How we verify, at a level buyers can do diligence on.
In plain terms: we check the details staff depend on, check them more carefully when the service is urgent, and keep a record of when and how each listing was checked. The shape of the system. The dimensions we measure. What each listing records. The standards we align to. Detailed methodology — specific weights, validation matrices, thresholds, review tooling — is shared under NDA with active evaluators.
Validation that scales with what is at stake.
More careful checks where a wrong answer hurts more.
Every location is classified by the urgency of its most critical service. T1 covers immediate-response services — crisis hotlines, suicide prevention. T4 covers routine services — support groups, general information and referral. T2 and T3 sit in between, covering acute and moderate care.
The classification feeds a validation matrix. Each field on each record is matched to a validation method appropriate to the urgency of the location and the consequence of the field being wrong. The most consequential details on the most urgent listings are checked most carefully; routine details on routine listings get lighter checks. A wrong phone number at a crisis center is treated differently than a wrong description on a support group listing.
Each listing records its current tier, the method used, and the date it was checked.
Disclosed: tier structure, classification logic, verification record.
Under NDA: matrix cell-by-cell, tier-transition thresholds, review tooling.
Four dimensions, one confidence level.
A single score that tells you how complete, valid, fresh, and well-sourced a listing is.
The Resource Confidence Score combines four dimensions:
Whether the fields a downstream workflow needs are populated.
Whether the values present pass structural and semantic checks against the HSDS v3.0 schema.
How recently the record was verified, weighted by the volatility of the field type.
Whether the record traces back to a sourced, dated verification event, and what method produced it.
The four dimensions combine into a single score per record. Partners can set a minimum score for records their workflows use.
Disclosed: dimensions measured, minimum-score settings.
Under NDA: dimension weights, scoring algorithm, calibration data.
Organized on an open standard.
Listings organized the way other systems can use them.
Listings follow HSDS v3.0: organization, location, and service, with the services offered at each location. A single agency with five clinics and twenty programs renders as one organization, five locations, and twenty services — not as one row or one hundred rows depending on who exported it.
Schema enforcement is a validation step, not a post-hoc reconciliation. Records that do not conform are flagged at ingest, not after they reach a partner's referral pipe. Records follow the HSDS v3.0 schema.
Disclosed: schema, hierarchy preservation.
Under NDA: ingest-time conformance rules.
Verified on cadence, not as a one-time scrape.
Checked again on a schedule, with the history kept.
Records do not enter the graph and stay frozen. Every listing is checked again on a schedule set by how urgent the service is, more often for urgent services. Last-month's hours are not today's hours; the graph reflects that.
Confidence scores update with re-verification. A listing that has not been re-checked recently will see its freshness component degrade in the score, surfacing it for re-verification before it reaches a downstream workflow.
Disclosed: re-check schedule model, freshness decay.
Under NDA: cadence parameters by tier, diff infrastructure, decay curves.
What verification does not prove.
A recently checked number does not mean a program has an opening today, that a particular person is eligible, or that they will be seen. We show what is known and what still needs confirmation, so your staff can decide what to double-check.
Detailed methodology documentation available under NDA.
For active evaluators — procurement, InfoSec, technical review, and compliance teams — we run a scoped methodology review under NDA. The review covers the validation matrix in detail, RCS scoring weights, tier transition thresholds, the review process and re-check schedule.