Build a research presentation storyline that survives an audience skipping straight to slide 12

Build a slide-by-slide storyline for a research presentation from the findings below — not the slide content itself yet, the structural outline of what each slide argues and how it connects to the one before it.

RESEARCH FINDINGS
Flexible scheduling raised retention 12% overall, effect was concentrated in employees with caregiving responsibilities, no effect on productivity metrics, cost to implement was under $50/employee/year.

AUDIENCE
The exec team, who are primarily worried about cost and whether this creates a fairness perception issue between employees.

CORE ARGUMENT I WANT THE DECK TO MAKE
We should offer flexible scheduling as an opt-in for all employees, not restrict it to caregivers, because the cost is low and restricting it risks a fairness backlash.

TIME LIMIT
10 minutes total, including questions.

Start by stating the core argument as a single sentence a viewer should be able to state back after seeing the deck, then build every slide as a step that either establishes a piece of evidence for that argument or addresses the most likely objection to it — cut any finding from Flexible scheduling raised retention 12% overall, effect was concentrated in employees with caregiving responsibilities, no effect on productivity metrics, cost to implement was under $50/employee/year. that's true and interesting but doesn't serve the core argument, even if it took real effort to uncover.

For each slide, write its headline as the actual claim of that slide, not a topic label — "Retention improved 12% under flexible scheduling" is a slide headline, "Retention Results" is not, because a reader skimming headlines alone should be able to reconstruct the deck's argument without reading the supporting content on any slide.

Assume someone in the room will jump straight to a specific slide or ask about it out of order — for each slide, note in one line whether it depends on a claim established earlier that would need a quick recap if someone jumped ahead, so the presenter knows which slides are safe to present out of sequence and which need a bridge sentence.

Given the time limit, mark which slides are core (the argument breaks without them) versus supporting (useful but cuttable if time runs short) — a presenter needs an honest answer to "what do I cut if I'm running long," not a deck where every slide claims to be essential.

OUTPUT FORMAT
For each slide: number, claim-headline, core or supporting, and a one-line note on whether it depends on an earlier slide's claim. End with the one-sentence core argument the deck should leave the audience able to repeat.