How We Work.
What We Owe You.

Accuracy is the foundation. A story built on inaccurate facts is not journalism — it is rumor with a byline. RFA holds itself to the following standards:

Verification Before Publication

Every factual claim in an RFA story must be verifiable from at least one primary source before publication. A primary source is a document, recording, official record, or firsthand witness account — not another publication's characterization of those things. We cite our primary sources in the text or in the accompanying record archive.

Distinguishing Fact from Allegation

RFA distinguishes between what is established by the record and what is alleged or claimed. Allegations are attributed. Official findings are distinguished from pending investigations. Bill text is quoted, not paraphrased without citation.

Original Source Review

When a story turns on the content of a document — a bill, a court filing, a contract — RFA reporters read the document, not a summary of it. Where summaries are used, the original document is linked.

Unnamed Sources

RFA uses unnamed sources only when the information they provide cannot be obtained any other way and is significant enough to warrant publication. See the full anonymous source policy in our sourcing standards.

Accountability journalism can cause harm. Publishing accurate information about a public official's conduct can damage reputations. Publishing identities can create safety risks. RFA weighs these considerations explicitly.

Private Individuals

Private individuals who are not public figures receive greater privacy protection than public officials and public figures. We do not publish home addresses, medical information, or other private details about private individuals unless directly relevant to a documented matter of public concern and unless the public interest clearly outweighs the privacy interest.

Public Officials and Public Figures

Public officials and public figures exercising public power have reduced privacy expectations regarding their exercise of that power. Their voting records, public statements, official conduct, and use of public funds are appropriate subjects for scrutiny without special privacy consideration.

Safety Risks

RFA does not publish information that would create a direct, documented safety risk to an individual — including the home addresses of private individuals — even when that information is technically public record. This applies regardless of the subject's politics or profession.

Independence means freedom from financial, political, and personal interests that could compromise reporting. RFA's independence standards are specific and public.

No Access Arrangements

RFA does not enter into arrangements — formal or informal — that exchange favorable coverage for access. We do not accept exclusive interviews conditioned on favorable framing. We do not embargo stories in exchange for access. See the full access prohibition policy below.

No Sponsored Content

RFA carries no advertising and no sponsored content. All editorial content on this site is produced without commercial consideration.

No Organizational Grants from Covered Entities

RFA does not accept funding from organizations whose conduct, positions, or funding we cover. If an organization that has funded RFA becomes the subject of coverage, that relationship will be disclosed in the story.

We are accountable to the same standards we apply to those we cover. That means public corrections, transparent sourcing, and acknowledgment of errors.

Explain Our Methods

RFA explains how we reported a story when method is material to evaluation of the findings. We note when something could not be independently verified. We note when a subject did not respond to a request for comment.

Respond to Complaints

RFA responds to substantive complaints about factual accuracy. A complaint is substantive if it identifies a specific claim and provides specific contrary evidence. We do not respond to complaints that object to our framing, methodology, or conclusions without identifying a specific factual error.

A conflict of interest exists when a reporter's personal, financial, or political interests could compromise — or appear to compromise — the independence or accuracy of their reporting.

Financial Conflicts

RFA reporters do not hold financial interests in companies, organizations, or entities they cover. Reporters who discover a financial conflict after accepting an assignment must disclose it to the editor immediately. Affected stories are reassigned or the conflict is disclosed in the story.

Personal and Political Conflicts

RFA reporters do not write about organizations or individuals with whom they have personal relationships that could compromise objectivity. Personal relationships include close family, romantic partners, and close personal friends. Political participation — including public advocacy for candidates or ballot measures — must be disclosed to the editor before assignment to related coverage.

Disclosure

When a conflict exists and a story proceeds (because the conflict is minor or because reassignment is impractical), the conflict is disclosed in the story text. "The reporter is a former employee of [organization]" is the standard format.

RFA corrects errors promptly and transparently. The corrections standard is: correct what was wrong, explain what was wrong, date the correction, and do not delete original text without noting what was removed.

What Triggers a Correction

• A factual claim that the record does not support
• A quote that was inaccurately transcribed or attributed
• A date, number, name, or title that was wrong
• A characterization of a document that the document itself does not support

What Does Not Trigger a Correction

• A subject's disagreement with our framing or conclusions
• New information that postdates publication (these are updates, not corrections)
• Stylistic choices

Correction Format

Corrections appear at the top of the corrected story with a timestamp and a description of what changed. They are also logged in the public corrections log. Deleted text is noted with a strikethrough or a parenthetical; we do not silently remove errors.

Full sourcing standards are published at sourcing.html. Summary:

• Primary sources are preferred over secondary sources in all cases
• Anonymous sources require editor approval and a documented reason why identity cannot be disclosed
• Claims sourced to a single unnamed source are not published without corroboration from a document or second source
• All sources — named and unnamed — are documented in the reporter's working notes, which are retained for two years
• When a claim cannot be verified, it is identified as unverified or not published

An access arrangement is any explicit or implicit understanding between a reporter or publication and a source, subject, or publicist that favorable coverage — or the suppression of unfavorable coverage — will be exchanged for access to that source or subject.

RFA prohibits all access arrangements. This prohibition is absolute. It applies to:

• Interview embargoes conditioned on favorable framing
• Background briefings conditioned on non-publication of anything discussed
• Exclusive access offered in exchange for advance story review by the subject
• Any arrangement, explicit or implicit, in which the subject controls any aspect of how the story is framed, timed, or published

Subjects may, as a condition of an on-record interview, request that specific statements be kept off the record. That is not an access arrangement — it is standard source management. What is prohibited is any condition that affects how RFA covers a subject across stories, or that gives a subject editorial control.