Our articles should make it easier to take the right action—not merely explain programs or attract search traffic. We publish plain-language guidance, distinguish national rules from state rules, and keep directory claims tied to official evidence.
What every article must do
We start by answering the reader’s question. We explain unfamiliar terms, identify the correct kind of agency, and describe a realistic next step. State pages own state-specific agency names, contacts, eligibility procedures, and local exceptions. National guides cover common processes without pretending that each state follows identical rules.
Reading level and structure
We aim for language most readers can understand without specialist training. We prefer short sentences, short paragraphs, clear headings, meaningful tables, and checklists. The target is approximately fifth-grade reading level when practical. We may need a more technical term when it is the name used in official rules, but we explain that term in everyday language.
We do not add paragraphs solely to reach a word target. A brief, accurate answer is better than a long generic article. State guides may be longer because they contain verified local listings.
Facts, evidence, and source selection
We prefer official sources: federal agencies, state programs, county offices, and the organizations delivering the relevant service. We can use public research and community experiences to understand reader questions, but a forum comment does not establish an eligibility rule or prove that a program is available. We do not invent phone numbers, physical addresses, office hours, wait times, costs, sources, or personal experiences.
Critical distinctions
Information and referral is not the same as receiving funded care. An initial screen is not a benefits decision. Approval for a program does not guarantee that a provider is immediately available. A designated ADRC, an ADRC partner, and another No Wrong Door contact may all have different responsibilities. Our writing must preserve those differences.
Editorial independence
Advertising or sponsorship, if used, must not decide which government or nonprofit contacts appear in a directory. We do not describe listings as endorsements. We avoid sales-driven language that could make readers mistake a private placement service for an independent public counselor.
Review and correction process
Pages should show when key facts were verified. Active directory records are reviewed on a roughly 90-day schedule when practical, and more urgently when critical contact or benefit information changes. A review date is a target, not a guarantee that every agency has re-confirmed every detail. Corrections may be made sooner when a trustworthy source identifies a problem. Readers can submit a correction report, and we prioritize errors that could prevent access to help.
Who our content does not replace
Our articles are not legal advice, clinical advice, financial planning, Medicaid approval, or an official government notice. A qualified local professional or agency should answer questions that depend on a particular person’s circumstances. For urgent danger, seek emergency assistance rather than relying on an article.