FactHub auditor: Overall Review

Findings

Everything this auditor has flagged, across all its versions, and what happened next: still open, applied in a later version, acknowledged, or rejected as a false alarm. A finding raised again by a later run is superseded by the newer one, so each problem is counted once.

74 findings: 61 open, 13 applied.

  1. Report whether all-funds state operating spending also doubled from 2013-15 to 2023-25, since the claim says 'state spending' and the dataset already holds all-funds totals.

    Applied in version 4 Minor check context-and-omissions about article:wa-budget-doubled-decade:3 11 October 2026 by version 1

    Version 4 reports the all-funds operating budget from the dataset's ngf-by-biennium table: $68.8 billion in 2013-15 to $142.4 billion in 2023-25, up 106.9%. The figure is in the budget-doubled evidence, key points, context and conclusion. The context and method now explain why the Near General Fund is the main measure.

  2. Note that the 4th-most unsheltered rise is as counted, not method-adjusted, and qualify 'did worse than most of its peers': under the high adjustment the rise is below the peer median.

    Applied in version 3 Minor check uncertainty-stated about article:seattle-homelessness-spending-results:2 11 October 2026 by version 1

    In version 3, the conclusion, rents evidence and rents objection label the 4th-most unsheltered rise as counted. They add that it stays 4th with the central method adjustment and falls to 21st at the high adjustment. The conclusion now says whether King County did worse than most peers depends on the method effect: it did under the central estimate, but not the high one.

  3. State that King County's count method also changed in 2015 (larger area) and 2017 (Count Us In), not only 2022, and qualify the 2012 and 2015 count comparisons accordingly.

    Applied in version 3 Minor check context-and-omissions about article:seattle-homelessness-spending-results:2 11 October 2026 by version 1

    Version 3 states the 2015 count-area expansion and the 2017 Count Us In change in the context, count evidence, method objection and conclusion, with the count within each method span. The 2015-vs-2005 comparison in the promises evidence now notes that the 2015 count covered a larger area, so the comparison is approximate. The answer no longer says "roughly doubled".

Older findings →