A support letter needs a line of sight

My EB-1A petition used five supporting letters.

The useful question was not only, "Who signed this?"

It was, "How could this person know the fact I am asking them to verify?"

A writer may have seen me create a program, lead a team, make a decision, or produce a result. Another may know the organization well but have no direct view of my day-to-day responsibility.

Those are different lines of sight.

Before using a sentence from a letter, record four things:

• the writer's relationship to the work
• the period they observed
• the specific fact they could know directly
• the claim that still needs another source

A senior title does not widen what the writer personally observed.

And a detailed account of my role does not automatically become independent proof of an organization's broader standing.

Try a simple audit.

Highlight every factual statement in the letter. Beside it, finish this sentence:

**The writer knows this because ______.**

If the blank is clear, keep the claim within that boundary.

If the blank depends on assumption, narrow the sentence or support it elsewhere.

The value of a support letter is not that it can say everything.

It is that the writer can explain particular facts from a position close enough to know them.