Explain what exists, what is missing and which genuine evidence may establish the relevant facts. Have the effect of the gap assessed rather than inventing records.
Keep explanations factual
Identify appropriate record holders and the basis of any statement. Do not present a later recollection as a contemporaneous document or convert informal help into unsupported employment. The review must follow the actual history.
Select relevant work examples and training records showing the applicant’s own contribution. Several weak but independent sources can sometimes support a fact that no single record proves on its own, such as a payroll remittance, a professional association listing, and a piece of correspondence that all place the applicant in the same role during the same period. Describe the search actually carried out, including which archives were checked and which no longer exist, so a reviewer can see the gap was investigated rather than assumed away. Where a colleague or supervisor can speak to the period from direct knowledge, distinguish what they personally observed from what they were told secondhand, since the two carry different weight. Avoid combining unrelated fragments into a single narrative that reads as more complete than the underlying sources actually support, and note openly where the record simply cannot resolve a particular detail. A single strong record is not required when several imperfect ones point consistently toward the same conclusion over time.