Methodology
We score evidence, not promises.
This scorecard measures publicly available evidence located by the author through a defined research framework. It does not rate the quality of a state’s health system, determine whether RHTP implementation is successful, or substitute for federal or state oversight. 2026 is a baseline and public-visibility year, not an impact evaluation; no final outcomes are scored.
Category weights
| Category | Max points |
|---|---|
| Funding & Fiscal Visibility | 15 |
| Administration & Governance | 10 |
| State Commitments & Implementation Plan | 15 |
| Transparency & Public Information | 20 |
| Public Understanding & Accessibility | 15 |
| Community Voice & Engagement Evidence | 10 |
| Rural Reproductive Justice & Family Wellbeing Lens | 10 |
| Measurement & Accountability Readiness | 5 |
| Total | 100 |
Calculation
Each indicator is scored 0–2. For each category, the sum of earned raw points is divided by the sum of applicable maximum raw points and multiplied by the category maximum. Category points are summed for an Evidence Visibility Baseline out of 100. Timing exclusions and true N/A values are never silently converted into zeros.
Statuses
- Clear evidence
- Qualifying public evidence located (raw 2).
- Partial evidence
- Limited or incomplete public evidence (raw 1).
- No public evidence located
- This project did not locate sufficient public evidence (raw 0). This does not prove the activity did not occur.
- Not Yet Due
- Excluded from the applicable denominator.
- Not Yet Reportable
- Excluded from the applicable denominator.
- N/A
- Excluded from the applicable denominator.
Public Visibility Score
A separate 0–10 measure built from six observable resident-facing questions. It measures how easily a resident can find and understand basic information about the state’s RHTP activity. It is never a substitute for the evidence visibility baseline.
Public Visibility measures the accessibility and findability of resident-facing information. It does not indicate whether a state is performing well or poorly. A state may make extensive information public without having better program outcomes, while meaningful activity may also be underway without being easy for the public to find.
Interpretive safeguards
- Evidence ≠ absence
- “No Public Evidence Located” means this project did not locate sufficient public evidence for the indicator. It does not mean the activity did not occur.
- Not Yet Due
- Some evidence may not yet be reasonably expected at a particular point in implementation. It is excluded rather than scored as zero.
- Not Yet Reportable
- Some information may exist internally but not yet be publicly reportable. It is excluded rather than scored as zero.
- N/A
- An indicator that does not apply is excluded rather than scored as zero.
- Funding distinctions
- Federal award, state distribution, subaward, obligation, and expenditure are kept separate. One is never substituted for another.
- Public Visibility ≠ program performance
- Findable information does not establish program quality or outcomes; activity may also exist without being easy for residents to find.
- Rural Reproductive Justice lens
- This is an analytical lens used by the project, not a claim that RHTP is itself a Reproductive Justice program. It examines the visibility of rural family, maternal, reproductive, and related needs in public plans, priorities, activities, funding, and measurement.
Standing rules
- Composite calculation
- For each category: earned raw points / applicable max raw points × category max points. Sum categories for overall score /100.
- Indicator scoring
- Each indicator uses raw score 0–2. 2 = clear evidence; 1 = partial/limited evidence; 0 = no qualifying evidence when applicable.
- Denominator exclusions
- Exclude Not Yet Due, Not Yet Reportable, and N/A from applicable denominators.
- Public Visibility
- Separate 0–10 measure based on six observable resident-facing questions; do not substitute it for the composite score.
- Interpretation
- Show category scores, evidence status, and last-checked date alongside the composite. Avoid definitive rank language.
- Future years
- Use a year field. Future product phases may examine implementation/reach, outcomes/equity, community impact, and sustainability; those scoring systems are not implemented here.
- Core rule
- WE SCORE EVIDENCE, NOT PROMISES.
- Baseline rule
- 2026 is a baseline/public-visibility year, not an impact evaluation.
- Missing evidence rule
- No Public Evidence Located means CRP did not locate sufficient public evidence; it does not prove an activity did not occur.
- Timing rule
- Not Yet Due, Not Yet Reportable, and N/A are excluded from applicable denominators.
- Funding rule
- Do not combine federal award, state distribution, subaward, obligation, or expenditure.
- Lens rule
- Rural Reproductive Justice & Family Wellbeing measures visibility of relevant needs and connections to priorities/funding/measurement; it is not a morality or policy rating.
Scope and update log
Pilot comparison set only; not a representative national sample. Year is a field in the dataset, so later years can be added without rebuilding the framework. Evidence last researched 2026-09-04.
- 2026-09-04 — Initial five-state research/QA baseline assembled (QA draft — human spot-check still required)
- Future — Update state evidence and recalculate (Use source-backed evidence only)