Investigative Journalism Timeline Template
Two documents and four sheets that key every chronology row to its evidence and count independent sources, so one leaker cannot read as three.
Free download · No account needed
Every guide to an investigative chronology asks for one row per event and a source citation on each row, and every one of them states the standard: be reluctant to rest anything contested on a single source. Not one of them defines what makes two sources two. So nothing checks it, and independence ends up asserted in the reporter's head rather than written down. Three memos from one leaker is one source. Four people who were all at the same briefing is one source.
So every item in this pack carries two fields instead of one. The route is how it reached you, which is what a lawyer asks about first. The origin is the single point of failure behind it, which is what makes the arithmetic possible. It ships filled in for a 14-month investigation by the Cordell Review, an invented paper, into why the Marleigh State Board of Water Resources renewed a testing contract three times after its own staff reported the contractor was altering results.
Of 143 chronology events, 58 are contested. They average 2.43 pieces of evidence each and 43 carry two or more, which is what a finished file looks like. Collapsed to origins, 23 do. Counted against what can be used in print, 19 do. Seventeen have no publishable origin at all: twelve resting on one leaker's unauthenticated documents, five on another paper's reporting. That last group is not a caveat to write. It is a records request to file.
What's in the pack
Evidence Register, two fields not one
One row per item, with the route it arrived by and the origin key behind it. Plus what it can be used for in print, what authenticates it, and every event citing it. The origin key is the field the arithmetic runs on.
Chronology, with three corroboration columns
One row per event, contested or established by record, carrying the item count, the independent origin count and the publishable origin count side by side. When those three numbers disagree, the row says so instead of the reporter remembering.
Relationship Map, as an edge list
Not a picture. One row per relationship, each citing the register item that establishes it, with a column for what the edge does to independence. This is where four background sources turn out to be one briefing.
Open Thread Log, sorted by what it fixes
Every event under two publishable origins becomes a thread with a named next action, the count of events it would fix, whether it touches the spine, its cost, and one line on what the piece concedes if it never closes.
Chronology Narrative, publishable rows only
The sequence written as prose from rows that have a publishable origin, with the 17 that have none marked in place rather than quietly skipped. Where the narrative stops making sense is where the reporting is thin.
Evidence Standard Note, for the legal read
The document to hand an editor or a lawyer before either reads a draft: the standard, how independence is measured, the three counts, what each route can be used for, and every dependency named.
A space rule every prompt reads first
Two items from one origin are one item. Contested events are separated from events a record establishes. Publishability is a third count. The map checks the origin field. And nothing here checks the draft.
How to use it
- 1
Open in River, or download it
Open the pack and send whatever exists, in whatever state, or download the blank register and sheets and work where you already do. The template library holds the rest.
- 2
Log the route and the origin
Two fields on every item. The route is how it reached you. The origin is the single point of failure behind it, keyed so that everything sharing one gets the same key.
- 3
Count three ways, over contested events only
By item, by independent origin, and by origin you could use in print. Then per origin: how many events cite it and how many rest on it alone. Do this in month three, not the week before the legal read.
- 4
Build the map, then re-run the count
The origin field is a belief, and the edge list is what checks it. Every collapse you find changes the arithmetic, and each event still under two publishable origins becomes a thread with a named next action.
Frequently asked questions
Is this template free?
Yes. Download the register, chronology, map and thread log as CSV files and the two documents as Word files, with no signup. "Edit with AI" is the optional path if you want the agent to build the register from what you have and keep the counts current as it grows.
Why not just count sources per event like every other template?
Because the count is wrong in the direction that matters. On the worked file 43 of 58 contested events carry two or more pieces of evidence and 23 carry two or more independent origins. Twenty events pass the standard on paper and fail it in fact, and every one of them looks fine in a source-count column.
What actually counts as one origin?
One single point of failure. One records request however many documents came back, one leaker however many they handed over, one meeting however many attendees described it separately. A subject's statement and a trade write-up of that statement are one. Two people who both heard it from the same third person are one.
Why is publishability a separate count from independence?
Because an origin can be independent and still unusable. A document given for guidance only is binding: the Supreme Court held that a promise to a source is enforceable against a publisher. Another paper's reporting is a lead, not your finding. So count origins, then count the ones you could print.
Does the count really change anything a lawyer would care about?
It changes the posture directly. The Reporters Committee's guide to pre-publication review is explicit that where libel risk is high you want public records or sources willing to go on the record, and that an inability to name a confidential source can hamper a defence. That is the publishable-origin column, in legal terms.
Why ask an agency for a leaked document you already have?
Because production authenticates it. Fourteen of the 38 leaked documents on the worked file also came back under the request, and those 14 carry nine events with two publishable origins each. Federal FOIA regulations require a requester to describe records in sufficient detail to locate them, and a document in your hand describes itself.
Where does this sit in the rest of the reporting?
Beside it. The FOIA request pack files the requests this log keeps generating, and document dump triage handles the unstructured half of a release. The dataset cleaning and analysis packs take the structured half, the source pack holds attribution terms, the fact check pack checks the draft, and finding verification puts each finding to the subject before it runs.
Find out what your file is really sourced on
Download the blank evidence register, chronology, relationship map and thread log, or open this exact pack in River and send it what you have so far.
Edit with AI