--- title: "Research Method | A Government That Works for the People" canonical: "https://govthatworks.org/method" description: "See the book\u2019s source hierarchy, source-freeze rules, distinction between projections and estimates, and accountability method." --- Appendix F · research method # How the book separates facts, proposals, projections, and assumptions. The research method is part of the argument. The book freezes its public-record facts to a date, ranks sources by authority, distinguishes current law from proposed reform, and labels author estimates separately from official scores. Source freeze · September 20, 2026 Current policy vs. the book ## The book proposes a stricter public test for whether programs work. This page is about governing practice rather than a single benefit or tax. The relevant comparison is how performance is measured and published. Current framework Federal agencies already use performance plans, evaluations, audits, and program data, but GAO reported in 2026 that many programs still lack clear goals or relevant data needed to assess whether they are solving the problem they were created to fix. → Book proposal The Six Tests require a defined problem, assigned responsibility, an outside perspective, financing, safeguards, and a measurable success standard before a policy is treated as complete. What it could mean for people A reader or taxpayer could see what a program promised to do, who owns the result, and what evidence would count as success or failure. Current framework Government statistics, legal authorities, projections, and research are published on different schedules and can be cited without a common “freeze date.” → Book proposal The book identifies a source hierarchy, distinguishes data year from release date, and freezes the edition’s factual record on September 20, 2026. What it could mean for people Readers can tell whether a number is a measurement, a projection, or the author’s estimate and know when the underlying evidence was last checked. Current framework A program can continue even when evidence is incomplete or goals are not clearly defined. → Book proposal The book pairs major policies with measures of success and a “Rule for Failure” that requires public explanation, repair, redesign, or termination when targets are missed. What it could mean for people Failure would be more visible, although deciding whether a missed target reflects bad policy, bad implementation, or outside conditions would still require judgment. Current-practice source: [GAO, Federal Programs: Assessing and Improving Effectiveness (2026)](https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-109130). Book method: Chapters 4, 36–37 and Appendix F. Four conventions ## What a reader should know before using a number or claim. 01 ### Current law is not the proposal. The book distinguishes the public record as it stood on the source-freeze date from what the author wants to change. Appendix B sorts major reforms by whether they require an amendment, statute, chamber rule, state action, or judicial change. 02 ### A projection is not a prediction. When the book uses a baseline from CBO or a trustees’ report, it treats that as a conditional projection under stated assumptions, not as a promise of what will happen. 03 ### Author estimates are labeled. The fiscal estimates are planning estimates built from published sources and disclosed assumptions. They are not CBO, JCT, OMB, CMS Actuary, or other official scores. 04 ### Failure has to be measurable. Major proposals are paired with baselines, targets, independent measurement, and failure triggers so that a future reader can ask whether the policy actually worked. Source hierarchy ## Higher-authority sources control when they can settle the claim. Appendix F states an order of preference rather than treating every citation as equivalent. **1** ### Primary legal sources The Constitution, enacted statutes, published judicial opinions, regulations, and official legal text. **2** ### Official statistics and analysis Federal statistical agencies and official analytic bodies such as CBO, GAO, CRS, JCT, OMB, and the Social Security and Medicare trustees. **3** ### Peer-reviewed research Used especially for causal claims about whether a policy changed an outcome. **4** ### Research and advocacy organizations Used where useful, with perspective identified when relevant and claims checked against higher-tier sources when possible. **5** ### News reporting Used for recent events not yet documented in official sources, with single-source reporting treated cautiously. Three different dates ## Data year, release date, and freeze date are not the same thing. A statistic can describe one year, be published in another year, and be checked for the book on a third date. The method keeps those concepts separate so an older data year is not mistaken for an outdated source. **Data year**What period the number describes *→* **Release date**When the source published it *→* **Freeze date**When the book locked its research Appendix F ## Read the complete research method. The full appendix explains source hierarchy, conflict resolution, dates, citation standards, fiscal-estimate conventions, and the update protocol. [Open the book](/downloads/book.pdf)