private tech-enabled urgent and primary-care chain

Carbon Health

Industry Health

A private tech-enabled urgent-care, primary-care, and telehealth company. Carbon Health scores low-middle because easier appointment access is useful, but app-mediated care, private growth financing, billing friction, and health-data sensitivity keep the structure weaker than nonprofit or community-health alternatives.

Why this matters: Convenient urgent care is valuable, but convenience does not settle ownership, billing, or accountability.

Letter grade D Extractive High confidence (AI) Rubric gcd-rubric-v1 Last reviewed May 12, 2026

Final Score 17* D - Extractive

DEXTRACTIVE17 pts

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

Base Material25

Bonus+0

Cap35Ownership <= 2 and Governance <= 2

After Cap25

Penalties-8

!Not Verified

Represent this organization?

Request verification to have the evidence record checked against primary materials and organization-supplied documents. Verification does not buy a higher score; scores change only when review finds factual errors, omissions, or miscalibration.

Request verification

Evaluation Overview

D - Extractive

The score turns mainly on Extraction, with the largest penalty coming from Surveillance Capture.

Strengths

Extraction4/10
Solidarity with the Unemployed4/7
Product Integrity4/5

Penalties

Surveillance Capture-3
Accountability Opacity-2
Subscription Capture-1
Identity Capture-1

Evidence state

ConfidenceHigh confidence (AI)
ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)
Linked claims14
Direct axis claims14
Coverage14/14

Scoring Axes

Axis	Score	Why this score
Ownership ? Control rights: shareholder-dominated at 0, worker cooperative control at 10.	1 / 10	Carbon Health's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health category. Carbon Health's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health category. On Ownership, Carbon Health belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Health, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence Carbon Health's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health category. [1] context Carbon Health's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context Carbon Health's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context Carbon Health's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context Carbon Health operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context Carbon Health's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context Carbon Health operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context Carbon Health's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context Carbon Health's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Governance ? Binding decision authority: centralized control at 0, democratic stakeholder control at 10.	1 / 10	Carbon Health's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. Carbon Health's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. On Governance, Carbon Health belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Health, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context Carbon Health's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health category. [1] Carbon Health's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context Carbon Health's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context Carbon Health's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context Carbon Health operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context Carbon Health's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context Carbon Health operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context Carbon Health's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context Carbon Health's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Extraction ? Surplus allocation, wage share, CEO pay ratio, margins, and structured extraction judgment.	4 / 10	Carbon Health's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. Carbon Health's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. On Extraction, Carbon Health sits in the middle because the structure has real public, nonprofit, or service value, but users still do not hold decisive control over prices, access rules, quality, or institutional priorities. That places it above ordinary shareholder firms but below democratic or member-owned alternatives. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context Carbon Health's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health category. [1] context Carbon Health's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] Carbon Health's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context Carbon Health's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context Carbon Health operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context Carbon Health's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context Carbon Health operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context Carbon Health's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context Carbon Health's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Labor Sovereignty ? Worker power: coercive conditions at 0, co-determination or ownership at 7. Employee dissatisfaction matters only when source-backed evidence shows concrete limits on worker agency, such as coercive scheduling, retaliation, wage theft, harassment, unsafe conditions, suppression of worker voice, or extreme turnover.	2 / 7	Carbon Health's linked public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. Carbon Health's linked public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. On Labor Sovereignty, Carbon Health belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Health, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context Carbon Health's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health category. [1] context Carbon Health's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context Carbon Health's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] Carbon Health's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context Carbon Health operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context Carbon Health's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context Carbon Health operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context Carbon Health's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context Carbon Health's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Solidarity with the Unemployed ? Treatment of exits and nonworkers, including severance, redeployment, and non-competes.	4 / 7	Carbon Health operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. Carbon Health operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. On Solidarity with the Unemployed, Carbon Health sits in the middle because the structure has real public, nonprofit, or service value, but users still do not hold decisive control over prices, access rules, quality, or institutional priorities. That places it above ordinary shareholder firms but below democratic or member-owned alternatives. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context Carbon Health's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health category. [1] context Carbon Health's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context Carbon Health's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context Carbon Health's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] Carbon Health operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context Carbon Health's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context Carbon Health operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context Carbon Health's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context Carbon Health's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Loss-Bearing Fidelity ? Willingness to absorb costs to preserve values, workers, users, and public obligations.	3 / 7	Carbon Health's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. Carbon Health's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. On Loss-Bearing Fidelity, Carbon Health belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Health, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context Carbon Health's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health category. [1] context Carbon Health's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context Carbon Health's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context Carbon Health's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context Carbon Health operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] Carbon Health's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context Carbon Health operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context Carbon Health's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context Carbon Health's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Market Conduct ? Pricing fairness, switching costs, lock-in, and rent extraction.	3 / 5	Carbon Health operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. Carbon Health operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. On Market Conduct, Carbon Health belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Health, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context Carbon Health's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health category. [1] context Carbon Health's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context Carbon Health's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context Carbon Health's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context Carbon Health operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context Carbon Health's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] Carbon Health operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context Carbon Health's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context Carbon Health's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Product Integrity ? Preservation of quality rather than degradation for monetization.	4 / 5	Carbon Health's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. Carbon Health's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. On Product Integrity, Carbon Health sits in the middle because the structure has real public, nonprofit, or service value, but users still do not hold decisive control over prices, access rules, quality, or institutional priorities. That places it above ordinary shareholder firms but below democratic or member-owned alternatives. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context Carbon Health's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health category. [1] context Carbon Health's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context Carbon Health's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context Carbon Health's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context Carbon Health operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context Carbon Health's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context Carbon Health operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] Carbon Health's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] context Carbon Health's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]
Scale Integrity ? Whether growth improves or degrades fairness and accountability.	3 / 5	Carbon Health's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. Carbon Health's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. On Scale Integrity, Carbon Health belongs low because control and surplus are mainly held by shareholders, executives, landlords, investors, or institutional boards while users face practical dependence. In a high-contact category like Health, that asymmetry counts more heavily than it would for an optional purchase. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence context Carbon Health's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health category. [1] context Carbon Health's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers. [2] context Carbon Health's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery. [3] context Carbon Health's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution. [4] context Carbon Health operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power. [5] context Carbon Health's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise. [6] context Carbon Health operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice. [7] context Carbon Health's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability. [8] Carbon Health's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities. [9]

Penalties

Penalty	Applied	Why this penalty
Subscription Capture ? Manipulative recurring-payment, automatic-renewal, cancellation-friction, bundling, trial-conversion, or refund designs that profit from inertia or confusion. Range: -5 to 0.	-1	Carbon Health's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. Carbon Health's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. This warrants a Subscription Capture penalty because the evidence shows harm or risk tied to the institution's actual role: housing, tax, utility, healthcare, storage, or childcare power over people with limited alternatives. The penalty is calibrated to this entity's severity rather than assigned automatically to the whole category. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence Carbon Health's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [10]
Accountability Opacity ? Material opacity, reputation laundering, or hidden accountability structures that prevent public accountability. Range: -2 to 0.	-2	Carbon Health's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. Carbon Health's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. This warrants a Accountability Opacity penalty because the evidence shows harm or risk tied to the institution's actual role: housing, tax, utility, healthcare, storage, or childcare power over people with limited alternatives. The penalty is calibrated to this entity's severity rather than assigned automatically to the whole category. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence Carbon Health's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [11]
Identity Capture ? Customer pressure, employee pressure, and pervasive identity saturation. Range: -3 to 0.	-1	Carbon Health's public record makes Identity Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. Carbon Health's public record makes Identity Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. This warrants a Identity Capture penalty because the evidence shows harm or risk tied to the institution's actual role: housing, tax, utility, healthcare, storage, or childcare power over people with limited alternatives. The penalty is calibrated to this entity's severity rather than assigned automatically to the whole category. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence Carbon Health's public record makes Identity Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [12]
Surveillance Capture ? Invasive surveillance, unreasonably non-optional tracking, facial recognition, biometric identification, or AI behavior scanning of customers, workers, bystanders, or the public. Range: -5 to 0.	-3	Carbon Health's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. Carbon Health's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. This warrants a Surveillance Capture penalty because the evidence shows harm or risk tied to the institution's actual role: housing, tax, utility, healthcare, storage, or childcare power over people with limited alternatives. The penalty is calibrated to this entity's severity rather than assigned automatically to the whole category. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence Carbon Health's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [13]
Ideological Disavowal ? Concealed ideology presented as neutrality, expertise, professional necessity, public-service administration, market inevitability, or non-ideological common sense while exercising power. Range: -3 to 0.	-1	Carbon Health's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. Carbon Health's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. This warrants a Ideological Disavowal penalty because the evidence shows harm or risk tied to the institution's actual role: housing, tax, utility, healthcare, storage, or childcare power over people with limited alternatives. The penalty is calibrated to this entity's severity rather than assigned automatically to the whole category. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and childcare/youth institutions. Linked evidence Carbon Health's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability. [14]

Bonus Credits

No bonus credits applied in this version.

Confidence Basis

Confidence is computed from the evidence trail and review state, not typed into the profile by hand.

High 80/100

14 verified linked claims 14 direct axis claims 0 disputed claims 14/14 components covered

This confidence label measures the source-backed evidence trail. AI-scaffolded scores remain tentative until human review.

Claim confidence 16/20

14 verified linked claims

Source quality 11/18

Best source per verified claim, weighted by institutional reliability

Direct axis-specific claims 14/18

14 direct claims across 14 active components

Dispute load 12/12

0 disputed claims on this entity

Recency 10/10

Newest accepted timestamp: May 13, 2026

Reviewer status 7/12

Human-reviewed components score higher than AI scaffolding

Component coverage 10/10

14/14 evidence-bearing components have direct support

Evidence State

Profile stateAI draft / human-pending

VerificationUnverified

ConfidenceHigh confidence (AI)

ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)

Correction routeUse “Challenge this rating” for factual errors, missing counterevidence, source problems, or calculation mistakes.

Company responseCompany representatives can submit source-backed corrections; payment never changes scores or reviewer authority.

Claims and Sources

Claims are the evidence record. Each claim needs a source link, axis category, status, confidence level, and timestamp before it can support a score.

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

1Carbon Health's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health category.

Ownership Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon Health aboutOfficial self-description · 68%

2Carbon Health's public record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or customers.

Governance Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon Health aboutOfficial self-description · 68%

3Carbon Health's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission delivery.

Extraction Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon Health aboutOfficial self-description · 68%

4Carbon Health's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic control over the institution.

Labor Sovereignty Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon Health aboutOfficial self-description · 68%

5Carbon Health operates in an everyday-need category where job loss, illness, rent pressure, family-care obligations, tax compliance, utility dependence, or household instability affects bargaining power.

Solidarity Unemployed Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon HealthGeneral web source · 58%

6Carbon Health's product or service can absorb real household, civic, care, housing, energy, or tax-compliance risk, but the record also shows who bears costs when the institution fails or prices rise.

Loss Bearing Fidelity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon Health aboutOfficial self-description · 68%

7Carbon Health operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice.

Market Conduct Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon HealthGeneral web source · 58%

8Carbon Health's core service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and accountability.

Product Integrity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon Health aboutOfficial self-description · 68%

9Carbon Health's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities.

Scale Integrity Verified High confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon HealthGeneral web source · 58%

10Carbon Health's public record makes Subscription Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Subscription Capture Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon HealthGeneral web source · 58%

11Carbon Health's public record makes Accountability Opacity relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Accountability Opacity Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon HealthGeneral web source · 58%

12Carbon Health's public record makes Identity Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Identity Capture Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon HealthGeneral web source · 58%

13Carbon Health's public record makes Surveillance Capture relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Surveillance Capture Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon HealthGeneral web source · 58%

14Carbon Health's public record makes Ideological Disavowal relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community accountability.

Ideological Disavowal Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Carbon HealthGeneral web source · 58%

Alternatives

Competitors

AGOOD66 Patient Advocate Foundation nonprofit patient case-management and financial-aid resource · same market AGOOD54 Federally Qualified Health Centers publicly supported community health-center system · same market AGOOD53 OpenNotes academic healthcare-transparency initiative · same market AGOOD50 CPESN USA network of independent community pharmacies · same market BQUALIFIED49 Civica Rx nonprofit generic medicine company · same market BQUALIFIED43 Planned Parenthood nonprofit reproductive and sexual healthcare federation · same market CPERFORMATIVE41 En-Vision America / ScriptAbility accessible prescription-labeling company · same market CPERFORMATIVE41 Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company public-benefit online pharmacy · same market

Help Improve This Profile

Submit source-backed evidence or challenge a specific claim, source, axis value, or calculation below.

How This Page Is Maintained

Evidence comes in through contributors, is checked by verifiers, and is synthesized by reviewers. Founder authority remains narrow and visible; scores recalculate when verified claims or the rubric change.

Civic Note

Incorporation, limited liability, market access, and other institutional privileges are public grants. Good Companies Directory treats those privileges as conditional on accountability to workers, users, communities, and the public.

Submit evidence for Carbon Health Add one source-backed fact for review.

Challenge this rating Point to a specific score, claim, source, or calculation problem.

Audit Log

Recent public changes for this company or group. The full audit log is part of the Transparency record.

No company-specific audit entries have been published yet.

View Full Audit Log