Learning management system requirements (4 sources)

Every row is a verbatim sentence read from the named source's own page through our fetch service on the date shown, hash-pinned to the stored read (the sha of the page's visible text; the raw page is mirrored to R2).

5 of the 21 named sources that could be read published a usable figure; 16 published none and are recorded as not published, never filled in; 2 could not be read (blocked, dead or unreachable) and count nowhere.

The headline figures (median, minimum, maximum, quartiles) are over ONE figure per source in USD (a source's median where its page yielded several accepted sentences), so N counts sources, never sentences; 50 candidate sentence(s) were refused by a reviewer with the reason recorded.

The fuller derivation this dataset is chartered to grow into (not yet what the figures above are; they are each source's own published figure as read): across every vendor in the capability index: whether it publishes a price at all, the published entry price, the pricing MODEL (per seat, per clinical provider, per active learner, flat, per appointment, percent of collections) and the non-licence items the page names (implementation, migration, training, support tier).

The figure the hub's cost-of-ownership sheet opens on is the PUBLISH-RATE per category and the spread among those that publish - measured on this first read, roughly half of the CLM and LMS vendors read quote-only - which is the thing a buyer cannot find anywhere and which decides how much of a selection is guesswork.

50 candidate sentences on these pages were refused by a reviewer; each refusal and its reason is recorded in the review ledger.