Sources and Methods Verification Report
This page shows where the numbers came from, how they were calculated, and how they were checked. It summarizes source classes, model assumptions, calculated values, and audit findings for the Contra Costa Plan B report using an AI-assisted public verification workflow focused on content, model logic, sources, and copy.
Key terms used here: , , , , and .
AI Verification Disclaimer
This verification was performed with AI assistance. It is a structured review and traceability check, not legal, accounting, or financial assurance. Readers should independently validate primary sources and assumptions before relying on conclusions.
Verification and Updates
This work is split into two explicit phases: first verification with recommendations, then implementation of fixes and updates. This public page tracks content, model, sources, and copy verification only.
Phase 1: Verification completed with recommendations
Phase 2: Fixes and updates applied
Scope: Public content, model assumptions, sources, and copy
Jargon and readability check: Pass
Missing citations in audited set: 0
Verification Categories
Each category below is evaluated separately so readers can see exactly what was checked and how it passed.
| Category | Definition | Status | Coverage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Direct Source Values | Values stated explicitly in cited primary sources with no transformation. | Pass | 8 values classified as direct source values. |
| Source-Derived (Interpreted) Values | Values interpreted from source language or context with an explicit interpretation rule. | Pass | 1 values classified as source-derived (interpreted) values. |
| Source-Derived Component-Sum Values | Values derived by summing independently cited component inputs (CCRMC state + federal impacts). | Pass | 4 values classified as source-derived component sums (FY26-27 through FY29-30 health shortfall estimates). |
| Assumption and Scenario Parameters | Planning parameters selected for scenario modeling, not directly quoted from source documents. | Pass | 3 assumptions tracked and displayed on this page. |
| Calculated Estimations | Values computed from source and interpreted inputs using explicit formulas. | Pass | 6 calculated estimations validated. |
| Copy-Language Accuracy | Public wording separates sourced facts from modeled outputs and avoids overstated claims. | Pass | Source-versus-model wording corrected in public copy. |
| Citation Traceability | Each audited public claim maps to a source citation, file path, or formula record. | Pass | Missing citations in audited set: 0. |
| Jargon and Readability | Public-facing language uses plain wording, limits jargon, and stays broadly readable. | Pass | Plain-language clarity check completed and documented. |
Sources and Methodologies
This table summarizes verification categories and documented coverage used in this report.
Direct Source Values
| Value | Number | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Measure B annual revenue estimate | $150M | Resolution 2026-40 (signed ballot language) |
| FY24-25 unassigned General Fund reserve | $584.6M | FY26-27 Budget Development Key Considerations, p. 8 |
| FY24-25 reserve shares of revenues | 23.8% unassigned / 49.4% total | FY26-27 Budget Development Key Considerations, p. 8 |
| General Fund reserve policy minimums | 5% unassigned / 10% total | General Fund Reserve Policy (2011) |
| FY24-25 General Fund balance mix | $19.8M / $4.3M / $1.1M / $604M / $584.6M | ACFR 2025 General Fund balance categories |
| FY24-25 total General Fund balance | $1213.8M | ACFR 2025 General Fund balance categories |
| CCRMC+Clinic state legislative impacts (FY26-27 through FY29-30) | $36M / $38M / $38M / $38M | RES-2026-40 CCH Budget Forecast Slides, table p. 2 |
| CCRMC+Clinic federal legislative impacts (FY26-27 through FY29-30) | $6M / $31M / $70M / $96M | RES-2026-40 CCH Budget Forecast Slides, table p. 2 |
Sources and Methodologies
Values in this table are directly sourced from linked primary documents.
Source-Derived (Interpreted) Values
| Value | Number | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Reserve policy floor proxy used in model | $123M | Reserve Policy plus FY26-27 revenue context |
Sources and Methodologies
Values in this table are source-derived using explicit interpretation rules shown in the audit register.
Source-Derived Component-Sum Values
These values are derived by summing independently cited component inputs. Each component (CCRMC state impact and CCRMC federal impact) is independently sourced; the sum is the modeled annual health impact.
| Metric | Value | Component inputs |
|---|---|---|
| FY26-27 health shortfall | $42M | ccrmcState (36) + ccrmcFederal (6) |
| FY27-28 health shortfall | $69M | ccrmcState (38) + ccrmcFederal (31) |
| FY28-29 health shortfall | $108M | ccrmcState (38) + ccrmcFederal (70) |
| FY29-30 health shortfall | $134M | ccrmcState (38) + ccrmcFederal (96) |
Sources and Methodologies
Component sums are calculated from independently cited CCRMC+Clinic state and federal impact inputs.
Key Assumptions
These assumptions are the policy and scenario choices used to turn source inputs into the public model shown elsewhere on the site.
| Assumption | Value | Why it is used |
|---|---|---|
| Reserve bridge amounts by year | $35M, $50M, $55M, $0M | Concentrates temporary reserve support in FY26-27 through FY28-29, then drops it to zero in FY29-30. |
| Revenue increase shares by year | 15%, 18%, 22%, 26% | Shows a phased increase in other revenues across the four-year scenario. |
| FY26-27 spending-cut split | 70% service adjustments / 30% operations | Keeps the donut chart aligned with the main model while preserving the displayed illustrative split. |
Sources and Methodologies
Assumptions are documented scenario choices used to produce the model outputs shown across the site.
Calculated Estimations
These values are computed from source and interpreted inputs using explicit formulas. Health shortfall estimates are in a separate section above.
| Metric | Value | Formula |
|---|---|---|
| CCRMC+Clinic cumulative health impact (through FY28-29) | $219M | (36+6) + (38+31) + (38+70) = 42+69+108 |
| FY26-27 total pressure | $65M | 23 + 42 |
| FY26-27 gap after Measure B | $0M | max(0, 65 - 150) |
| Measure B coverage share | 100% | round(min(100, (150/65)*100)) |
| Unassigned reserve above policy minimum | $462M | round(584.6 - 123) |
| Current reserve multiple of minimum | 4.8x | round(584.6 / 123, 1) |
Sources and Methodologies
Calculated estimations use formulas shown in the table and values tracked in the source audit register.
Audit Findings
F-001 (Medium)
Resolved 2026-03-25Verification recommendation: Clarify wording so model-derived values are not presented as direct source quotes.
Fix/update applied: Public wording now explicitly distinguishes model outputs from direct source values.
F-002 (Medium)
Resolved 2026-03-25Verification recommendation: Add a clear method note for the reserve floor proxy so interpretation is transparent.
Fix/update applied: Reserve floor proxy language now includes an explicit methodology note in public copy.
F-003 (Low)
Resolved 2026-03-25Verification recommendation: Align health shortfall path displays across public site views.
Fix/update applied: Public health shortfall path displays are now aligned across site views.
F-004 (Low)
Resolved 2026-03-25Verification recommendation: Reduce jargon and keep public-facing wording broadly readable and easy to scan.
Fix/update applied: Plain-language edits were applied to public copy so source claims, model outputs, and caveats are easier to understand.