Skip to content
FonteumThe Graph

Fonteum · Manifesto

The record should come with the answer.

Most data tools ask you to trust the answer. Fonteum hands you the public record with the source, observation date, and limitation where available. File hashes and snapshot attestations are shown only when present; retained history is limited to named sources and banked rows.

Last updated 2026-06-24 · Aggregate public-records positioning · FCRA-safe by design

Active

production source registry

Registry status does not establish loaded, complete, or fresh coverage.

9M+

providers in the broad NPPES identity spine

An aggregate public-records population, not a provider rating.

11.9M

approximate NPPES and PECOS serving rows

Used as data-volume context; sources are counted separately, not as historical versions or unique entities.

The thesis

A clean answer is not enough.

The market has learned to love summaries. Dashboards summarize. Agents summarize. Search results summarize. The risk is that a summary can feel authoritative while separating the reader from the public record underneath it.

Fonteum is built for the opposite instinct. A number should carry where it came from. A field should carry when it was captured. A conclusion should carry its limitation. A record should be re-checkable by someone who did not build the system.

The answer is useful only when the source can follow it into the room.

That is not a UX preference. It is an operating position. If a fact is going to ground an AI agent, support a compliance review, or sit under a published finding, the fact needs more than a label. It needs a trail.

What travels with a fact

Source, date, limitation, signature.

Fonteum treats provenance as payload, not as decoration. The record should say what agency published it, which dataset it came from, when Fonteum captured it, which methodology touched it, and what limitation belongs beside it.

Dated
Sourced
Limited
Hash noted
Attestation when present
Re-checkable

These words describe the record trail. They are not provider endorsements.

Why now

AI, compliance, and journalism all hit the same wall.

AI systems need grounding that survives citation. Compliance teams need evidence that survives audit. Journalists and researchers need figures that readers can retrace. Three different audiences, one shared failure mode: an answer with no source trail becomes a dead end.

AI grounding

A model can cite an answer only if the answer carries a source trail. Fonteum makes the trail travel with the fact: source name, source URL, capture date, limitation, hash, and signature.

Compliance evidence

A compliance file needs more than a current answer. It needs the record as of the day the decision was made, plus enough context for an auditor to re-run the check.

Journalism and research

A public-interest finding is stronger when readers can inspect the same government file. The work should be reproducible from the source, not dependent on a screenshot or a vendor memo.

The time-machine edge

The present record is not the whole record.

Public datasets change. A provider updates an address. An enrollment appears or disappears. A sanctions file is refreshed. A facility measure is republished. If a system only stores the current value, it cannot answer the question that matters later: what did the source say when the decision was made?

Fonteum is not just a lookup table. It is a dated memory of public records.

Retained history is source-specific. On July 12, closed row versions existed for named sanctions, procurement, and provenance tables; sources without banked versions cannot be replayed to arbitrary dates.

The stance

Against unverifiable data.

Fonteum is deliberately narrow about what belongs in public copy and customer-facing data. If a source cannot be named, if a date cannot be shown, if a limitation would change how the reader should use the field, the system should say so.

  • We do not turn uncertain joins into quiet certainty.
  • We do not publish credentials, datasets, package paths, or repository links that do not resolve.
  • We do not rate, endorse, inspect, or independently judge a provider.
  • We do not hide limitations behind a clean interface.
  • We would rather say a field is unavailable than invent confidence we do not have.

The line

Do not ask for belief where a record can travel.

Fonteum exists for the moment after someone asks, "Where did that come from?" The answer should be immediate: from this public record, observed on this date, handled by this method, and re-checkable from the supplied source or snapshot metadata. A file or snapshot attestation does not sign each fact it contains.

What’s on file, by the numbers

Platform snapshot · 2026-07-22

13.4Mproviders & companiesProviders, organizations, owners, and facilities on file
26.2Msource-linked factsSource-linked field facts in the dated platform snapshot
90sources with dataDistinct snapshot source IDs with at least one positive record count
79fresh sourcesDistinct source IDs whose latest positive-data snapshot falls within the preceding 45 days
111sources integratedActive registry rows; integration does not establish a load
13state Medicaid jurisdictionsDistinct states represented in the state-exclusions serving table

Integrated, with-data, and fresh-observation counts are separate. No platform-wide source-completeness count is published. Completeness is source-specific and must be evaluated against the named source's expected scope. State coverage is a separate jurisdiction measure.

Source authority is record-specific

Use the issuer named on the record.

Fonteum spans federal, state, and global public publishers. A source page or returned record identifies its issuer and dataset where that metadata is available. A platform registry count does not assign every page to one authority or establish loaded, fresh, or complete coverage.

Browse source records and their stated limitations →

Reproducible by design

Inspect the evidence each published figure actually supplies.

Source and date

Research pages expose the named public file and observation date where those fields are available. Source-file SHA-256 coverage is separate; facts do not currently link deterministically to signatures.

Available derivation

Studies with a retained release and committed derivation link the SQL or method used. Other studies state the evidence and reproduction limits they actually have.

Daily observations

Dated table row-count observations can detect local drift. They do not imply that an upstream publisher released or Fonteum ingested new data that day.

Named medical review

Reviewed by Jennifer Montecillo, MD, medical reviewer. Non-practicing medical reviewer.

Read the full provenance and attestation methodology →

Request access