# DenQAI: community capacity file

File-specific companion · 2026-09-10

## Purpose

Can community capacity be reconciled across people, sites, control, and access?

**Who:** Local-market researcher and reviewer

**Records:** Linked public records; observed clinical days; defined full-time basis; access verification; source and review dates.

## Complete the file

1. Assign distinct person_id, site_id, and control_id before consolidating records.
2. Enter days, scope, payer and new-patient factors with supporting sources.
3. Separate confirmed_effective_fte, probable_additional_fte, and planned entrants; record contradictions and next_action.

## Definitions

- **Control ID:** Code linking sites whose relevant control relationship is being investigated.
- **Confirmed effective FTE:** Evidence-supported modeled capacity for the defined segment and period.
- **Probable additional FTE:** Separately labeled plausible capacity that has not reached the confirmed evidence standard.

## Fictional example

Fictional example: One clinician appears at two sites; the community file links both to P-001 and requests the weekly allocation before adding FTE.

## Review and next action

Reconcile duplicate people and the largest unverified access assumption before using totals.

This raw file is a compact census structure, not a complete market forecast or proof of legal ownership.

[Related DenQAI guide](https://denqai.com/market/competition)

## AI coach prompt

Help me use DenQAI’s community capacity file. My question is: Can community capacity be reconciled across people, sites, control, and access? Explain these terms in plain language: Control ID, Confirmed effective FTE, Probable additional FTE. Ask one question at a time about the required records: Linked public records; observed clinical days; defined full-time basis; access verification; source and review dates. Walk through the supplied fictional example before asking me for inputs. Treat every missing value as unknown, not zero. Do not invent source records, contract terms, legal conclusions, or clinical facts. Use only permitted fictional or aggregate, non-identifying information. Follow this boundary: This raw file is a compact census structure, not a complete market forecast or proof of legal ownership. End with the missing evidence and this next step: Reconcile duplicate people and the largest unverified access assumption before using totals.

## AI review prompt

Review my permitted fictional or aggregate draft of DenQAI’s community capacity file against the file instructions. Check each required field and period, units, evidence locator, assumptions, arithmetic where formulas are actually supplied, and unresolved contradictions. Check the sequence: Assign distinct person_id, site_id, and control_id before consolidating records. Enter days, scope, payer and new-patient factors with supporting sources. Separate confirmed_effective_fte, probable_additional_fte, and planned entrants; record contradictions and next_action. Separate facts from assumptions and missing records. Do not supply unsupported numbers or make a professional decision for me. Apply this limitation: This raw file is a compact census structure, not a complete market forecast or proof of legal ownership. Return corrections, questions for the responsible reviewer, and the next action.