This is a working research document from the childcare filing, published as written — including the parts later corrected. It is the underlying record for Whitepaper No. 1, not a summary of it.
Date: 2026-08-07 Method: Per M6/M10 — structural blinding via scripts/batch-rescore.py. The blind scorer received only a tool-less request containing: architecture specs, the 14 anchored scales, scoring disciplines, and ws03–ws13 + ws15. Excluded (cannot be reached): scores.csv, rationale.md, rankings.txt, red-team log, deviations log, sequencing, site pages, ws14 (pre-score leanings). Raw output: blind-scores-2026-08-07.md. Reconciled cell-by-cell below.
Supersedes deviations #2/#6 (same-analyst 3-architecture sample). That sample is no longer the filing's independence claim.
Headline: the stable set was an evidence-density artifact
The re-score's largest contribution is not any single cell — it is exposing that the published "four designs survive every ranking" finding rested on above-neutral scores without cited effect evidence, especially on the federal-fallback ladder (a9) and on distributional/evaluability columns across several winners. The blind scorer applied the evidence floor both ways. After reconciliation:
| Finding |
Before |
After |
| Stable across all 4 weightings |
a3, a6, a8, a9 |
a3, a4, a8 |
| In top-4 under some but not all |
(none claimed; actually two exact ties existed) |
a6 (3 of 4), a11 (equity only) |
| Bottom two under every weighting |
misstated as "cash and Tri-Share" |
a5 demand-side allowance, a10 federalized Tri-Share |
| Cash comparator |
claimed "ranks last" |
mid-table (7th equal / 7th–10th by weighting) |
K–12 extension (a4) enters the stable set on the strength of evidenced red-state durability, near-parity district pay, and direct-provision pass-through — while retaining its definitional coverage_02=1. It is a stable component for the school-age band, not a universal architecture. Federal fallback (a9) keeps federalism=5 (the holdout-proofing finding stands) but loses unevidenced 4s on workforce, supply, durability, and distributional — and leaves the all-weightings top-4.
Cell-by-cell reconciliation (material moves only; identical cells omitted)
47 cells corrected. 25 judgment splits kept-and-logged.
Asymmetric floor — below-neutral without evidence → 3
| Cell |
Orig |
Blind |
Resolved |
Basis |
| a1 coverage_512 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Age scope not in evidence base |
| a1 durability |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Mandatory funding vs no dedicated revenue = wash at 3 |
| a1 evaluability |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Observational cross-state variation = anchor 3 |
| a1 participation_risk |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Cost-estimation rate-setting = anchor 3 |
| a2 relief_workforce |
2 |
3 |
3 |
No compensation mechanism evidenced |
| a2 integrity_risk |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Unevidenced |
| a2 evaluability |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Unevidenced |
| a5 evaluability |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Unevidenced |
| a7 evaluability |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Unevidenced |
| cash coverage_02/34/512 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Cash makes no care offer; anchors fit badly → neutral not 2 |
| cash integrity_risk |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Unevidenced |
| cash evaluability |
1 |
3 |
3 |
Unevidenced; 1 was mechanism reasoning |
Asymmetric floor — above-neutral without evidence → 3
| Cell |
Orig |
Blind |
Resolved |
Basis |
| a2 distributional |
4 |
3 |
3 |
No incidence evidence for this design |
| a3 relief_workforce |
4 |
3 |
3 |
Grants cover wages indirectly; no parity/pipeline = anchor 3 |
| a3 distributional |
5 |
3 |
3 |
Means-tested HS ≠ scaled-universal incidence |
| a6 distributional |
4 |
3 |
3 |
Rural-weighting instruction ≠ measured incidence |
| a6 evaluability |
4 |
3 |
3 |
National staging creates no comparison group in record |
| a7 relief_workforce |
4 |
3 |
3 |
Revenue instrument, not a compensation program |
| a7 coverage_34 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
Benefit design unspecified |
| a8 distributional |
4 |
3 |
3 |
Unevidenced |
| a8 evaluability |
4 |
3 |
3 |
DoD case still pending in record |
| a9 relief_workforce |
4 |
3 |
3 |
No compensation mechanism specified |
| a9 relief_supply |
4 |
3 |
3 |
Capacity effects unevidenced |
| a9 durability |
4 |
3 |
3 |
Unevidenced |
| a9 distributional |
4 |
3 |
3 |
Unevidenced |
| cash distributional |
4 |
3 |
3 |
No child-benefit incidence evidence in base |
Evidence corrections (blind citation accepted)
| Cell |
Orig |
Blind |
Resolved |
Basis |
| a2 procedural |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Byrd exposure on standards = "reconcilable with major strips" |
| a2 passthrough_risk |
2 |
4 |
4 |
Administered rates; Quebec rations rather than inflates |
| a3 procedural |
3 |
4 |
4 |
ws11: standards inside federal spending programs |
| a3 passthrough_risk |
4 |
5 |
5 |
ARPA supply-side operating grants = anchor 5 |
| a4 relief_workforce |
3 |
4 |
4 |
Boston/district near-parity pay (ws07/ws13) |
| a4 coverage_34 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
Universal pre-K sustained at scale (GA/OK/FL) |
| a4 federalism |
3 |
4 |
4 |
Red-state durability lowers holdout risk vs match designs |
| a4 passthrough_risk |
4 |
5 |
5 |
Direct public provision |
| a4 preference_fit |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Centre-fit for 3–5 washes against no 0–2 / no home-based |
| a5 relief_supply |
1 |
2 |
2 |
Holds nothing new but is not pure "builds no capacity" void |
| a5 federalism |
4 |
5 |
5 |
No state opt-in machinery |
| a6 relief_supply |
5 |
4 |
4 |
Retention dominates new-build arithmetic (ws04) |
| a7 durability |
5 |
4 |
4 |
Dedicated revenue without institutional entanglement |
| a8 procedural |
2 |
4 |
4 |
ws11 names architecture 8 with a3 as Byrd-defensible home |
| a8 federalism |
4 |
5 |
5 |
Direct-federal = holdout-proof |
| a8 integrity_risk |
4 |
5 |
5 |
Direct provision = anchor 5 |
| a10 durability |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Multi-state replication vs pilot scale = wash |
| a11 passthrough_risk |
2 |
3 |
3 |
Kin payments outside priced market vs purchased-care risk = wash |
| a11 integrity_risk |
1 |
3 |
3 |
Netherlands caution vs direct-to-family simplicity = wash |
Judgment splits kept (original stands; blind reading logged)
| Cell |
Orig |
Blind |
Kept |
Why |
| a11 coverage_02 |
5 |
4 |
5 |
Universal home-based offer matches anchor 5; take-up dock is judgment |
| a5 distributional |
3 |
2 |
3 |
Desert/rate argument conflates supply failure with incidence (sample re-score already corrected this direction once) |
| a3 coverage_34 / participation / preference |
5/4/3 |
4/5/2 |
kept |
Magnitude thresholds on universal pre-K and centre-vs-home fit |
| a4 procedural / evaluability |
3/3 |
4/4 |
kept |
Federal vs state-led vehicle; lottery-evidence credit |
| a5 coverage / participation / preference / integrity |
various |
+1 |
kept |
Portable-money readings vs as-implemented inflation record |
| a6 coverage_02/34 |
3/3 |
4/4 |
kept |
Credit for eventual universal eligibility vs build-out-only present |
| a7/a8/a9/a10/a11/cash procedural & risk cells |
various |
±1 |
kept |
See blind basis notes; none move a ranking on their own |
Reconciled matrix
| Architecture |
Wf |
Sup |
0–2 |
3–4 |
5–12 |
Proc |
Fed |
Dur |
Pass |
Part |
Pref |
Int |
Dist |
Eval |
| a1 CCDF supercharge |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
| a2 Medicaid entitlement |
3 |
2 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
| a3 Head Start scaled |
3 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
| a4 K–12 extension |
4 |
4 |
1 |
5 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
| a5 Demand allowance |
1 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
5 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
| a6 Supply-first |
5 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
| a7 Social insurance |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
| a8 Public option |
5 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
5 |
5 |
2 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
| a9 Fallback ladder |
3 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
| a10 Tri-Share federal |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
| a11 Caregiver choice |
2 |
2 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
| Cash comparator |
1 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
What survives, what changed
- Supply-side / direct-provision / holdout-proofing still win — a3 and a8 lead or co-lead every weighting; a6 remains in the top-4 under three of four.
- "Four designs, no flips" is withdrawn. Three designs are stable; the fourth seat flips between supply-first and caregiver-choice by objective. Federal fallback is a necessary feature (federalism=5) that does not by itself clear the board.
- K–12 is a stable top-tier component for ages 3+ / school-age, not a universal answer — its
coverage_02=1 is definitional and still binds any single-architecture reading.
- The fashionable losers are a5 and a10, not cash. Cash is mid-table; saying it "ranks last" was always false against
rankings.txt and remains false.
- Segmentation strengthens. Caregiver-choice enters the equity top-4; K–12's school-age dominance is now rank-visible rather than only narrative.
Effects applied
- scores.csv → reconciled matrix; prior values in git history.
- rankings.txt regenerated via
rank.py.
- rationale.md headline + reconciliation section rewritten.
- Site whitepaper Part 6, honesty box, and sidebar status updated; sources page scorecard/deviations language aligned.
- Deviation #10 appended; #2/#6 marked discharged by this pass.