Skip to content
FonteumThe Graph

By use case

Exclusion & monitoring (self-serve)Free roster screen — no accountExclusion & sanctions screeningCredentialing & provider-data enrichmentAudit evidence & defensible programsProvider data for AI / RAGM&A & network diligence

By buyer

Compliance & riskJournalists & newsroomsDevelopers & AI teams

By industry

HealthcareProviders & facilitiesSanctionsOFAC / EU / UK / UN / OIG / SAMFederal contractingSAM · USASpending · FAPIIS

The capability layer

APIREST + bulk accessMCP serverCallable by AI agentsFHIR R4 APIBulk exportAttestation & audit packReconciliationSource-vs-source diffsGrounded answersAI citation assetEntity graphSnapshotsPoint-in-time, bitemporal

The differentiator

Coverage & sourcesThe catalogFreshnessMethodologyCare CompareFacility qualityCompare grounded answersBrowse all datasets →
Research

The dev on-ramp

DocsAPI referenceMCP — connect your agentOne-paste installFHIR sandboxLive API surfaceQuickstartStatusChangelogSDKs & integrations
Pricing
Sign inFree roster screen →Get a signed certificate →

Solutions

Exclusion & monitoring (self-serve)Exclusion & sanctions screeningCredentialing & provider-data enrichmentAudit evidence & defensible programsProvider data for AI / RAGM&A & network diligenceCompliance & riskJournalists & newsroomsDevelopers & AI teamsHealthcareSanctionsFederal contracting

Platform

APIMCP serverFHIR R4 APIBulk exportAttestation & audit packReconciliationGrounded answersEntity graphSnapshots

Data

Coverage & sourcesFreshnessMethodologyCare CompareCompare grounded answersBrowse all datasets →
Research

Developers

DocsAPI referenceMCP — connect your agentFHIR sandboxQuickstartStatusChangelogSDKs & integrations
Pricing
Sign inFree roster screen →Get a signed certificate →
Fonteum · Compare

Stop shipping answers you can't stand behind

Answer-first capsule: AI and RAG builders do not need another plausible paragraph. They need a dated public-records answer that names the government source, carries the limitation, is signed and attested, and can be re-checked after the user sees it. Fonteum turns the same question an LLM might answer from memory into a source-backed answer across

44 federal source familiesSource: Fonteum methodology · As of 2026-05-27
.

Published June 24, 2026 · Last reviewed June 2026 · Capability comparison — public facts only

Request access →or explore the Fonteum data platform →
9-capability comparison

From plausible text to a signed, re-checkable public-records answer

From plausible text to a signed, re-checkable public-records answer
CapabilityUngrounded LLM answerFonteum
Same questionWhich public records show whether a provider or vendor appears on an exclusion list?Which public records show whether a provider or vendor appears on an exclusion list?
Example answerA plausible paragraph says the organization is probably clear, cites no source, gives no checked date, and may be stale by the time it is read.The OIG LEIE snapshot contains aggregate exclusion records. Fonteum answers name the source, snapshot date, limitation, and evidence artifact; no individual record is named in this aggregate example.
SourceMay blend training data, web memory, or retrieval snippets without a field-level citation.Government record first — OIG, SAM.gov, CMS, HRSA, or another registered source family named in the answer.
DateOften no as-of date, or a generic phrase like recently.Snapshot-dated and last-checked at the field level, so the answer says when it was checked.
SignatureNo signed evidence package travels with the text.Signed, attested, and chained to the snapshot digest so the answer can be checked again later.
Time-machine edgeAnswers the present-tense question only, and may not know what changed since training or retrieval.As-of history: ask what the public record said on a past date, not only what the current page says now.
Re-check lineA user can rerun the prompt, but cannot re-create the exact upstream record behind the sentence.Re-fetch the government file, compare the digest, and re-check the evidence at /verify.
RAG handoffThe answer is a text blob the application has to defend after the fact.The answer ships with source, date, limitation, and evidence pointers that a RAG app can show to the user.
Failure modeConfident, unsourced, and possibly stale output that sounds useful until someone asks for the record.A dated public-record answer that can be quoted, audited, and re-checked without naming nonessential individuals.

This comparison is aggregate and FCRA-safe. The worked example cites an OIG LEIE aggregate count and names no individuals; it compares answer mechanics, not any provider, contractor, or person.

Why grounded answers matter

The evidence path is the product

Answer-first capsule

Stop shipping answers you can't stand behind. If an AI product answers a compliance, credentialing, diligence, or sourcing question, the answer needs a source, an as-of date, a limitation, and an evidence trail at the moment it leaves the model.

The time-machine edge

Most LLM answers collapse time into now. Public-records products need a different question: what did the government record say on the date the decision was made? Fonteum keeps dated snapshots so an answer can be reconstructed as of a past date.

The re-check line

A Fonteum answer is designed to be re-checked: source family, snapshot date, SHA-256 digest, and attestation chain point back to the file. The user can inspect the evidence path at /verify instead of accepting a sentence on faith.

Related comparisons

Compare other data capabilities

Provider data vs raw public files →

NPI-resolved, provenance-tracked records vs parsing bulk CSVs yourself.

Live provider data vs annual snapshots →

Continuously refreshed, per-field-dated federal data vs yearly editions.

Federal exclusion screening vs checking SAM.gov by hand →

Award-time, point-in-time SAM.gov exclusion evidence vs a manual lookup.

FAQ

Common questions

Why is an ungrounded LLM answer a problem for public-records data?
The problem is not fluency; it is accountability. A public-records answer can affect compliance, credentialing, diligence, or user safety. If the answer has no source, checked date, limitation, or evidence trail, the builder cannot show what record supports it when a user, auditor, or customer asks.
What does Fonteum add to a RAG or agent stack?
Fonteum adds the evidence layer: with source, date, limitation, digest, and attestation metadata attached to the record. A RAG or agent application can cite the government record instead of asking the model to defend an unsupported answer.
What is the worked example on this page?
The example is aggregate and FCRA-safe: the OIG LEIE snapshot carries exclusion records. The point is not to name an individual; it is to show the difference between an unsourced answer and a dated answer that points back to OIG as the government record.
How does the time-machine edge help AI builders?
It lets the application answer as-of questions. A present-tense lookup tells you what the list says now; a dated snapshot tells you what the list said on the date a decision, contract, credentialing action, or dataset release occurred. That is the answer a defensible AI workflow needs.
Can I use this through an API?
Yes. Fonteum exposes public-records data through API surfaces for builders, plus research downloads for aggregate work. The important distinction is that the data returned to the application carries source and evidence metadata, so the answer can keep its citation path when it moves into a model response.
Request access

Ground your next answer in the public record.

Start with /for/rag, connect agents at /for/ai-agents, inspect the API, re-check evidence at /verify, or browse aggregate work at /research.

Request access →or browse the source library →
See also
  • /for/rag → How RAG builders ground provider-data answers in source-cited records.
  • /for/ai-agents → How agents call Fonteum with evidence metadata intact.
  • /api → API entry point for public-records data with source and date metadata.
  • /verify → Re-check signed evidence artifacts and snapshot digests.
  • /research → Aggregate public-records research with downloads and methodology.

Built on the authoritative federal record

The primary sources, named on every page.

These are the federal agencies whose public datasets Fonteum ingests and attributes — the issuing authorities, not customers or partners. Every figure on the site links back to one of them.

  • CMS
  • HHS-OIG
  • HRSA
  • FDA
  • NLM
  • NUCC
  • Census
  • BLS
  • BEA

See the full source registry, with license and refresh cadence for each →

Reproducible by design

Every figure traces to its federal source.

14-tuple provenance

Every rendered fact ties to a source URL, dataset ID, snapshot date, row key, and SHA-256 — the full chain-of-custody record.

Reproducible SQL

Each study ships the exact query behind its figures, run against the cited federal snapshot. Re-run it yourself.

Daily count checks

Published counts are checked against the upstream federal datasets on a daily cadence, with drift logged.

Named medical review

Reviewed by Jennifer Montecillo, MD, medical reviewer. Non-practicing medical reviewer.

Read the full provenance and attestation methodology →

Two doors

Use the free API and open data

Query providers, facilities, sanctions, and quality scores — each field carrying its federal source. Self-serve, no call to start.

Explore the API →Browse the data catalog →

Talk to us

Managed pilots, enterprise terms, and audit-ready, signed attestation packages for compliance, risk, and research teams.

Talk to us →
Fonteum
Platform
Platform overviewAPIMCP serverFHIR R4 APIBulk exportAttestation & audit packReconciliationGrounded answersEntity graphSnapshots
Solutions
All solutionsExclusion & sanctions screeningCredentialing & enrichmentAudit evidenceProvider data for AI / RAGM&A & network diligenceCompliance & riskJournalists & newsroomsDevelopers & AI teams
Data & sources
Coverage & sourcesBrowse all datasetsState Medicaid exclusionsFreshnessMethodologyCare CompareSanctions screeningOIG LEIE listOwnershipStaffingDeficienciesSpecial Focus Facilities
Federal contracting
OverviewAwards during active exclusionFederal debarment scorecardProcurement questionsContractor lookup8(a) certification guide
Developers
Developer hubDocsAPI referenceQuickstartStatusChangelogSDKs & integrationsWebhooks
Research & guides
Research hubGuidesHealthcare provider dataExclusion & sanctions screeningProvider credentialing dataHealthcare data for AIHospital margin gapProvider access gapsGlossaryComparisonsGrounded data vs LLM answersCitationsManifestoWhy Fonteum
Company
AboutPressCustomersPricingContactEditorial policyCorrections
Trust & legal
TrustTrust markQualitySecurityPrivacy policyTerms of serviceAPI & MCP termsMedical disclaimer

Reviewed by Jennifer Montecillo, MD, medical reviewer. Non-practicing medical reviewer.

© 2026 Fonteum LLC. All rights reserved.

·hello@fonteum.com

The U.S. healthcare graph AI can cite — every fact carries its source.

Every fact Fonteum serves carries a signed, re-checkable trust mark — source, as-of date, and an Ed25519 signature travel with the data. Re-check any fact at fonteum.com/verify · the trust-mark standard (W3C Verifiable Credentials 2.0, C2PA-aligned).
Request access→

The substrate, by the numbers

9.2Mgraph entitiesProviders, organizations, owners, and facilities
15.7Mlinked identifiersNPIs, CCNs, LEIs and more, resolved to entities
5Mgraph edgesSource-attested relationships between entities
44federal source familiesDistinct CMS, OIG, HRSA, FDA and peer datasets
35dataset pagesCitable, downloadable /data catalog pages
70reproducible studiesEach shipping the SQL behind its figures