How we handle being wrong
Every number on this site carries a source so it can be checked, which is only meaningful if there is a route to tell us when it is wrong. This is that route, and the policy behind it.
A URL and the specific number or claim. “Something on the transparency page is wrong” is hard to act on. “The Legazpi row says 1/12 and the site has a budget section” is a correction we can check in two minutes.
The source you looked at, and when. If a government website added a transparency section last week, our scorecard row is stale and we want to know, but we need to be able to see it too.
We do not take a correction on trust any more than we took the original figure on trust. If we cannot reproduce your finding we come back and say so rather than quietly ignoring it.
The page changes and the change is recorded. We do not silently edit. A transparency site that edits its own record without saying so has no standing to score anyone else.
A wrong figure, a broken link, a misattributed source, an LGU listed in the wrong province, an alert level that has changed.
A disagreement about interpretation rather than fact. We print two conflicting counts in several places on purpose, and a request to print only the flattering one is not a correction.
Remove a sourced, accurate figure because it is unflattering. Take down the record of a government website that does not publish its budget. Both of those are the point of the site.
Nothing, unless you ask. Corrections are published as changes to the page, not as credits, unless you want to be credited.