The rulebook itself could not be read; these values are as the case study and the state report quote or paraphrase it. Equity is marked externally imposed because the state's HSTP funding required projects to serve low-income and BIPOC residents and be accessible to Medicaid members, and it was lived: the implementer rubric gave 30 of 100 points to health equity alignment and subcommittees deliberately picked smaller grassroots groups. Inclusion was lived through voting at 13 and up regardless of citizenship, registration or incarceration history, Spanish interpretation and stipends. Shared power was lived in that resident committees chose implementers, though staff carried the liaising. Transparency is aspirational: the rulebook promised regular communication on implementation, and the case study found staff email updates were not reaching committee members. Accountability of elected officials outside election years was a rulebook goal the case study calls only partially met, and the Providence Post reports that the convener bypassed its own accountability bodies (the HEZ Executive Committee and Resident Advisory Council) when it cut the team. Sustainability was a scored criterion in the implementer rubric (10 points), yet the convener ended the program and its staff at the close of the cycle; that is why it is marked performative, a judgment made from the press, not from the case study.