Method principles
HAA is an independent, participant-founded public-interest documentation and records-verification project. It does not determine legal liability, replace an agency process, or exercise regulatory, adjudicative, investigative, audit, or enforcement authority.
The method begins with a defined question, identifies the governing or administrative source relevant to that question, reviews available records, records limitations, seeks clarification where appropriate, and applies a publication boundary before public release.
Source hierarchy
Source weight depends on the question being reviewed. The hierarchy below is a working order, not a claim that every higher-ranked source resolves every issue.
- Governing authorities: enacted law, regulations, binding grant terms, and other controlling instruments.
- Official program materials: agency handbooks, notices, monitoring tools, approved plans, and formal guidance.
- Administrative records: agreements, policies, notices, reports, monitoring records, correspondence, and documented decisions.
- Participant-facing records: intake materials, plans, referrals, notices, service records, and other records appropriate for controlled review.
- Statements and context: written responses, interviews, public statements, and explanatory materials, clearly attributed and evaluated against available documentation.
When governing authorities require documentation, can the required administrative record actually be produced?
Verification-status definitions
Supported by reviewed sources
The stated point is supported by identified records judged sufficient for the limited proposition presented.
Some elements remain unresolved
Available records support part of the point, while another material element requires clarification or additional documentation.
Review is incomplete
A source or response has been requested, reconciliation is underway, or the available record is not yet sufficient for publication.
Independent confirmation is not available
The expected record was not located or available sources do not permit a reliable determination. This status does not prove that an event did or did not occur.
Material accounts conflict
Sources or responses materially disagree, and the disagreement is described without treating one account as resolved unless the record supports doing so.
Not suitable for public release
The material is private, controlled, legally restricted, insufficiently verified, or unnecessary to the public educational purpose.
Response opportunity
Before publishing material that could materially affect an identifiable person or organization, HAA should provide a reasonable opportunity to review the relevant proposition, identify factual errors, supply responsive records, and explain documentary limitations. A response opportunity is not an endorsement and does not guarantee publication of private or unsupported material.
Public materials should state when a material response was received and fairly summarize verified clarifications that affect the public record.
Correction process
- Receive a specific correction request and identify the public passage at issue.
- Request or review supporting documentation appropriate to the correction.
- Compare the request with the cited source and any relevant response record.
- Correct material errors promptly and preserve a concise public version note when the change affects meaning.
- Decline unsupported changes without disclosing private correspondence or controlled records.
Correction and response inquiries may be sent through the channels on the Contact page.
Version-control principles
Public pages should carry a review or update date. Material changes should be summarized on the Updates page. Published files should remain reviewable through Git history, with descriptive commits and pull requests rather than silent replacement.
Version notes should distinguish editorial or design changes from changes to publication status or substantive public content.
Publication limitations
- Do not publish raw medical records, health details, private addresses, account identifiers, third-party participant identities, or controlled evidence.
- Do not publish proposed findings, allegations, or entity-specific claims while verification and response review remain incomplete.
- Use public summaries and redaction only when the information is necessary to the public-interest purpose.
- Separate source description, verified fact, analytical interpretation, and unresolved limitation.
- Do not infer that one missing record proves an event did not occur; describe the resulting verification limit.
- Keep private and controlled records outside the public repository.