Skip to content
FonteumThe Graph
Attest · Coverage audit

Check the evidence that is actually present.

Most provenance rows inherit a SHA-256 from their source row. As of July 12, 2026, none linked deterministically to a snapshot signature.

Production coverage observation2026-07-12
1
Directly counted provenance rows
26,211,234 · observed 2026-07-12
2
Valid-shaped source-file SHA-256
26,211,220 rows · 14 without one
3
Deterministic signature linkage
No linked rows · snapshot attestations are separate
✓ Row coverage counted directly in production
26,211,220 of 26,211,234 directly counted provenance rows carried a valid-shaped source-file SHA-256 on July 12, 2026; 14 did not, and none linked deterministically to a signature

Bitemporal history & attestation chain

The July 12 direct count found

26,211,234Source: Fonteum production provenance audit · As of 2026-07-12
provenance rows. Of those, inherited a valid-shaped source-file SHA-256 and 14 did not. No claim linked deterministically to an attestation or witness signature. Claim rows can record when the source asserted it (valid-time) and when we recorded it (system-time), but only 20 rows had a closed valid_toversion. A source hash can be checked only when it is present and the corresponding source release remains obtainable.

How the chain works

  1. 1
    Claim A fact about a facility or provider (e.g. star rating at CCN 460057). Has valid_from, valid_to, and recorded_at columns (bitemporal).
  2. 2
    Source A provenance-source row can name the public file and store its SHA-256. Eight claim-bearing source rows had no hash in the July 12 audit.
  3. 3
    Snapshot + witness Some aggregate snapshot records carry an Ed25519 signature (methodology: in-toto-witness/v1). This ledger is separate from provenance claims. Historical payload hashes often covered source/date/count metadata rather than complete data bytes.

Bitemporal columns

ColumnAxisMeaning
valid_fromValid-time startWhen the source asserted this fact became true
valid_toValid-time endWhen the fact stopped being true; null = still current
recorded_atSystem-timeWhen Fonteum first wrote this row to the database

Backfill note: valid_fromasserted_at; recorded_atcreated_at. No valid-time was fabricated.

Worked example — real claim

Claim
id:23dda2ec-9f75-4edc-b06a-0cb37f2d2075
claim_key:facility.251561.hospice_visits_last_days_of_life.2026q2
metric:hospice_visits_last_days_of_life
value:69.8 percent
valid_from:2026-06-10T03:54:53.223513+00:00
valid_to:— (current)
recorded_at:2026-06-10T03:54:53.223513+00:00
Source
name:CMS Hospice - Provider Data 2026-05-01
publisher:Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
retrieved:2026-06-10T03:52:57.005+00:00
sha256:911107f932814da0ec998aced6fdd92e05bc66a0d0e80b0769c406eb6ac2c3b2
Point-in-time diff

The claim above has valid_from = 2026-06-10 and valid_to = null (current). When CMS releases updated data and a new claim supersedes this one, valid_to will be set and the diff will show the change.

# Point-in-time query
GET /api/attest/pit?claim_key=facility.251561.hospice_visits_last_days_of_life.2026q2&as_of=2026-06-10
Audit command
# Inspect the source-file hash when present
curl -s 'https://data.cms.gov/provider-data/sites/default/files/resources/88c6eedfbc6f52e839092ed781f6482c_1777658736/Hospice_Provider_May2026.csv' | sha256sum
# Expected: 911107f932814da0ec998aced6fdd92e05bc66a0d0e80b0769c406eb6ac2c3b2
Resolver output
# Best-effort claim lookup; not deterministic signature linkage
curl https://fonteum.com/api/attest/claim/23dda2ec-9f75-4edc-b06a-0cb37f2d2075

Inspect a claim lookup

Paste a provenance_claims UUID to inspect the lookup result. The current resolver uses a best-effort source match; it is not a deterministic claim-to-signature link.

Methodology

Witness signature algorithm
Ed25519 (Node.js crypto module)
Canonical payload format
{"methodology_version":"...","sha256":"...","signed_at":"...","snapshot_id":...} — Keys always sorted alphabetically for determinism.
Methodology version pinned
in-toto-witness/v1
Source hash
Source-file SHA-256 when present in provenance_sources.content_sha256; 14 directly counted claims inherited a null value on July 12, 2026

What’s on file, by the numbers

Platform snapshot · 2026-07-23

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