Fact-Check Standards

Every claim of fact published on American River Wellness Recovery is verified before publication using the process below. This page explains that process in detail so readers, journalists, and other publications can evaluate our work.

Every claim is either sourced or clearly labeled

Any statement of fact — a regulatory rule, a number, a date, a legal consequence — must trace back to a primary or authoritative source (see Editorial Policy for our sourcing hierarchy). Statements based on Graham’s clinical experience are explicitly labeled as such (e.g. “In our practice, we typically see…”) and are used to illustrate rather than replace regulatory citations.

Two-source rule for high-stakes claims

For any claim that could affect a reader’s employment, CDL, license, or legal exposure, we require two independent authoritative sources. Regulatory citations count as one; a second confirming source (agency guidance document, Federal Register commentary, established industry publication) is required before publication.

Direct primary sources over secondary reporting

Where a regulation, agency rule, or official guidance document exists, we cite it directly rather than referencing news coverage of it. If a Federal Register notice announces a change, we cite the Federal Register — not a trade publication’s article about the Federal Register.

Numeric claims

Any number published on this site — evaluation counts, timelines, percentages, dollar figures — is either:

• Cited to an authoritative source with the source’s methodology available for review, or
• Derived from our own internal data with the methodology briefly explained in the article

We do not publish “studies show” or “research indicates” claims without a specific citation.

Legal and regulatory language

When we quote a regulation, we quote it verbatim and link to the primary source. When we paraphrase a regulation, we make clear that our paraphrase is an interpretation and refer readers to the primary source for the exact language.

What we don’t do

• We don’t cite our own past articles as evidence for factual claims. Each article stands on its primary sources.
• We don’t fabricate statistics or extrapolate directional data as if it were rigorous.
• We don’t publish content generated by AI tools without human verification of every factual claim.
• We don’t rely on competitor SAP provider websites for factual claims.

When we get it wrong

If we publish an error, we correct it (see Corrections Policy). Correction requests are welcome from anyone — readers, journalists, agencies, or other providers.