# Responsible America — IG/Watchdog Tracking Methodology Status: architecture document plus a first real, hand-verified seed dataset (added 2026-08-11). Companion to `docs/public-scorecard-methodology.md`, `docs/political-money-tracking-methodology.md`, and `docs/federal-contracts-tracking-methodology.md` (same "architecture before data" approach, and the same real-data-civic-tools batch). Last reviewed: 2026-08-11. ## 1. What this is, and what it is not This is the data architecture for tracking statutory Inspector General offices: acting/permanent/vacant status, removal or transfer events, and GAO/watchdog cross-links. **It is still not a live tracker, and it still never characterizes a specific person or agency as corrupt.** CIGIE's own Inspectors General Directory (ignet.gov) and Oversight.gov's own vacancy tracker remain continuously-updated, authoritative federal sources for exactly this information — this platform points to them rather than attempting to mirror them via a live ingestion pipeline. As of 2026-08-11, `ig-watchdog-tracking.html` also shows a small, hand-verified seed dataset of three real statutory IG offices (§2 below) — every record is a one-time snapshot with its own "last verified" date, never framed as real-time. ## 2. The seed dataset: three statutory IG offices, and how the named-person content is handled Added 2026-08-11 as this tool's first conversion from architecture-only to real, source-backed content. Selection criteria and full research notes are in `research/tool-ig-watchdog-seed/research-plan.md`. In short: - **Department of Defense (Department of War) OIG.** Robert Storch was removed 2025-01-24 in a same-day action affecting at least 17 statutory IGs, without a confirmed 30-day advance notice; on 2025-09-24 a federal judge ruled the administration likely violated the notice requirement, while declining to order reinstatement. Platte B. Moring III was Senate-confirmed 2025-12-18 and is the office's current IG. - **Department of State OIG.** Two removal events on the same office across two administrations: Steve Linick (2020-05-15) and Cardell Richardson (2025-01-24, part of the same mass action as Storch). `current_status: vacant` -- a nominee is pending Senate confirmation as of this dataset's verification date; no specific named acting IG was confirmed via search this pass, and that limitation is stated directly. - **AmeriCorps (Corporation for National and Community Service) OIG.** The cross-party symmetric complement: Gerald Walpin was removed by the Obama administration in 2009, with its own real, documented notice- timing controversy. `current_status: acting` (Stephen Ravas), plus a real, current `major_reports` entry (an ongoing OIG review of AmeriCorps' 2025 staff reductions and NCCC demobilization). **Every removal_or_transfer_events entry keeps the official stated reason and any contested characterization strictly separate**, via the schema's `stated_reason` (sourced-record-only) and `context_note` (attributes any contested characterization explicitly to its own source -- a court ruling, named senators, a congressional investigation -- never adopted as this platform's own conclusion). This is the same discipline `docs/legal-review-policy.md` §3 already requires platform-wide for any content describing a named real person in terms that could be read as an assertion of unlawful or unethical conduct. **This content is handled the same way this platform already handles every other named-person claim** (see the existing precedent at `data/claims/claim-006-pelosi-family-trading-controversy.json`), not as a new or looser standard invented for this tool: the two claims discussing specific named individuals and contested characterizations (`claim-tool-igw-notification-safeguard-real`, `claim-tool-igw-cross-party-symmetry`) carry `named_person_ids`, `official_finding`, `adjudicated`, `alleged`, `disputed`, and `legal_review_required: true`, exactly like every other named-person claim on this platform. Setting `legal_review_required: true` does not block publication here: the reform these claims are attached to (`ra-national-debt-government-performance`) remains `publication_status: draft`, so `responsible-america/scripts/lib/review-gates.mjs`'s machine-enforced publication gate is not yet in play for it -- the same state every other reform on this platform is currently in. See `docs/legal-review-policy.md` §6 for exactly what would need to happen (an approved `legal_review` event from a qualified legal reviewer) before that reform, and by extension this content, could ever be marked published. **Verified seed dataset — last verified 2026-08-11.** This is a demonstration dataset (3 offices), not a comprehensive one, and is not refreshed on any schedule. ## 3. The statutory removal-notification safeguard The Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended by the Inspector General Reform Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-409), builds a specific accountability mechanism directly into law: before the President may remove or transfer a statutory Inspector General, both Houses of Congress must receive written notice, with reasons, **not later than 30 days before** the removal or transfer takes effect. A separate 15-day notice applies before placing an IG on non-duty status, and non-duty status cannot be invoked during the 30-day removal-notice window without a specific, documented finding that the IG poses a threat to employees or government interests. This is the legal frame this tool's `removal_or_transfer_events` field is built around: it is designed to track **whether the statutory notice process was followed for a documented event**, not to presume any removal or transfer is itself improper. A removal that follows the statutory process is not evidence of wrongdoing by itself; the notification requirement exists precisely so Congress and the public can evaluate whether a specific case was properly handled, using real, sourced facts. ## 4. "Do not characterize a person or agency as corrupt without sourced evidence" This is not a caution added on top of ordinary practice here — it is structurally enforced by the schema itself: every `removal_or_transfer_events` entry requires at least one `source_id`, and `stated_reason` is explicitly defined as "the reason as stated in a sourced record... never this platform's own inferred motive." No field in this schema allows asserting that a removal was retaliatory, corrupt, or improperly motivated without a direct citation making that specific claim — and even then, per this platform's existing claim-verification standard, such a claim would need to go through the same sourcing and (where it names a specific person) right-of-reply process every other named-person claim on this platform follows (see `docs/right-of-reply-policy.md`). ## 5. Published reports, recommendations, agency response, implementation status Oversight.gov already aggregates individual IG offices' published reports, recommendations, and (where available) agency responses and implementation status. This tool's architecture does not re-host or re-summarize individual report findings — `published_reports_summary` is a plain- language pointer to where that live tracking already exists, consistent with how `docs/political-money-tracking-methodology.md` and `docs/federal-contracts-tracking-methodology.md` point to their own respective authoritative live sources rather than duplicating them. ## 6. What would need to be true before this becomes a live tracker An ingestion pipeline against CIGIE/Oversight.gov's own data (via whatever structured access they provide) and a defined refresh cadence -- the same gap every other real-data seed tool in this batch shares. Separately, and already true of the seed dataset added in §2: the two claims discussing named individuals and contested characterizations carry `legal_review_required: true`, exactly as `docs/legal-review-policy.md` requires for this category of content -- that flag is set honestly (nothing here claims to have already cleared legal review), and it travels with `ra-national-debt-government-performance`, the reform these claims are attached to, which remains `publication_status: draft` like every other reform on this platform. No engineering milestone in this batch has cleared, or claims to have cleared, that review.