First determine the actual facts and evidence needed. A rewritten public profile cannot replace a qualifying role or resolve a factual discrepancy by itself.
Separate communication work from eligibility assessment
Clarify professional preparation and current official charges separately from any communication services. Corrections should improve accuracy, not be purchased as a way to change the historical employment facts. Ask what source records, such as payroll history, organizational charts or filed tax documents, any communication professional would actually rely on, since a polished narrative is only as reliable as the documentation underneath it, no matter how well it reads.
Request that the reviewer first confirm which underlying facts are already supportable and which are not, before any rewritten profile or public-facing material is commissioned, so that spending on communication work does not happen twice when the narrative later needs revision. Confirm that any correction to public material is tied to a specific documented fact, rather than to a general goal of sounding more impressive or more senior than the record supports. Ask how disagreements between the narrative and the underlying records would be resolved, and in whose favor, before treating the narrative as settled.
Separate the professional fee for reviewing the underlying facts from any fee for writing or editing public material, since the first determines whether the second is worth commissioning at all.