Who checks, and what they carry
You check facts, not people.
An engagement selects specific provider facts and checks each one against a public authority the provider does not control. You get signed findings with evidence — no scores, no rankings, no whole-provider verdicts.
Supported fields: license status and expiry, name of record, board address of record, NPI identity fields, NPPES practice location. Fields with no publishable authority record (accepting new patients, disciplinary actions where the board does not publish) are refused with the recorded reason.
Service capability — what an engagement can check
No visitor's directory has been evaluated. This states what the service supports today, what it requires from the buyer, and what it refuses.
- License status and expiry
- Supported — read from the state board's published roster file. Buyer input: provider name or license number. Refuses: nothing where the roster publishes the field.
- Name of record
- Supported — the board's listed name as an attributed reading, never asserted as the person's legal name beyond what the board lists. Buyer input: license number.
- Board address of record
- Supported — what the board holds. Buyer input: license number. Refuses: never presented as a treatment location.
- NPI identity fields
- Supported — enumeration, NPI number, registry name, taxonomy. Buyer input: NPI number or a match path. The board↔NPI identity link requires an identifier; name-only matching is refused. Cross-authority association is proposed evidence, not a ratified finding.
- NPPES practice location
- Supported — what the registry lists. Buyer input: NPI number. Refuses: never presented as a treatment location.
- Accepting new patients
- Not supported — no authority publishes this predicate for this subject class. Refused as unanswerable; the recorded reason ships with the finding.
- Disciplinary actions
- Not supported — the authority holds the fact but does not publish it for verification. Refused as unverifiable; never guessed.
- Whole-provider verdicts, scores, rankings
- Not offered. Refused on principle — no fifth state, no percentage, no whole-record badge.
What a finding does not establish
Not a directory entryWe do not sell provider data. Supplying the answer would end our standing to check it.
Not a treatment locationA board address of record or NPPES listing is not a treatment location. Address verification is a separate engagement question.
Not an identity ratificationBoard-license and NPI-registry statements are separate subjects. The statement that they refer to the same person is proposed evidence in the demonstration corpus — it has NOT been independently verified. A commissioned engagement can check it where both authorities publish a common identifier.
Not a scoreNo ratings, no rankings, no confidence percentages.
Not a claimEvery published number re-derives from the ledger with the public key, or it comes down.
Accountability — who stands behind this
- Who receives a challenge
- Challenges to a finding are received at the contact listed on this page. Every challenge is recorded, investigated against the cited evidence, and resolved with a published receipt.
- Who reruns at our expense
- A WoC method defect — where our own procedure, applied to the same evidence, produces a different result — is re-run at our expense. This is distinct from a source-data dispute (where the authority's own file is contested), which is the authority's to resolve.
- What the buyer supplies
- A list of provider identifiers (license numbers, NPI numbers) and the propositions to check. No directory data is accepted from the business being checked. Buyer-supplied identifiers are used only for the engagement and are not retained beyond its closeout.
- How inputs are handled
- Buyer inputs are processed for the engagement only. Identifiers are matched against public authority files — they are never used to build a directory, never resold, and never compared across customers.