.

State Census

Template:

[Year] [State] census, [County], [enumeration district if applicable], [page], [name] household; [Repository], [Collection], [specific location].

VITAL RECORDS

Birth Certificate - Original Record

Template:

[Name], born [date], birth certificate no. [number]; [Issuing Office], [Location]; [Repository], [Collection], [volume/file]:[page].

Example:

John Smith, born 15 March 1850, birth certificate no. 1850-045; Office of Vital Records, Coshocton County, Ohio; Ohio Department of Health, Division of Vital Statistics, Birth Records 1850-1900, vol. 12, p. 34.

Short Form:

John Smith birth certificate (1850), Coshocton Co., Ohio.

Marriage License/Certificate

Template:

[Groom name] and [Bride name], married [date], marriage [license/certificate] no. [number]; [Issuing Office], [Location]; [access information if digital].

Example:

John Smith and Mary Johnson, married 10 June 1872, marriage license no. 456; Probate Court, Coshocton County, Ohio; digital image, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com/imageviewer/collections/8801/images/4234123 : accessed 6 October 2025).

Short Form:

John Smith–Mary Johnson marriage (1872), Coshocton Co., Ohio.

Death Certificate

Template:

[Name], died [date], death certificate no. [number]; [Issuing Office], [Location]; [Repository or Database with access information].

Example:

John Smith, died 12 April 1920, death certificate no. 1920-234; Bureau of Vital Statistics, Columbus, Ohio; Ohio Deaths, 1908-1932, database with images, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X8HB-N9S : accessed 6 October 2025).

CHURCH RECORDS

Template:

[Church name], [Location], "[Record type]," [volume/register name], [page], entry for [person]; [current repository if different], [collection].

Example:

First Presbyterian Church, Coshocton, Ohio, "Baptismal Register," vol. 2 (1850-1875), p. 45, entry for Sarah Smith, baptized 20 July 1851; Ohio Church Records Collection, Coshocton County Library, Coshocton.

Short Form:

First Presbyterian Church (Coshocton, Ohio), Baptismal Register, 2:45, Sarah Smith.

LAND RECORDS

Deeds

Template:

[Grantor] to [Grantee], [document type], [date], [County] County, [State], [Record Office], [Book/Volume]:[Page]; [digital access if applicable].

Example:

William Jones to John Smith, deed, 15 March 1865, Coshocton County, Ohio, Recorder of Deeds, Book 45:123; digital image, FamilySearch, Ohio, County Deeds, 1810-1890 (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CS1Q : accessed 6 October 2025).

Short Form:

Jones to Smith deed (1865), Coshocton Co., Ohio, Deeds 45:123.

Tax Records

Template:

[Year] [tax type], [County], [State], [taxpayer name]; [Repository], [Collection], [Volume/Roll]:[Page].

Example:

1875 real property tax list, Coshocton County, Ohio, John Smith; Coshocton County Auditor, Tax Duplicate Records, vol. 15:78.

PROBATE RECORDS

Wills

Template:

[Testator name], [location], will dated [date], proved [date]; [Court], [Location], [Record type], [Book/Volume]:[Page]; [digital access if applicable].

Example:

John Smith, Coshocton County, Ohio, will dated 5 January 1919, proved 20 April 1920; Probate Court, Coshocton County, Will Records, vol. 34:156-159; digital images, FamilySearch, Ohio, Wills and Probate Records, 1786-1998 (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/3:1:3Q9M-CSQX : accessed 6 October 2025).

Short Form:

John Smith will (1919), Coshocton Co., Ohio, Probate, Wills 34:156-159.

Estate Files

Template:

Estate of [Name], [date of death/probate], [Court], [Location], [case/file number]; [Repository], [Collection].

Example:

Estate of John Smith, probate opened April 1920, Probate Court, Coshocton County, Ohio, case no. 1920-145; Coshocton County Probate Court, Estate Files 1900-1925.

MILITARY RECORDS

Service Records

Template:

[Name], [Service/Regiment/Unit], [War/Service Period], [record type]; [Repository], [Record Group/Collection], [file number].

Example:

John Smith, Company B, 51st Ohio Volunteer Infantry, Civil War service record; National Archives, Records of the Adjutant General's Office, RG 94, Compiled Military Service Records, M552, roll 45.

Short Form:

John Smith, 51st Ohio Vol. Inf., service record, NARA RG 94.

Pension Files

Template:

[Name], [pension type], pension application [number], [Service/War]; [Repository], [Record Group], [application number].

Example:

John Smith, widow's pension application WC-123456, Civil War; National Archives, Civil War and Later Pension Files, RG 15, application 123456.

IMMIGRATION RECORDS

Passenger Lists

Template:

[Ship name], [departure port] to [arrival port], [arrival date], passenger list, [passenger name]; [Repository/Database], [Collection], [Roll/Image].

Example:

SS Britannic, Liverpool to New York, arrived 15 June 1905, passenger manifest, Johann Schmidt; digital image, Ancestry, New York Passenger Lists, 1820-1957 (https://www.ancestry.com/imageviewer/collections/7488/images/NYM237_233-0456 : accessed 6 October 2025); citing NARA microfilm T715, roll 823.

Naturalizations

Template:

[Name], [document type], [date], [Court], [Location], [document/case number]; [Repository], [Collection].

Example:

Johann Schmidt, petition for naturalization, 12 March 1912, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, petition no. 8456; National Archives, Naturalization Records, RG 21.

NEWSPAPERS

Template:

"[Article title/description]," [Newspaper Name] ([City, State]), [full date], [page], col. [column]; [digital access if applicable].

Example:

"Obituary for John Smith," Coshocton Tribune (Coshocton, Ohio), 15 April 1920, p. 3, col. 2; digital image, Newspapers.com (https://www.newspapers.com/image/123456789 : accessed 6 October 2025).

Short Form:

Coshocton Tribune, 15 April 1920, p. 3, John Smith obituary.

CITY DIRECTORIES

Template:

[Directory Title], [Year] ([Publisher location]: [Publisher], [year]), [page], entry for [name]; [digital access if applicable].

Example:

Williams' Coshocton City Directory, 1895 (Cincinnati, Ohio: Williams Directory Co., 1895), 234, entry for John Smith; digital image, Ancestry, U.S. City Directories, 1822-1995 (https://www.ancestry.com/imageviewer/collections/2469/images/1234567 : accessed 6 October 2025).

ONLINE DATABASES - Compiled Records

Template:

"[Entry/record title]," database entry, [Database Name] ([URL] : accessed [date]), [entry details]; citing [original source if known].

Example:

"John Smith," database entry, Ohio, U.S., Death Records, 1908-1932, 1938-2018, Ancestry (https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui-content/view/12345:5014 : accessed 6 October 2025); citing certificate 1920-234, Ohio Department of Health, Columbus.

PUBLISHED BOOKS

County Histories

Template:

[Author/Title], [Book Title] ([Place]: [Publisher], [year]), [page(s)], [specific entry].

Example:

History of Coshocton County, Ohio (Chicago: A. Warner & Co., 1881), 456-457, biographical sketch of John Smith family.

Short Form:

History of Coshocton County (1881), 456-457.

Genealogies

Template:

[Author], [Title], [edition] ([Place]: [Publisher], [year]), [page(s)], [entry].

Example:

Jane Smith, The Smith Family of Ohio, 2nd ed. (Columbus: Ohio Genealogical Society, 2005), 78-79, entry for John Smith (1850-1920).

MANUSCRIPTS

Letters and Correspondence

Template:

[Writer] to [Recipient], [date], [description]; [Repository], [Collection], [box/folder].

Example:

John Smith to William Smith, 15 March 1890, letter describing family history; Smith Family Papers, Ohio History Connection, Columbus, box 3, folder 12.

Family Bibles

Template:

[Bible title], [publication info]; family record section, [owner] family; [current holder].

Example:

The Holy Bible, King James Version (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1865); family record pages, Smith family; privately held by Mary Jones [address], Chicago, Illinois, 2025.

PHOTOGRAPHS

Template:

[Description], [date if known]; [current holder].

Example:

Photograph of John and Mary Smith, circa 1875; privately held by Robert Smith [address], Chicago, Illinois, 2025.

Citation Best Practices

Essential Elements

Every citation needs:

• WHO - Person(s) the record is about
• WHAT - Type of record and specific details
• WHERE - Repository, collection, specific location
• WHEN - Date of record AND access date (online)
• HOW - Access method (digital, microfilm, original)

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• ❌ "Found on Ancestry" (too vague)
• ❌ Omitting access information for online sources
• ❌ Not distinguishing original from database entry
• ❌ Forgetting page numbers or identifiers
• ❌ Incomplete repository information

When in Doubt

• Include more detail rather than less
• Check Evidence Explained for your source type
• Save URL and access date for online sources
• Note image quality and completeness

Evidence Evaluation and Conflict Resolution

Detailed frameworks for analyzing genealogical evidence and resolving conflicts between sources.

Three Key Classifications

1. Source Classification (What you consulted)

Original Source

• First recording of information in original form
• Created at or near time of event
• Held in original repository
• Examples: courthouse deed books, original certificates, church registers

Derivative Source

• Copy, extract, abstract, or transcription
• Created later from original
• Potential for transcription errors
• Examples: published abstracts, database entries, microfilm copies

Authored Work

• Compiled or analyzed work with interpretation
• May combine multiple sources
• Examples: published genealogies, county histories

Why It Matters:

• Affects reliability assessment
• Guides whether to seek original
• Influences evidence weight
• Determines citation format

2. Information Classification (When recorded)

Primary Information

• Recorded at or very near time of event
• Informant had direct knowledge
• Less time for memory to fade
• Examples: birth date on birth certificate, marriage date on license

Secondary Information

• Recorded well after event occurred
• Often based on memory or hearsay
• More opportunity for error
• Examples: birth date on death certificate (70+ years later)

Undetermined Information

• Cannot determine when/how recorded
• Unknown informant or circumstances

Critical Distinction: An ORIGINAL source can contain SECONDARY information!

• Example: Original death certificate (original source) contains birth date (secondary information - reported decades later)

3. Evidence Classification (How it answers your question)

Direct Evidence

• Explicitly states the fact needed
• Answers question directly
• Example: birth certificate stating birth date

Indirect Evidence

• Implies or suggests fact
• Requires combining with other sources
• Example: age on census implies birth year

Negative Evidence

• Absence of expected information
• "Silence" that suggests something
• Example: person missing from expected census

Source Reliability Ranking

Reliability Factors (highest to lowest)

Tier 1: Highest Reliability

• Original source
• Primary information
• Direct evidence
• Informed informant with direct knowledge
• Recorded contemporaneously
• Official/professional record keeper
• Corroborated by multiple independent sources

Tier 2: Moderate-High Reliability

• Original source with secondary information
• Derivative source with primary information
• Informed informant but later recording
• Consistent with other sources
• Professional transcription/database

Tier 3: Moderate Reliability

• Derivative source with secondary information
• Uncertain informant quality
• Indirect evidence only
• Some inconsistencies with other sources
• Amateur transcription

Tier 4: Low Reliability

• Compiled sources with unclear provenance
• Secondary information from unknown informant
• Contradicted by stronger sources
• Known errors in record/database
• Hearsay or family tradition unsupported by documents

Evidence Comparison Matrix

When analyzing multiple sources, create a systematic comparison:

Pattern Analysis:

• Three consistent sources vs. one conflicting
• Earlier sources vs. later source
• Likely informed informant (self) vs. unknown informant
• Corroboration pattern strongly favors Ohio

Conflict Types and Resolutions

Type 1: Direct Contradictions

Nature: Sources explicitly disagree Example: "born Ohio" vs. "born Pennsylvania"

Resolution Strategy: 1. Evaluate relative reliability of each source 2. Consider informant quality and proximity 3. Weight earlier/more reliable sources more heavily 4. Look for corroboration patterns 5. Apply preponderance of evidence

Type 2: Chronological Inconsistencies

Nature: Dates don't align logically Example: Married before birth, died before event

Resolution Strategy: 1. Check for transcription errors 2. Consider old style vs. new style dates 3. Verify calendar systems (Julian vs. Gregorian) 4. Look for documentation errors 5. Evaluate if actually impossible or unlikely

Type 3: Minor Variations

Nature: Small differences in ages, dates Example: Age differs by 1-2 years across censuses

Resolution Strategy: 1. Consider rounding (ages often rounded) 2. Memory errors for secondary information 3. Mathematical errors by enumerator 4. Not necessarily significant conflict 5. May accept range rather than exact date

Type 4: Name Variations

Nature: Different spellings, nicknames Example: Johann/John, Elizabeth/Betsey, Smith/Smythe

Resolution Strategy: 1. Consider name evolution over time 2. Research phonetic spellings 3. Cultural naming practices 4. Enumerator's interpretation 5. Often not true conflict

Type 5: Informant Error

Nature: Uninformed informant provided wrong info Example: Neighbor giving deceased's birth info

Resolution Strategy: 1. Assess informant's knowledge level 2. Consider relationship to subject 3. Evaluate proximity to event 4. Weight informed sources over uninformed 5. Recognize honest mistakes vs. deception

Type 6: Both Partially Correct

Nature: Each source reflects different truth Example: Born in one place, raised in another (both claimed)

Resolution Strategy: 1. Look for evidence of movement 2. Consider "near border" situations 3. Research dual connections 4. Evaluate if both could be true 5. May require accepting complexity

Conflict Resolution Framework

Step 1: Evaluate Each Side

For each conflicting source, assess:

• Reliability ranking (Tier 1-4)
• Information type (primary/secondary)
• Informant identity and knowledge
• Timing of record creation
• Consistency with other sources

Step 2: Explore Explanations

Possible Explanations for Conflicts:

Transcription/Recording Errors

• Misheard by enumerator
• Handwriting misread
• Database transcription error
• Abbreviation misinterpreted

Informant Error

• Memory failure
• Didn't actually know
• Deliberate deception (age fraud)
• Misunderstood question

Both Partially Correct

• Born one place, raised another
• Near border (claimed by both)
• Moved shortly after event
• Different specificity levels

Changed Information

• Name changes over time
• Adoption/foster situations
• Boundary changes
• Different maiden/married names

Different Individuals

• Common name confusion
• Multiple people same name
• Wrong person in database

Contextual Factors

• Political pressure
• Legal advantages
• Social stigma avoidance
• Cultural practices

Step 3: Apply Evidence Weight

Weighting Principles: 1. Quality over Quantity - One strong source beats three weak ones 2. Primary over Secondary - Contemporary recording more reliable 3. Original over Derivative - First recording preferred 4. Informed over Uninformed - Knowledgeable informant crucial 5. Corroborated over Standalone - Independent confirmation strengthens 6. Earlier over Later - Closer to event generally better 7. Consistent over Contradicted - Pattern matters

Calculate Preponderance:

• Assign weight percentages to sources
• Strong, consistent sources = higher weight
• Weak, contradictory sources = lower weight
• Determine where balance tips (>50% threshold)

Example:

• 3 census records (Tier 2, consistent): 75% weight
• 1 death certificate (Tier 3, conflicts): 25% weight
• Preponderance: 75% favors census version

Step 4: Determine Resolution

Resolution Outcomes:

Definitively Resolved

• Preponderance strongly favors one version
• Conflicting source explained satisfactorily
• Independent corroboration supports resolution
• Can state conclusion with confidence

Probably Resolved

• Preponderance favors one version
• Some uncertainty remains
• Conflicting source not fully explained
• State conclusion with caveat

Unresolved

• Sources equally balanced
• No clear preponderance
• Insufficient additional evidence
• Acknowledge as unresolved conflict
• List what additional research needed

Both Partially True

• Evidence supports complexity
• Multiple truths documented
• Explain nuanced situation
• Acknowledge dual realities

GPS Element 4: Resolving Conflicting Evidence

Requirements for GPS Compliance

Identification:

• All conflicts must be identified
• No conflicts ignored or glossed over
• Contradictions explicitly stated

Analysis:

• Each conflict systematically analyzed
• Source reliability assessed
• Informant quality evaluated
• Timing considered

Resolution or Acknowledgment:

• Conflicts resolved with reasoning explained
• OR acknowledged as unresolvable
• Weighting explicitly discussed
• Preponderance demonstrated

Documentation:

• Resolution process documented
• Reasoning transparent
• Alternative explanations considered
• Evidence weight shown

Preponderance of Evidence Analysis

Preponderance Definition: The conclusion supported by the strongest, most reliable, most consistent evidence is most likely correct.

Assessment Questions: 1. How many sources support each conclusion? 2. What is the quality of sources on each side? 3. Are corroborating sources independent? 4. Which informants were most knowledgeable? 5. Which information is primary vs. secondary? 6. What is the pattern of consistency?

Preponderance Thresholds:

• Strong Preponderance (>75%) - Proven or Probable
• Moderate Preponderance (60-75%) - Probable
• Slight Preponderance (50-60%) - Possible
• No Preponderance (<50%) - Unproven/Unresolved

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

❌ Ignoring conflicts - GPS requires addressing all conflicts ❌ Cherry-picking - Using only sources that support preferred conclusion ❌ Quantity over quality - Three weak sources don't outweigh one strong one ❌ Dismissing later sources - Later sources can be reliable if primary information ❌ Assuming original = accurate - Original sources can contain errors ❌ Accepting tradition uncritically - Family stories need documentary corroboration ❌ Over-weighting one source - Even strong sources need corroboration ❌ Under-documenting - Must show reasoning, not just assert conclusion

Proof Argument Construction

Structure of Proof Argument

1. State Conclusion

• Answer research question directly
• Be specific (names, dates, places)
• Indicate level of certainty

2. Present Strongest Evidence

• Lead with most reliable sources
• Explain source quality
• Show corroboration pattern

3. Address Conflicts

• Acknowledge contradictory sources
• Explain reliability differences
• Show resolution reasoning

4. Apply Evidence Weight

• Demonstrate preponderance
• Show percentage distribution
• Explain why weighted as done

5. Acknowledge Limitations

• Note evidence gaps
• Recognize uncertainty
• Suggest additional research

6. State Conclusion with Appropriate Proof Level

• Proven: Beyond reasonable doubt
• Probable: Preponderance supports
• Possible: Some evidence, gaps remain
• Assign level honestly

Example Proof Argument

Research Question: What was John Smith's birth location?

Conclusion: John Smith was born in Ohio, circa 1820. [PROBABLE]

Argument:

The preponderance of evidence supports John Smith's birth in Ohio around 1820. Three independent federal census enumerations (1850, 1860, 1870) consistently report his birthplace as Ohio, with ages progressing logically from 30 to 40 to 50, implying birth circa 1820. These census records are original documents, with information likely provided by John Smith himself as head of household, making him an informed source despite the secondary nature of birth information recorded decades after the event.

The consistency across three enumerations spanning 20 years, with the same likely informant, significantly strengthens this evidence. Independent corroboration exists in the Ohio birth locations of all known children (1846-1860) and John's documented Ohio residence by 1845 (marriage record).

One conflicting source exists: John's 1920 death certificate reports his birthplace as Pennsylvania. However, this source carries less weight because: (1) the informant is unknown and almost certainly not a family member; (2) the information was recorded 98+ years after John's birth; (3) the informant likely had no direct knowledge; (4) it conflicts with three earlier, more reliable sources. The most plausible explanation is informant error.

Evidence weight distribution: Census records (75%) vs. death certificate (25%). The preponderance strongly favors Ohio birth.

While evidence strongly supports Ohio birth, the specific county cannot be determined from current sources. Pennsylvania cannot be entirely ruled out without positive birth evidence or definitive proof of no Pennsylvania connection.

The "probable" rather than "proven" designation reflects: (1) secondary nature of all birth information; (2) one conflicting source; (3) lack of primary birth evidence. Additional research in Ohio birth/baptism records 1818-1822 would strengthen to "proven."

This argument demonstrates:

• Clear conclusion with proof level
• Strongest evidence presented first
• Conflicts addressed honestly
• Weighting explained
• Limitations acknowledged
• Reasoning transparent and logical

Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS) Guidelines

Detailed requirements for the five-element GPS framework used by professional genealogists.

Overview

The Genealogical Proof Standard is the professional benchmark for evaluating genealogical conclusions. It consists of five interdependent elements that must ALL be satisfied for a conclusion to meet GPS.

The Five Elements: 1. Reasonably exhaustive research 2. Complete and accurate source citations 3. Analysis and correlation of collected information 4. Resolution of conflicting evidence 5. Soundly reasoned, coherently written conclusion

GPS Compliance Levels:

• ✅ Fully GPS-Compliant - All five elements satisfied
• ⚠️ Substantially Compliant - Most elements met, minor gaps
• ❌ Non-Compliant - Significant deficiencies in one or more elements

Element 1: Reasonably Exhaustive Research

What It Means

Research should be thorough enough that:

• Most relevant sources have been searched
• Unlikely that major contradictory evidence remains undiscovered
• Additional research would probably only confirm existing conclusion
• All "obvious" sources for the time/place/question have been consulted

NOT:

• Every conceivable source in existence
• Sources unlikely to contain relevant information
• Sources physically/practically inaccessible

Assessment Questions

Have you searched:

• ✓ All standard sources for the time period and location?
• ✓ Multiple source types (not just one category)?
• ✓ Both direct and indirect sources?
• ✓ Original records where available?
• ✓ Associated persons (FAN principle)?
• ✓ Multiple repositories and databases?

Can you say:

• ✓ "I searched all accessible census records 1850-1900"
• ✓ "I searched both original courthouse records and online databases"
• ✓ "I consulted vital records, land records, and probate records"
• ✓ "I searched for siblings, neighbors, and associates"

Red Flags for Insufficient Research:

• ❌ Only searched online databases, never accessed original records
• ❌ Only consulted one source type (e.g., only census)
• ❌ Haven't searched negative sources (where person should be but isn't)
• ❌ Haven't researched collateral lines or associates
• ❌ Major record groups not yet searched

Source Categories to Consider

Essential Sources (time/place dependent):

• Census records (federal, state, territorial)
• Vital records (birth, marriage, death)
• Land records (deeds, tax rolls)
• Probate records (wills, estates)
• Church records (baptism, marriage, burial)

Supporting Sources:

• Military records
• Immigration/naturalization
• Newspapers
• City directories
• Court records
• School records
• Cemetery records

Contextual Sources:

• Published county histories
• Maps and gazetteers
• Record availability guides
• Background histories

FAN Principle:

• Family members (parents, siblings, spouses, children)
• Associates (business partners, witnesses)
• Neighbors (clustered in records)

Documentation of Exhaustive Research

GPS requires demonstrating research was thorough:

Document:

• Sources searched (positive and negative results)
• Date ranges searched
• Repositories consulted
• Search strategies used
• Why certain sources weren't searched (unavailable, destroyed, irrelevant)

Research Log Components:

• All databases and websites searched
• Physical repositories visited
• Correspondence sent
• Microfilm reviewed
• Books and publications consulted
• Negative results explicitly noted

When Is Research "Exhaustive Enough"?

Factors to Consider:

• Complexity of research question
• Availability of records
• Consistency of evidence found
• Presence/absence of conflicts
• Time period and location challenges

For "Proven" Conclusion:

• Must be truly exhaustive
• All major sources searched
• No major gaps
• Pattern of consistent evidence

For "Probable" Conclusion:

• Substantially thorough
• Key sources searched
• Some gaps acceptable
• Preponderance of evidence established

For "Possible" Hypothesis:

• Preliminary research done
• Some sources searched
• Significant gaps remain
• Needs more research before conclusion

Element 2: Complete and Accurate Source Citations

What It Means

Every source used must be:

• Completely cited following accepted standards
• Accurately cited (no errors in transcription)
• Sufficient for others to locate the same source
• Distinguished (original vs. derivative noted)

Citation Requirements

Complete Citations Include:

• Author/Creator (if applicable)
• Title/Description of source
• Publication/Creation information
• Repository/Location
• Specific item location (page, volume, entry, etc.)
• Access information (URL, microfilm, call number)
• Access date (for online sources)

Evidence Explained Standard: Three citation forms needed: 1. Full Reference Note - Complete first citation 2. Short Reference Note - Abbreviated subsequent citations 3. Source List Entry - Bibliography format

Critical Distinctions:

• Original source vs. derivative vs. database
• Digital image vs. transcription vs. index
• What you actually consulted (not what you wish you consulted)

Common Citation Errors

❌ "Found on Ancestry" - Too vague, not enough detail ❌ "1870 Census" - Missing county, state, page, household ❌ No URL or access date for online sources ❌ Not distinguishing database transcription from original image ❌ Incomplete repository information ❌ No page numbers or specific location within source

GPS Compliance for Citations

Fully Compliant:

• Every source has complete citation
• Citations follow recognized standard
• Sufficient detail to relocate sources
• Original/derivative distinctions clear

Non-Compliant:

• Missing citations for sources used
• Vague or incomplete citations
• No standard format followed
• Cannot relocate sources using citations

Element 3: Analysis and Correlation

What It Means

Evidence must be:

• Analyzed individually (each source evaluated for reliability)
• Correlated systematically (sources compared and connected)
• Evaluated collectively (pattern assessment)
• Tested against alternative explanations

NOT just:

• Listing sources found
• Transcribing records
• Accumulating information without analysis

Individual Source Analysis

For each source, evaluate:

Source Classification:

• Original, derivative, or authored?

Information Classification:

• Primary, secondary, or undetermined?

Evidence Classification:

• Direct, indirect, or negative?

Reliability Factors:

• Who created the record?
• When was it created relative to event?
• Who provided information?
• What was their knowledge/relationship?
• Any known biases or errors?
• Condition and completeness?

Correlation Process

Systematic Comparison:

• What does each source say about the fact?
• Where do sources agree?
• Where do they conflict?
• Are corroborating sources truly independent?

Pattern Recognition:

• Consistent information across multiple sources
• Progressive timeline of information
• Contextual corroboration (related facts fit together)
• Discrepancies that need explanation

Testing Hypothesis:

• Does evidence support conclusion?
• What evidence would contradict it?
• Are alternative explanations possible?
• What evidence is missing?

GPS Compliance for Analysis

Fully Compliant:

• Each source analyzed individually
• Sources systematically compared
• Reliability assessed explicitly
• Corroboration demonstrated
• Patterns identified
• Alternative explanations considered

Non-Compliant:

• Sources listed without analysis
• No reliability assessment
• Conflicting sources not identified
• No systematic comparison
• Accepts information uncritically

Element 4: Resolution of Conflicting Evidence

What It Means

When sources disagree:

• All conflicts must be identified
• Each conflict must be analyzed
• Resolution must be attempted
• If unresolvable, must be acknowledged

Resolution shows:

• Why some sources weigh more heavily
• What explanations considered
• How preponderance determined
• What conclusion supported

Conflict Resolution Requirements

Identification:

• Every conflict explicitly stated
• Nature of discrepancy described
• Sources involved identified

Evaluation:

• Reliability of conflicting sources assessed
• Information quality compared
• Informant credibility evaluated
• Timing of recording considered

Explanation:

• Possible reasons for conflict explored
• Most plausible explanation identified
• Evidence weight explicitly assigned

Resolution or Acknowledgment:

• Conflict resolved with reasoning shown
• OR conflict acknowledged as unresolvable
• Preponderance of evidence demonstrated
• Impact on conclusion explained

GPS Compliance for Conflicts

Fully Compliant:

• All conflicts identified and addressed
• Systematic evaluation performed
• Weighting explicitly explained
• Resolution logical and documented
• OR acknowledged as unresolved with impact noted

Non-Compliant:

• Conflicts ignored or glossed over
• Conflicting sources not evaluated
• No explanation for weighting
• Cherry-picking evidence
• Dismissing conflicts without analysis

Element 5: Soundly Reasoned, Coherently Written Conclusion

What It Means

The conclusion must:

• Answer the research question directly
• Flow logically from the evidence
• Be clearly and coherently written
• Show transparent reasoning
• Acknowledge limitations
• Assign appropriate proof level

Components of Sound Conclusion

Clear Statement:

• Directly answers research question
• Specific (names, dates, places)
• Indicates level of certainty
• Appropriately qualified

Logical Reasoning:

• Proceeds from evidence to conclusion
• Steps explained clearly
• No logical leaps
• Alternative explanations addressed

Coherent Writing:

• Well-organized structure
• Clear, professional language
• Technical terms used correctly
• Free of ambiguity

Transparent Process:

• Reasoning visible and explicit
• Assumptions stated
• Limitations acknowledged
• Evidence weight shown

Appropriate Proof Level:

• Proven: Beyond reasonable doubt
• Probable: Preponderance supports
• Possible: Some evidence, gaps remain
• Honestly reflects evidence strength

GPS Compliance for Conclusions

Fully Compliant:

• Conclusion directly addresses question
• Logic is sound and explicit
• Writing is clear and coherent
• Reasoning is transparent
• Proof level appropriate to evidence
• Limitations acknowledged

Non-Compliant:

• Vague or unclear conclusion
• Logical fallacies
• Reasoning not explained
• Over or understates certainty
• Ignores evidence limitations
• Poor organization or writing

GPS Self-Assessment Checklist

Element 1: Reasonably Exhaustive Research

• [ ] All standard sources for time/place/question searched
• [ ] Multiple source types consulted
• [ ] Both direct and indirect sources examined
• [ ] FAN principle applied (family, associates, neighbors)
• [ ] Negative results documented
• [ ] Research log maintained

Element 2: Complete Citations

• [ ] Every source has complete citation
• [ ] Citations follow Evidence Explained or other standard
• [ ] Sufficient detail to relocate sources
• [ ] Original/derivative distinctions clear
• [ ] Online sources include URL and access date
• [ ] Three citation forms provided (full, short, source list)

Element 3: Analysis and Correlation

• [ ] Each source analyzed individually
• [ ] Source classification determined (original/derivative)
• [ ] Information type assessed (primary/secondary)
• [ ] Evidence type identified (direct/indirect/negative)
• [ ] Reliability factors evaluated
• [ ] Sources systematically compared
• [ ] Corroboration demonstrated
• [ ] Patterns identified

Element 4: Conflict Resolution

• [ ] All conflicts identified
• [ ] Each conflict systematically analyzed
• [ ] Source reliability compared
• [ ] Possible explanations explored
• [ ] Evidence weighting explicit
• [ ] Preponderance demonstrated
• [ ] Resolution documented OR acknowledged as unresolved

Element 5: Sound Conclusion

• [ ] Conclusion directly answers research question
• [ ] Logic flows from evidence
• [ ] Reasoning is transparent
• [ ] Writing is clear and coherent
• [ ] Limitations acknowledged
• [ ] Appropriate proof level assigned
• [ ] Alternative explanations addressed

Common GPS Compliance Issues

Why Conclusions Fail GPS

Insufficient Research:

• Only searched online databases
• Single source type only
• Obvious sources not consulted
• Negative results not documented

Poor Citations:

• Vague or incomplete
• No recognized standard
• Can't relocate sources
• Original/derivative confused

Weak Analysis:

• Sources accepted uncritically
• No reliability assessment
• No systematic comparison
• Corroboration not demonstrated

Unresolved Conflicts:

• Conflicts ignored
• Cherry-picking evidence
• No weighting explanation
• Contradictions glossed over

Weak Conclusions:

• Doesn't answer question
• Logic unclear
• Over/understates certainty
• Ignores limitations

GPS in Practice

How Professional Genealogists Use GPS

During Research:

• Guides source selection (exhaustive research)
• Ensures proper documentation (citations)
• Prompts analysis as you work
• Identifies conflicts early

After Research:

• Framework for organizing findings
• Structure for proof argument
• Standard for peer review
• Benchmark for publication

For Difficult Cases:

• Systematic approach to complexity
• Forces addressing conflicts
• Prevents premature conclusions
• Ensures thorough documentation

GPS and Proof Levels

Proven (GPS fully satisfied):

• All five elements strongly met
• No significant gaps or weaknesses
• Beyond reasonable doubt
• Publication-ready

Probable (GPS substantially satisfied):

• Elements mostly met
• Minor gaps or limitations
• Preponderance of evidence
• Needs some strengthening

Possible (GPS partially satisfied):

• Significant gaps in elements
• Preliminary research
• Some evidence, not conclusive
• Needs substantial work

Resources

GPS Standard: Board for Certification of Genealogists (BCG) https://www.bcgcertification.org/resources/standard.html

Citation Standard: Elizabeth Shown Mills, Evidence Explained https://www.evidenceexplained.com/

Professional Standards: National Genealogical Society (NGS) https://www.ngsgenealogy.org/

Research Log Guidance & Best Practices

This document provides comprehensive guidance for creating detailed research logs following professional genealogical standards. Use this alongside the simplified research-log-template.md for your daily research work.

Overview

A research log is a systematic record of your research activities, sources searched, findings discovered, and evidence analyzed. It serves multiple purposes:

• Documentation: Proves your research was reasonably exhaustive
• Accountability: Supports your conclusions with cited evidence
• Continuity: Allows you to pick up where you left off
• Quality Control: Helps identify gaps and conflicts
• Professional Standard: Meets Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS) requirements

---

Session Metadata

Essential Information

Date, Researcher, Session Number:

• Record the date you conducted research
• Include your name (useful if shared with collaborators)
• Number sessions sequentially for this research project
• Include time spent for tracking research effort

Research Context:

• Clearly state your research goal (one session, one goal)
• Identify the specific ancestor or project
• List the research questions you're trying to answer
• Reference your overall research plan if you have one

---

Sources Searched - Comprehensive Documentation

Complete Source Table

Track ALL sources searched, including those with negative results:

Search Strategies - Document Your Method

For each major source searched, document:

Search Approach:

• Did you search the exact name?
• What name variations did you try? (maiden names, alternate spellings, nicknames)
• What date ranges did you search? (broader than expected? narrower?)
• What geographic filters/limits did you use?
• Did you browse manually or use keyword search?
• What specific fields did you search?

Challenges Encountered:

• Database interface difficulties
• Name variations creating confusion
• Records not indexed as expected
• Access limitations
• Time constraints

Time Investment:

• How long did this source take?
• Was the time spent proportional to the importance of the source?

Negative Results Are Evidence

Sources Expected to Contain Information But Didn't: 1. [Source name]

• Expected: What information you thought would be there
• Search Strategy: How thoroughly you searched (all variations? full date range?)
• Possible Reasons: Why information might be absent (destroyed? indexed differently? person not in database?)
• Implications: What this tells you (moved away? changed name? didn't exist?)

Negative results are just as important as positive ones. They prove your research was reasonably exhaustive.

---

Findings & Discoveries - Systematic Documentation

Organize by Source

For each finding, document the complete context:

Finding: [Description]

• Source: [Full Evidence Explained citation]
• Key Information:
• Names (exactly as written in document)
• Dates (birth, marriage, death, or event dates)
• Locations (jurisdictions, specific places)
• Relationships (parent-child, spouse, sibling)
• Other details (occupation, residency, status)
• Exact Wording: "[Quote from document if relevant]"
• Significance: How this answers your research questions
• New Questions Raised: What does this make you wonder about?
• Source Quality: Is this original or derivative? How reliable?

Unexpected Discoveries

Document anything surprising or unanticipated:

• Side-line discoveries about other ancestors
• Information contradicting previous assumptions
• Clues suggesting different research directions
• Contextual information that changes interpretation

---

Source Citations - Complete Documentation

Evidence Explained Format

Provide complete, formal citations for all sources (positive and negative results):

1. Fully cited as per Evidence Explained methodology 2. Include retrieval information (database, search terms, date accessed for online sources) 3. Cite even negative results (source you searched thoroughly but found no information) 4. Complete citations prove your research and allow others to verify

Citation Elements

Your citations should include:

• Author/Creator (if applicable)
• Title (of record, database, book, etc.)
• Publication/Access Information
• Specific page/entry/image reference
• Date accessed (for online sources)
• Search terms used (if searching database)

---

Evidence Analysis - Critical Evaluation

Distinguish Facts from Interpretation

Facts Learned:

• Information directly stated in documents
• Include source for each fact
• Record exactly as stated (even if you think it's wrong)

Interpretation:

• Your analysis of what the facts mean
• Connections you've made
• Conclusions you're drawing
• Keep separate from factual information

Evidence Type Classification

Direct Evidence:

• Explicitly states the fact being proven
• Example: "John Smith, born 15 May 1845, son of Robert and Mary Smith"

Indirect Evidence:

• Suggests a relationship but doesn't state it explicitly
• Example: John listed as head of household in 1870 census with children born 1850-1865
• Requires analysis to interpret

Negative Evidence:

• Expected records not found
• Proves exhaustive search but something is missing
• Requires interpretation (moved away? not recorded? false assumption?)

Reliability Assessment

Evaluate each source for reliability:

High Reliability:

• Original records (not copies)
• Made close to the event
• By someone with knowledge of the facts
• No obvious bias or errors

Moderate Reliability:

• Derivative records or secondary sources
• Made some time after the event
• Based on available information but not original

Low Reliability:

• Family folklore or oral tradition
• Secondary sources far removed from events
• Known errors or inconsistencies
• Written long after the event

Identify Conflicts & Discrepancies

Conflicting Information:

1. [Description of conflict]

• Source A says: [Statement and citation]
• Source B says: [Statement and citation]
• Nature of conflict: [Date discrepancy? Location? Name? Relationship?]
• Preliminary assessment: [Which seems more reliable and why?]
• Further research needed: [What would help resolve this?]

Document conflicts honestly. They don't weaken your research—resolving them strengthens it.

---

Document & Image Management

File Organization

If obtaining documents or images:

File Naming Convention:

• Use consistent, descriptive names
• Include ancestor name, date, source, type
• Example: Smith_John_1870Census_Coshocton_OH.jpg

Storage Location:

• Primary storage location (hard drive, cloud)
• Backup location
• Organization method (by ancestor? by source type? by date?)
• Naming conventions used

Document Transcription

If you transcribe records:

Source: [Full citation]

Transcription: [Exact text of document, preserving original spelling, capitalization, punctuation]

[unclear] = unclear text [damaged] = damaged/illegible portion [sic] = note obvious errors

---

Research Quality Assurance

Self-Assessment Checklist

Before finishing your research session:

• [ ] All sources searched are documented (including those with no results)
• [ ] Complete citations are recorded for all sources
• [ ] Findings are distinguished from interpretation
• [ ] Images/documents are properly filed and referenced
• [ ] Source citations match actual sources consulted
• [ ] Next steps are specific and actionable
• [ ] Research contributes to answering stated research questions
• [ ] Both positive and negative results are documented
• [ ] Conflicts identified and assessed for reliability
• [ ] Evidence quality and type assessed

GPS Compliance Check

Your research log should support the Genealogical Proof Standard:

• Reasonably Exhaustive Research: Did you search all available sources?
• Your sources searched table proves this

• Complete and Accurate Citations: Are all sources fully cited?
• Your source citations section proves this

• Analysis & Correlation: Did you analyze what you found?
• Your evidence notes and findings section prove this

• Conflict Resolution: Did you identify and address discrepancies?
• Your evidence analysis section proves this

• Soundly Reasoned Conclusions: Can someone follow your logic?
• Your next steps and session notes prove this

---

Advanced Topics

Hypotheses and Patterns

Document:

• Hypotheses you're testing (this person might be related to that family because...)
• Patterns noticed (all children born in same county suggests resident family)
• Contextual observations (immigration patterns, land availability, family networks)
• Connections emerging (how this fits into larger family picture)

Repository Interactions

If you visit or contact repositories:

[Repository Name]:

• Address and hours
• Contact person/method
• Access policies (restrictions? fees?)
• Records available
• What you requested/obtained
• Any limitations encountered
• Future contact information

Research Expenses

Track costs (useful for professional genealogy):

Total session cost: [$]

---

Session Evaluation - Reflective Practice

After completing your research session:

Progress Made: Excellent / Good / Moderate / Limited

Goals Achieved: Which specific goals from the start of your session were accomplished?

Challenges: What made research difficult?

• Difficult sources? Limited access? Conflicting information?

Lessons Learned: What worked well? What didn't?

• What search strategies were most effective?
• What would you do differently next time?
• Any techniques discovered?

Overall Assessment: Brief summary of your session's productivity

---

Continuity & Navigation

Linking Sessions Together

Connect related research:

• Research Plan: Link to your overall research plan
• Previous Log: Link to previous session (showed progress)
• Next Log: Link to next session (plans built on this work)
• Related Analysis: Link to formal evidence analysis documents
• Related Templates: Link to related research plan or citation library

This helps create a complete research history and shows progression of your work.

---

Professional Standards

Your research log should meet standards established by:

• Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS) - reasonably exhaustive research documented
• Evidence Explained - complete and accurate citations
• Board for Certification of Genealogists (BCG) - professional methodology
• National Genealogical Society (NGS) - research standards

A well-documented research log allows:

• Peer review of your work
• Reproduction of your research
• Verification of your conclusions
• Professional publication if desired

---

Getting Started

1. Use the practical template (research-log-template.md) for daily research 2. Refer to this guidance when you need detailed explanations 3. Adapt to your needs - not every section applies to every session 4. Be consistent - develop a personal system and stick with it 5. Be thorough - good documentation takes time but pays off

Remember: Your research log is proof of your work. Make it detailed enough that someone else (or you, six months later) could understand exactly what you did and why.

Research Plan Guidance and Best Practices

This document provides detailed guidance, examples, and best practices for creating effective family history research plans. Use this as a reference when completing the research-plan-template.md.

---

Table of Contents

1. Project Objective 2. Research Questions 3. Record Sources Checklist 4. Research Strategy 5. Timeline Planning 6. Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS) 7. Success Criteria 8. Documentation Best Practices

---

Project Objective

How to Write Effective Research Questions

A good research question is:

• Specific: Focuses on one person or family relationship
• Answerable: Based on records that likely exist
• Clear: States exactly what you want to discover

Examples

Good Research Questions:

• "Determine the birth location and parents of John Smith (b. circa 1820, d. 1895 in Ohio)"
• "Identify the maiden name and parents of Mary Johnson (b. 1845, married 1865)"
• "Establish when and where the Thompson family migrated from Virginia to Kentucky"

Too Broad:

• "Learn about the Smith family"
• "Find ancestors in Europe"

Too Vague:

• "Find information about John"
• "Research family history"

---

Research Questions

Creating Prioritized Questions

Research questions should be ranked by: 1. Primary: The main question that needs answering 2. Supporting: Questions that help answer the primary question 3. Contextual: Background information that aids research

Example Question List

1. Where was John Smith born and when? (PRIMARY) 2. Who were John Smith's parents? (PRIMARY) 3. Where did John Smith reside between 1835-1845? (SUPPORTING) 4. When did John Smith migrate to Ohio? (SUPPORTING) 5. Are there siblings who can provide clues to origins? (CONTEXTUAL) 6. What church did the family attend? (CONTEXTUAL) 7. Who were John Smith's neighbors in 1850? (CONTEXTUAL - FAN principle)

---

Record Sources Checklist

Vital Records

• [ ] Birth certificates/records
• [ ] Marriage licenses/certificates
• [ ] Death certificates
• [ ] Church baptism records
• [ ] Church marriage records
• [ ] Church burial records
• [ ] Delayed birth records
• [ ] Divorce records

Census Records

• [ ] Federal census: 1850, 1860, 1870, 1880, 1900, 1910, 1920, 1930, 1940, 1950
• [ ] State/territorial census
• [ ] Mortality schedules
• [ ] Agricultural schedules
• [ ] Manufacturing schedules
• [ ] Veterans schedules

Land and Property Records

• [ ] Deed records (grantee index)
• [ ] Deed records (grantor index)
• [ ] Land grants/patents
• [ ] Homestead applications
• [ ] Tax records/assessments
• [ ] Plat maps
• [ ] Warranty deeds
• [ ] Quit claim deeds

Probate Records

• [ ] Wills
• [ ] Estate files
• [ ] Guardianship records
• [ ] Estate settlements
• [ ] Administration papers
• [ ] Probate petitions
• [ ] Estate inventories
• [ ] Distribution of assets

Military Records

• [ ] Service records
• [ ] Pension files (widow's pensions valuable!)
• [ ] Draft registrations
• [ ] Bounty land warrants
• [ ] Compiled military service records
• [ ] Discharge papers
• [ ] Veterans benefits applications

Immigration/Migration

• [ ] Passenger lists (arrival)
• [ ] Passenger lists (departure)
• [ ] Naturalization records (declarations)
• [ ] Naturalization records (petitions)
• [ ] Border crossings
• [ ] Port of entry records
• [ ] Passport applications

Court Records

• [ ] Civil cases
• [ ] Criminal cases
• [ ] Adoption records
• [ ] Name changes
• [ ] Lunacy proceedings
• [ ] Bastardy bonds

Newspapers and Publications

• [ ] Obituaries
• [ ] Marriage announcements
• [ ] Birth announcements
• [ ] Death notices
• [ ] Legal notices
• [ ] Social columns
• [ ] Business advertisements

Other Important Sources

• [ ] City directories
• [ ] Cemetery records
• [ ] Funeral home records
• [ ] School records
• [ ] Employment records
• [ ] Published county histories
• [ ] Compiled genealogies
• [ ] Family Bible records
• [ ] Organization memberships
• [ ] Professional licenses

---

Research Strategy

Four-Phase Approach

Phase 1: Foundation (Weeks 1-2)

Focus: Establish basic timeline and collect easily accessible records

Activities:

• Search online census records for all available years
• Locate death certificate for end-of-life information
• Search online vital records indexes
• Review FamilySearch and Ancestry trees (with caution)
• Search FindAGrave for burial information

Goal: Create solid foundation of dates, locations, and family composition

Phase 2: Core Research (Weeks 3-6)

Focus: Obtain primary sources and expand timeline

Activities:

• Request vital records from county/state agencies
• Search land and property records
• Research probate and estate files
• Examine church records
• Review military pension files if applicable

Goal: Fill gaps in knowledge and collect original documents

Phase 3: Expansion (Weeks 7-10)

Focus: Collateral research and supporting evidence

Activities:

• Research siblings and associates (FAN principle)
• Review published county histories
• Search newspapers for obituaries and notices
• Investigate church membership records
• Explore social organizations and memberships

Goal: Build comprehensive picture through indirect evidence

Phase 4: Analysis and Documentation (Weeks 11-12)

Focus: Evaluate evidence and document conclusions

Activities:

• Analyze and correlate all evidence
• Resolve conflicting information
• Build proof argument
• Write research report
• Create evidence analysis

Goal: Meet Genealogical Proof Standard and document findings

Strategic Approaches

FAN Principle

Family, Associates, and Neighbors

Research extends beyond the primary subject to include:

• Family: Parents, siblings, children, cousins, in-laws
• Associates: Business partners, witnesses on documents, godparents
• Neighbors: Those living nearby in census, deed witnesses, church members

Why It Works: When direct evidence is missing, studying the network often reveals clues through indirect references.

Cluster Research

Identify surname clusters or communities to study together:

• Families who migrated together
• Same-surname families in one area
• Religious or ethnic communities

Geographic Strategy

Follow migration patterns:

• Work backward from last known location
• Study common migration routes
• Research origin areas based on naming patterns
• Consider chain migration (following family/friends)

Chronological Approach

• Forward: Start from earliest known ancestor, move forward
• Backward: Start from known person, work back in time (usually more effective)
• Targeted: Focus on specific time period where answers likely exist

---

Timeline Planning

Sample 12-Week Research Timeline

Weeks 1-2: Foundation

• [ ] Search all online census records
• [ ] Locate death certificate
• [ ] Search vital records indexes
• [ ] Review FindAGrave and cemetery records

Weeks 3-4: Vital Records

• [ ] Order birth, marriage, death certificates
• [ ] Search church records for baptism, marriage, burial
• [ ] Review delayed birth records

Weeks 5-6: Property and Probate

• [ ] Search deed indexes (grantee and grantor)
• [ ] Review tax records
• [ ] Examine probate files and wills
• [ ] Check guardianship records

Weeks 7-8: Collateral Research

• [ ] Research siblings' families
• [ ] Identify and research neighbors from census
• [ ] Search for witnesses on documents

Weeks 9-10: Newspapers and Secondary Sources

• [ ] Search newspapers for obituaries
• [ ] Review county histories
• [ ] Check compiled genealogies (verify claims)

Weeks 11-12: Analysis and Documentation

• [ ] Complete evidence analysis
• [ ] Resolve conflicts
• [ ] Build proof argument
• [ ] Write research report

Milestone Tracking

Use milestones to stay on track:

• Week 2: Complete online database searches
• Week 4: Receive vital records ordered
• Week 6: Complete courthouse records research
• Week 8: Finish collateral line research
• Week 10: Complete evidence analysis
• Week 12: Finalize proof argument and report

---

Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS)

The Genealogical Proof Standard requires five elements for any genealogical conclusion:

1. Reasonably Exhaustive Research

What It Means: Search thoroughly in sources likely to contain relevant information.

In Your Plan:

• List all applicable record types for time period and location
• Search both direct sources (vital records) and indirect (FAN research)
• Document negative results (sources that didn't have information)
• Consider both online and offline repositories

Example: For a birth location question, search:

• Birth records (if available for time period)
• Census records showing birthplace
• Death certificate with birthplace
• Marriage record with age/birthplace
• Obituary mentioning birth
• Bible records
• Church baptism

2. Complete and Accurate Source Citations

What It Means: Cite all sources completely so others can find them.

In Your Plan:

• Use Evidence Explained citation format
• Record enough detail to relocate source
• Note repository, collection, volume/page, digital location
• Maintain citation library or database

Example Citation: "Ohio, Coshocton County, Probate Court, Estate Files, 1850-1900, John Smith estate file (1895); Coshocton County Courthouse, Coshocton."

3. Analysis and Correlation

What It Means: Evaluate each source's information quality and reliability, then compare information from multiple sources.

In Your Plan:

• Classify sources (original vs. derivative, primary vs. secondary)
• Assess information reliability
• Create comparison matrices for key facts
• Note patterns and consistencies

Example:

4. Resolution of Conflicting Evidence

What It Means: Identify contradictions and explain which evidence is most reliable.

In Your Plan:

• List all conflicts found
• Assess reliability of each conflicting source
• Apply preponderance of evidence principle
• Document reasoning for choosing one source over another

Example: "Birth year conflict: Census says 1820, death certificate says 1822. Death certificate is preferred because: (1) it's primary information from someone who knew the birth year, (2) it's original information recorded at time of death, (3) census ages are often approximations."

5. Soundly Reasoned Conclusion

What It Means: Build a logical argument from evidence to conclusion.

In Your Plan:

• State conclusion clearly
• Demonstrate logical progression from evidence to conclusion
• Assign appropriate proof level (Proven, Probable, Possible, Disproven, Undetermined)
• Address alternative hypotheses

Example: "Conclusion: John Smith was probably born in 1822 in Virginia based on: (1) death certificate primary information, (2) pattern of Virginia births for siblings, (3) migration timing consistent with Virginia origin, (4) naming patterns suggest Virginia family connections. Proof level: Probable (not proven due to lack of birth record)."

---

Success Criteria

Project Completion Checklist

Research is complete when:

• [ ] All research questions answered or determined to be unanswerable
• [ ] Reasonably exhaustive research completed for time/place
• [ ] All applicable record types searched
• [ ] All sources properly cited using Evidence Explained format
• [ ] Conflicts identified and addressed
• [ ] Evidence analyzed and correlated
• [ ] Proof argument meets GPS standards
• [ ] Appropriate proof level assigned and justified

Required Deliverables

• [ ] Research Report: Narrative explaining findings and proof argument
• [ ] Evidence Analysis: Detailed source comparison and conflict resolution
• [ ] Complete Source Citations: All sources cited completely
• [ ] Research Log: Record of all searches conducted
• [ ] Supporting Documents: Digital copies or transcriptions of key records

Proof Levels

Assign one of these levels to your conclusion:

• Proven: Evidence meets GPS with no reasonable doubt
• Probable: Strong evidence meeting GPS but some uncertainty remains
• Possible: Some supporting evidence but gaps exist
• Disproven: Evidence contradicts the hypothesis
• Undetermined: Insufficient evidence to make a conclusion

---

Documentation Best Practices

Citation Format

Use Evidence Explained format for all citations. This format includes:

• Author (if applicable)
• Title of source
• Publication information or repository
• Specific location within source (page, line, entry)
• Date accessed (for online sources)

Organization System

Recommended Structure:

Project-Name/
├── Research-Plan.md
├── Research-Log.md
├── Citations/
│   ├── Citation-Library.md
│   └── Source-Notes/
├── Documents/
│   ├── Vital-Records/
│   ├── Census/
│   ├── Land-Property/
│   ├── Probate/
│   └── Other/
├── Evidence-Analysis/
└── Reports/

Tools and Software

Genealogy Software:

• Family Tree Maker
• RootsMagic
• Legacy Family Tree
• Gramps (free, open source)

Citation Management:

• Zotero (free)
• EasyBib
• Spreadsheet with citation template

Document Organization:

• Cloud storage (Google Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive)
• Local folders with consistent naming
• Genealogy software document attachment features

File Naming Conventions

Use consistent naming for easy retrieval:

[Surname]-[GivenName]-[RecordType]-[Date]-[Location]

Examples:
Smith-John-DeathCert-1895-CoshoctonOH.pdf
Smith-John-1880Census-CoshoctonOH.pdf
Smith-John-Will-1895-CoshoctonOH.pdf

---

Resources and Planning

Budget Considerations

Typical Research Costs:

• Vital record copies: $10-25 each
• Database subscriptions: $20-50/month
• Courthouse research (travel): Variable
• Document copies from repositories: $0.25-1.00 per page
• Professional researcher (if needed): $30-75/hour

Budget Planning:

• Estimate record costs based on research plan
• Consider subscription vs. pay-per-view databases
• Budget for travel if courthouse visits needed
• Plan for unexpected records discovered

Time Management

Realistic Time Estimates:

• Simple question, good records: 10-20 hours
• Moderate complexity: 40-80 hours
• Complex problem, scarce records: 100+ hours

Weekly Time Allocation:

• 5 hours/week: 2-3 month project
• 10 hours/week: 1-2 month project
• 20 hours/week: 2-4 week project

Skills Assessment

May Need:

• Foreign language translation
• Old handwriting (paleography)
• DNA analysis interpretation
• Legal document terminology understanding
• Historical context of time period

Resources for Learning:

• Online paleography courses
• Genealogy societies and workshops
• DNA analysis webinars
• Historical society resources

Common Constraints

Record Availability:

• Privacy laws (recent records)
• Record destruction (fires, floods, wars)
• Incomplete record keeping
• Non-digitized records

Geographic Distance:

• Records only available at courthouse
• No online access to some repositories
• Travel costs prohibitive

Solutions:

• Hire local researcher
• Request records by mail
• Join local genealogy society for lookups
• Use FamilySearch library loan system

---

Revision and Updates

When to Update Research Plan

Update your plan when:

• New information changes research direction
• Research questions answered (mark complete, add new ones)
• Discovery of new relevant record sources
• Timeline adjustments needed
• Strategy proves ineffective and needs revision

Documenting Changes

Use the Revision History section to track:

• Date of update
• What changed and why
• New directions or strategies
• Completed phases or questions

Example:

- **2024-01-15** - Research plan created
- **2024-02-01** - Updated strategy after finding John Smith in 1850 census
  in Pennsylvania, not Ohio as expected; added Pennsylvania repositories
- **2024-02-20** - Question 1 answered (birth location: PA); added new
  question about parents' origins
- **2024-03-10** - Completed Phase 1 and 2; moving to collateral research

---

Quick Reference: Common Mistakes to Avoid

1. Starting research without a plan - Leads to duplicate work and missed sources 2. Not documenting negative results - You'll waste time searching again 3. Accepting online trees without verification - Trees often contain errors 4. Ignoring conflicting evidence - Must be addressed for GPS 5. Inadequate source citations - Can't verify or relocate sources later 6. Researching too many people at once - Focus on one question at a time 7. Not considering the FAN principle - Missing valuable indirect evidence 8. Stopping at first answer found - Reasonably exhaustive research required 9. Poor file organization - Wastes time finding documents later 10. Not updating the research log - Forget what you've already searched

---

For questions or additional guidance, consult:

• Genealogy Standards (Board for Certification of Genealogists)
• Evidence Explained (Elizabeth Shown Mills)
• Mastering Genealogical Proof (Thomas W. Jones)
• Local genealogy society resources
• Professional genealogist consultations

Family History Research Strategies

Advanced research methodologies and strategic approaches for effective family history and genealogy research.

Core Research Principles

1. FAN Principle (Family, Associates, Neighbors)

Research the network around your ancestor, not just the ancestor alone.

Family:

• Parents, siblings, spouses, children
• In-laws and step-relations
• Aunts, uncles, cousins
• Godparents and guardians

Associates:

• Business partners
• Witnesses to documents
• Executors of wills
• Bond co-signers
• Fellow church members

Neighbors:

• Clustered in census records
• Adjacent land owners
• Same community institutions
• Migration companions

Why It Works:

• Family left records when ancestor didn't
• Associates provide clues to ancestor's activities
• Neighbors help locate ancestor geographically
• Network reveals relationships and context

Application: When researching John Smith:

• Search for all Smith siblings in same records
• Find witnesses on John's marriage record
• Research neighbors from 1850 census
• Track godparents named in baptism records

2. Cluster Genealogy

Study your ancestor within their social cluster.

Identify Clusters:

• Same surname in locality
• Repeated witnesses across documents
• Adjacent land owners
• Same migration patterns
• Common church/organization membership

Track Clusters:

• Follow cluster through records
• Note when cluster members separate
• Identify cluster leaders/patriarchs
• Map cluster relationships

Benefits:

• Reveals family connections
• Provides context for decisions
• Helps distinguish same-name individuals
• Suggests migration routes and destinations

3. Reasonably Exhaustive Research

Work systematically through source types and locations.

Source Prioritization:

Tier 1 - Essential (search first):

• Census records
• Vital records
• Major events (birth, marriage, death)
• Land records
• Probate records

Tier 2 - Important (search next):

• Church records
• Military records
• Immigration/naturalization
• Newspapers
• City directories

Tier 3 - Contextual (as needed):

• Court records
• Tax records
• School records
• Business records
• Organization memberships

Tier 4 - Supplemental (for difficult cases):

• Published histories
• Compiled genealogies
• DNA evidence
• Archaeological evidence
• Oral histories

4. Work Backward from Known to Unknown

Start with what you know for certain and work backward chronologically.

Process: 1. Establish identity of known person with documentation 2. Find parent-child connections 3. Verify each generation before moving back 4. Don't skip generations based on assumptions

Avoid:

• ❌ Working forward from early immigrant
• ❌ Assuming surname means relation
• ❌ Skipping generations
• ❌ Starting with others' research without verification

Geographic Strategies

1. Migration Tracking

Follow ancestors through geographic movement.

Migration Clues:

• Birth places of children (show movement)
• Land sales and purchases
• Changing census locations
• Probate records show both origin and destination
• Newspaper notices of arrivals/departures

Pattern Recognition:

• Chain migration (following relatives/neighbors)
• Following transportation routes (rivers, roads, rails)
• Moving to similar geography/climate
• Seeking specific resources (farmland, mining, manufacturing)

Research Strategy: 1. Establish presence in each location with documentation 2. Search records in both origin and destination 3. Check intermediate locations along migration route 4. Research known migration patterns for time/place

2. Locality Research

Understand the history and records of each location.

Priority Resources (use these first):

• FamilySearch Wiki - Comprehensive locality guides, record information, and research strategies for locations worldwide
• LDSgenealogy.com - State-specific research guides and record information
• Example: Pennsylvania Research
• Includes county formation, record repositories, and research strategies

Essential Background:

• County formation history (which county existed when?)
• Record losses (fires, floods, wars)
• Record repositories (where records are now)
• Boundary changes (did location change counties?)
• Local history (economic, social, religious factors)

Research Guides:

• Red Book (American State, County & Town Sources)
• Wiki sites (FamilySearch Wiki, county wikis)
• State archives research guides
• Local historical society resources

3. Jurisdictional Strategy

Understand which jurisdiction created which records.

Typical Jurisdictions:

• Federal: Census, military, immigration, tax
• State: Vital records, land grants, institutions
• County: Deeds, probate, court, marriages
• Town/City: Local vital records, directories, newspapers
• Church/Private: Baptisms, marriages, burials

Research Implication: Know which level of government to search for each record type.

Record-Specific Strategies

Census Research

Complete Census Search:

• Search every census year person was alive
• Include mortality schedules
• Check agricultural/industrial schedules
• Search state/territorial censuses

Techniques:

• Browse entire enumeration district (find neighbors)
• Check indexes AND browse images (transcription errors)
• Note all household members and relationships
• Track household composition changes
• Compare across multiple censuses

Common Issues:

• Name variations/misspellings
• Age inconsistencies
• Enumeration errors
• Missing enumerations

Land Records Research

Deed Research Strategy:

• Search both grantee (buyer) and grantor (seller) indexes
• Read complete deeds for family relationships
• Note witnesses (often family)
• Check adjoining land owners
• Follow land through generations

Beyond Deeds:

• Tax records (prove ownership without deed)
• Plat maps (show locations)
• Homestead files (rich detail)
• Military bounty land (connects to service)

Probate Research

Comprehensive Probate Search:

• Search by name of deceased
• Search by administrator/executor (might be relative serving)
• Check probate packets (complete files, not just indexed wills)
• Search guardianship records (minor children)
• Check estate settlements (years after death)

Information in Probate:

• Family relationships explicitly stated
• Property distribution reveals family structure
• Witnesses often family members
• Dates of death
• Financial status

Church Records

Church Record Strategy:

• Identify denomination through other records
• Find church locations using maps/histories
• Check multiple churches in area
• Search for original records and published abstracts

Record Types:

• Baptism/christening (shows parents, godparents)
• Marriage (shows families of both parties)
• Burial (shows death date, age)
• Membership lists (show arrivals/departures)
• Church minutes (context about families)

Brick Wall Strategies

When research stalls, try these approaches:

1. Re-analyze Existing Evidence

• Review all sources collected
• Look for overlooked clues
• Reconsider interpretations
• Check for indirect evidence

2. Expand Geographic Search

• Search neighboring counties
• Check origin and destination states
• Research migration routes
• Try unexpected locations

3. Expand Time Frame

• Search earlier than expected (age errors)
• Search later (delayed recording)
• Check surrounding decades

4. Research Collateral Lines

• Focus on siblings who left more records
• Research spouse's family
• Study children's records for clues

5. Alternative Name Strategies

• Try phonetic spellings
• Check nickname variations
• Search for maiden names
• Consider name changes

6. Non-Traditional Sources

• Newspapers (obituaries, notices, ads)
• City directories (occupation, residence)
• Organization records (memberships)
• School records
• Employment records
• DNA evidence

7. Hire Local Researcher

• Access to repositories you can't visit
• Knowledge of local records
• Understanding of local history
• Reading old handwriting

Documentation Strategies

Research Logs

Essential Elements:

• Date of research session
• Sources searched (positive and negative)
• Search terms and variations used
• Results found (or not found)
• Next steps identified

Benefits:

• Avoid duplicate searches
• Track strategies tried
• Document thorough research
• Support GPS compliance

Source Organization

System Requirements:

• Consistent citation format
• Cross-referencing between sources
• Tagging/categorizing by person, place, type
• Linking sources to conclusions

Tools:

• Genealogy software
• Spreadsheets
• Cloud storage
• Physical filing system

Evidence Tracking

Organize Evidence By:

• Individual person
• Research question
• Source type
• Time period
• Geographic location

Track:

• What source says (exact information)
• Your interpretation
• Reliability assessment
• Connections to other sources
• Questions raised

Advanced Strategies

1. Negative Evidence Strategy

Use absence of information as evidence.

Examples:

• Person not in census (suggests death or migration)
• Not in probate records (died without estate)
• Not in church records (different denomination)
• Missing from land records (renter not owner)

Application: Absence of John in 1880 census but present in 1870 suggests:

• Death between 1870-1880
• Migration out of area
• Enumeration error

Next: Search death records, neighboring counties

2. Timeline Construction

Build comprehensive timeline of ancestor's life.

Include:

• Known facts with dates
• Implied facts (birth from age)
• Contextual events
• Family member events
• Historical context

Analysis:

• Identify date conflicts
• Spot gaps in knowledge
• Recognize patterns
• Test logical consistency

3. Hypothesis Testing

Formulate and test specific hypotheses.

Process: 1. State hypothesis specifically 2. Identify what evidence would support it 3. Identify what evidence would contradict it 4. Search for both supporting and contradicting evidence 5. Evaluate results objectively

Example: Hypothesis: "John Smith was son of William Smith of Pennsylvania" Supporting evidence: Similar names, right time/place, DNA match Contradicting evidence: William's will doesn't mention John Result: Hypothesis needs revision

4. DNA Strategy

Use genetic genealogy to complement documentary research.

DNA Applications:

• Confirm family relationships
• Break through brick walls
• Identify unknown parents
• Distinguish same-name individuals
• Find living cousins with information

Important:

• DNA doesn't replace documentary research
• Requires DNA literacy and understanding
• Consider privacy and ethical issues
• Best used with strong paper trail

Research Planning

Project-Based Research

Define Project:

• Specific research question
• Scope and limitations
• Expected sources
• Timeline and milestones

Advantages:

• Focused effort
• Measurable progress
• Prevents research sprawl
• Supports GPS compliance

Iterative Research

Research in cycles, not linear progression.

Cycle: 1. Plan: Identify sources to search 2. Search: Execute research plan 3. Analyze: Evaluate findings 4. Document: Record results and reasoning 5. Revise: Update plan based on findings 6. Repeat: Next research cycle

Collaboration Strategies

Effective Collaboration:

• Share sources and citations
• Respect others' privacy and wishes
• Cite others' contributions
• Verify independently
• Contribute to community

Resources:

• Online forums and groups
• Local genealogy societies
• Surname studies
• DNA project groups
• Academic partnerships

Efficiency Strategies

Batch Research

Group by:

• Repository (research all at one archive)
• Source type (all census at once)
• Location (all records for one county)
• Time period (all 1850s records)

Online Research Optimization

Effective Searching:

• Use wildcards for name variations
• Try different date ranges
• Search phonetically
• Browse, don't just search
• Check multiple databases

Time Management:

• Set specific research goals
• Limit browsing time
• Take organized notes
• Schedule focused sessions
• Balance online and offline research

Research Ethics

Professional Standards

• Give proper credit to sources
• Respect copyright
• Protect privacy of living persons
• Share information generously
• Correct errors when discovered
• Be honest about uncertainty

Source Attribution

Always cite:

• Published sources
• Other researchers' work
• Unpublished documents
• Oral histories
• DNA matches

Continuous Learning

Stay Current:

• New records digitized regularly
• New research methodologies
• Technology changes
• Historical discoveries
• Legal changes affecting access

Resources:

• Genealogy conferences
• Webinars and workshops
• Professional journals
• Online courses
• Local society meetings

Summary: Keys to Success

1. Be Systematic - Work methodically through sources 2. Be Thorough - Search multiple source types 3. Be Skeptical - Verify everything 4. Be Organized - Document as you go 5. Be Patient - Breakthroughs take time 6. Be Flexible - Try new approaches 7. Be Collaborative - Learn from others 8. Be Ethical - Follow professional standards