How we write, where information comes from, and how we correct mistakes.

What we draw from

Everything substantive on this site traces back to a small set of primary sources. For clinical claims we use SAMHSA Treatment Improvement Protocols (TIPs), NIDA Research Reports, CDC surveillance data, the APA's DSM-5-TR, and the ASAM Criteria for levels of care. For insurance explanations we work from CMS parity-rule filings, state insurance-department rulings, and publicly posted Summary Plan Descriptions. For cost figures we use the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), HCUP inpatient data, and published academic analyses. We prefer primary over secondary sources when we can get them.

The directory of treatment centers is pulled from the federal SAMHSA Behavioral Health Treatment Services Locator. We refresh it quarterly. When a facility is removed from the federal database — because a license was suspended, the center closed, or a state regulator flagged it — we remove it from our directory within 30 days.

Every editorial guide on this site carries a Sources block at the foot of the article, linking to the specific citations referenced in the text. A reader who wants to verify a claim — or a clinician who wants to check whether we represented their field accurately — can do so without reverse-engineering our reasoning.

Our writing process

We do not publish drafts that have not been source-checked. The practical workflow:

1. An editor writes a draft, typically from an outline derived from primary-source literature on the topic.
2. Every factual claim is cross-checked against a primary source. Claims without a verifiable citation are either softened ("many programs report…" rather than "67% of programs…") or removed.
3. Treatment descriptions are aligned with ASAM Criteria for levels of care, SAMHSA TIPs for interventions, and DSM-5-TR for diagnostic terminology. Where clinical bodies disagree — methadone vs. buprenorphine for specific patient profiles, for example — we present the disagreement rather than pretending there is consensus.
4. The piece is published under our institutional byline. We do not invent expert personas. When a named clinician contributes, their real credentials appear.
5. Guides covering regulatory or insurance topics are reviewed at least annually. Major policy changes — like the 2024 federal parity rule — prompt site-wide reviews of related content.

What we will not do

We will not accept payment for editorial coverage. If we recommend an approach positively, it is because the evidence supports it. If a specific treatment vendor had paid to be mentioned, we would label the article sponsored; we have not yet done that, and we would not do it without clear disclosure.

We will not promise specific outcomes. Recovery success rates that get cited in marketing materials — "67% of our graduates are sober at two years" — are rarely peer-reviewed, often self-reported, and frequently based on selected populations. We do not publish such claims, and we flag them when they appear in quoted sources.

We will not list a facility more prominently because it paid us. The directory is algorithmically generated from SAMHSA data and geographic proximity. We do not sell placement.

We will not attribute content to fictional clinical reviewers. Schema-markup fields like reviewedBy on our pages reflect only what actually happened editorially.

How we handle mistakes

We make mistakes. When a reader or a source points out a factual error, we: (1) acknowledge within two business days; (2) correct within five business days if the correction is warranted; (3) log the correction with a visible notice at the foot of the piece, stating what changed and when. Non-material edits (typos, link fixes, small formatting) we make silently.

To report an error, email [email protected] with a link to the page and, if possible, the source that contradicts our claim. We read every correction request. When we choose not to change the text, we explain why.

How we are funded

Redwood Wellness is a free resource. Operating costs — editorial staff, engineering, hosting — are paid through affiliate relationships with licensed treatment-center networks. When a reader calls the helpline on this site, depending on their geography and plan, they may be connected to a partner network that pays us a referral fee.

Two rules about these relationships. First: they do not affect which centers appear in the directory, or in what order. The directory is transparent and algorithmic. Second: they do not affect editorial content. Insurance-coverage guides, level-of-care explanations, and program comparisons are written by the editorial team with no input from helpline partners.

Where a specific article recommends a category of service in a way that could financially benefit a helpline partner, we disclose the relationship inside the article rather than at the bottom of the page.

Contact

For editorial questions, listing corrections, or questions about sourcing behind a specific claim: [email protected] or our contact page.