An academic initiative based at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
that studies and promotes patient access to clinical notes. OpenNotes
scores well because it shifts information power toward patients and care
partners, though it is an advocacy and research layer rather than a
direct healthcare provider.
Why this matters: Clinical notes are an accountability
surface: patients cannot meaningfully share power if records are hidden
from them.
Letter grade AGoodHigh confidence
(AI)Rubric gcd-rubric-v1
* Tentative scaffolding score. Not
human-checked or final.
Base Material49Bonus+4Cap66No structure cap
After Cap53Penalties0!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.
The score turns mainly on Extraction; no penalty currently dominates the
evaluation.
Strengths
Extraction8/10
Ownership6/10
Governance6/10
Penalties
No penalties applied in this version.
Evidence state
ConfidenceHigh
confidence (AI)
ThoroughnessDeveloped
(AI)
Linked claims12
Direct axis claims12
Coverage12/12
Scoring Axes
Axis
Score
Why this score
Ownership
?
Control rights: shareholder-dominated at 0, worker cooperative control
at 10.
6 / 10
OpenNotes's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional
type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health
category.
OpenNotes's public record identifies its ownership form, institutional
type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health
category. On Ownership, OpenNotes 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
OpenNotes's public record identifies its ownership form,
institutional type, or public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in
the health category.[1]
contextOpenNotes's public
record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders,
executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents,
patients, or customers.[2]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes's public
materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic
control over the institution.[4]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes's core
service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on
pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and
accountability.[8]
contextOpenNotes'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.
6 / 10
OpenNotes's public record indicates whether binding control sits with
shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards,
residents, patients, or customers.
OpenNotes's public record indicates whether binding control sits with
shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards,
residents, patients, or customers. On Governance, OpenNotes 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
contextOpenNotes's public
record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or
public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health
category.[1]
OpenNotes's public record indicates whether binding control sits
with shareholders, executives, members, public officials, nonprofit
boards, residents, patients, or customers.[2]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes's public
materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic
control over the institution.[4]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes's core
service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on
pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and
accountability.[8]
contextOpenNotes'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.
8 / 10
OpenNotes's model determines whether money flows primarily to investors
and owners or back toward users, members, public value, community
services, affordability, or mission delivery.
OpenNotes'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, OpenNotes
belongs near the top of this pass because its cooperative, public,
volunteer, or nonprofit structure moves power and value closer to the
people the service exists to help. It remains below the strongest
directory entries where scale, bureaucracy, local variation, utility
dependence, or public-program limits still constrain user power.
Calibration notes
Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated
across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and
childcare/youth institutions.
Linked evidence
contextOpenNotes's public
record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or
public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health
category.[1]
contextOpenNotes's public
record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders,
executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents,
patients, or customers.[2]
OpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes's public
materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic
control over the institution.[4]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes's core
service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on
pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and
accountability.[8]
contextOpenNotes'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.
4 / 7
OpenNotes's linked public materials do not show ordinary workers holding
full binding democratic control over the institution.
OpenNotes's linked public materials do not show ordinary workers holding
full binding democratic control over the institution. On Labor
Sovereignty, OpenNotes 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
contextOpenNotes's public
record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or
public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health
category.[1]
contextOpenNotes's public
record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders,
executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents,
patients, or customers.[2]
contextOpenNotes'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]
OpenNotes's public materials do not show ordinary workers holding
full binding democratic control over the institution.[4]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes's core
service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on
pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and
accountability.[8]
contextOpenNotes'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.
6 / 7
OpenNotes 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.
OpenNotes 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, OpenNotes 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
contextOpenNotes's public
record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or
public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health
category.[1]
contextOpenNotes's public
record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders,
executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents,
patients, or customers.[2]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes's public
materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic
control over the institution.[4]
OpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes's core
service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on
pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and
accountability.[8]
contextOpenNotes'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.
5 / 7
OpenNotes'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.
OpenNotes'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, OpenNotes 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
contextOpenNotes's public
record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or
public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health
category.[1]
contextOpenNotes's public
record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders,
executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents,
patients, or customers.[2]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes's public
materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic
control over the institution.[4]
contextOpenNotes 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]
OpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes's core
service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on
pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and
accountability.[8]
contextOpenNotes'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.
5 / 5
OpenNotes operates in a market where customers, tenants, patients,
taxpayers, utility users, parents, or community members often face
switching costs, asymmetric information, or limited choice.
OpenNotes 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, OpenNotes 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
contextOpenNotes's public
record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or
public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health
category.[1]
contextOpenNotes's public
record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders,
executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents,
patients, or customers.[2]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes's public
materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic
control over the institution.[4]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes'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]
OpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes's core
service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on
pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and
accountability.[8]
contextOpenNotes'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.
5 / 5
OpenNotes's core service has practical everyday utility, but its
integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality,
data handling, and accountability.
OpenNotes's core service has practical everyday utility, but its
integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality,
data handling, and accountability. On Product Integrity, OpenNotes 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
contextOpenNotes's public
record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or
public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health
category.[1]
contextOpenNotes's public
record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders,
executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents,
patients, or customers.[2]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes's public
materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic
control over the institution.[4]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes 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]
OpenNotes's core service has practical everyday utility, but its
integrity depends on pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality,
data handling, and accountability.[8]
contextOpenNotes'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.
4 / 5
OpenNotes's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for
ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility
customers, or communities.
OpenNotes's scale or category makes its decisions consequential for
ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility
customers, or communities. On Scale Integrity, OpenNotes 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
contextOpenNotes's public
record identifies its ownership form, institutional type, or
public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health
category.[1]
contextOpenNotes's public
record indicates whether binding control sits with shareholders,
executives, members, public officials, nonprofit boards, residents,
patients, or customers.[2]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes's public
materials do not show ordinary workers holding full binding democratic
control over the institution.[4]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes'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]
contextOpenNotes 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]
contextOpenNotes's core
service has practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on
pricing, safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and
accountability.[8]
OpenNotes's scale or category makes its decisions consequential
for ordinary U.S. households, patients, tenants, parents, taxpayers,
utility customers, or communities.[9]
Penalties
No penalties applied in this version.
Bonus Credits
Bonus
Credit
Why this credit
Openness to Dissent
?
Credit for tolerating internal, user, customer, worker, and public
dissent without retaliation, capture, or viewpoint laundering.
2 / 3
OpenNotes's public record makes Openness to Dissent relevant through its
ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth
exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community
accountability.
OpenNotes's public record makes Openness to Dissent relevant through its
ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth
exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community
accountability. This earns limited Openness to Dissent credit because
the record shows a concrete public, cooperative, affordability, access,
transparency, or community-accountability feature beyond ordinary market
service. The credit stays limited unless affected users can reliably
exercise durable power over the institution.
Calibration notes
Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated
across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and
childcare/youth institutions.
Linked evidence
OpenNotes's public record makes Openness to Dissent relevant
through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden,
youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community
accountability.[10]
Constitutional Spirit
?
Credit for respecting constitutional rights and civil-liberties norms
even where private law does not strictly require it.
1 / 3
OpenNotes's public record makes Constitutional Spirit relevant through
its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth
exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community
accountability.
OpenNotes's public record makes Constitutional Spirit relevant through
its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth
exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community
accountability. This earns limited Constitutional Spirit credit because
the record shows a concrete public, cooperative, affordability, access,
transparency, or community-accountability feature beyond ordinary market
service. The credit stays limited unless affected users can reliably
exercise durable power over the institution.
Calibration notes
Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated
across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and
childcare/youth institutions.
Linked evidence
OpenNotes's public record makes Constitutional Spirit relevant
through its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden,
youth exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community
accountability.[11]
Cost Transparency
?
Credit for clear posted prices, all-in fees, unit costs, public rate
cards, margin/cost visibility, or surplus-allocation transparency,
especially in markets where opaque quotes, hidden fees, or
individualized pricing are normal.
1 / 3
OpenNotes's public record makes Cost Transparency relevant through its
ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth
exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community
accountability.
OpenNotes's public record makes Cost Transparency relevant through its
ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth
exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community
accountability. This earns limited Cost Transparency credit because the
record shows a concrete public, cooperative, affordability, access,
transparency, or community-accountability feature beyond ordinary market
service. The credit stays limited unless affected users can reliably
exercise durable power over the institution.
Calibration notes
Comparative anchor: Coverage-gap batch calibrated
across tax filing, utilities, housing, storage, healthcare systems, and
childcare/youth institutions.
Linked evidence
OpenNotes's public record makes Cost Transparency relevant through
its ownership, pricing, safety, lobbying, environmental burden, youth
exposure, data practices, lock-in, public mission, or community
accountability.[12]
Confidence Basis
Confidence Basis
Confidence is computed from the evidence trail and review state, not
typed into the profile by hand.
This confidence label measures the source-backed evidence trail.
AI-scaffolded scores remain tentative until human review.
Claim confidence17/20
12 verified linked claims
Source quality10/18
Best source per verified claim, weighted by institutional reliability
Direct axis-specific claims14/18
12 direct claims across 12 active components
Dispute load12/12
0 disputed claims on this entity
Recency10/10
Newest accepted timestamp: May 13, 2026
Reviewer status7/12
Human-reviewed components score higher than AI scaffolding
Component coverage10/10
12/12 evidence-bearing components have direct support
Evidence State
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.
1OpenNotes's public record identifies
its ownership form, institutional type, or
public/private/nonprofit/cooperative structure in the health
category.
2OpenNotes's public record indicates
whether binding control sits with shareholders, executives, members,
public officials, nonprofit boards, residents, patients, or
customers.
3OpenNotes's model determines whether
money flows primarily to investors and owners or back toward users,
members, public value, community services, affordability, or mission
delivery.
6OpenNotes'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 FidelityVerifiedHigh
confidenceHuman-reviewed
7OpenNotes operates in a market where
customers, tenants, patients, taxpayers, utility users, parents, or
community members often face switching costs, asymmetric information, or
limited choice.
8OpenNotes's core service has
practical everyday utility, but its integrity depends on pricing,
safety, transparency, access, quality, data handling, and
accountability.
9OpenNotes's scale or category makes
its decisions consequential for ordinary U.S. households, patients,
tenants, parents, taxpayers, utility customers, or communities.
10OpenNotes's public record makes
Openness to Dissent relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety,
lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in,
public mission, or community accountability.
Openness To DissentVerifiedMedium
confidenceHuman-reviewed
11OpenNotes's public record makes
Constitutional Spirit relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety,
lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in,
public mission, or community accountability.
12OpenNotes's public record makes
Cost Transparency relevant through its ownership, pricing, safety,
lobbying, environmental burden, youth exposure, data practices, lock-in,
public mission, or community accountability.
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 OpenNotes 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.