On every page of our website in the footer, it says:

Full Fact is a registered charity (no. 1158683) and a non-profit company (no. 6975984) limited by guarantee and registered in England and Wales.

Full Fact is registered both as a https://bit.ly/2W36LrJ and also as a non-company https://bit.ly/37VFjyy 

This information, with links to full details, appears at the foot of all Full Fact (FF) web pages. The foot reads: "Full Fact is a registered charity (no. 1158683) and a non-profit company (no. 06975984) limited by guarantee and registered in England and Wales." (See attached screenshot).

Its statutory reporting to the Charities Commission for England and Wales, as well as its reporting to Companies House, are both fully up-to-date and compliant.

1. Full Fact was launched in 2010 by a cross-party group of trustees. The initial idea came from conversations about the accuracy of public debate in the UK and the gap that could be filled by a truly independent, nonpartisan and non-governmental organisation. The first task was to bring together a cross-party group of trustees to ensure that Full Fact started on a cross party basis. Before launch, we agreed rigorous safeguards in place at every level of the organisation to ensure our neutrality. These were carefully constructed based on advice from our board and examples ranging from Amnesty International to the BBC. They include the cross-party board, fundraising safeguards, a conflict of interests policy, restrictions on staff political activity, feedback processes, operating guidelines, external reviews, and more. Most importantly, they include carefully recruiting staff who are sensitive to these issues.

2. At the time of writing, Full Fact employs 38 staff members across six teams: Editorial, Communications, Policy & Research, Automated Fact Checking, Fundraising and Operations. The staff team is led by our Chief Executive and Management team, who are accountable to our volunteer trustee board. We occasionally receive support from volunteers on various projects and during elections and referendums.More information on the roles in the team is available at: https://fullfact.org/about/our-team/

3. Full Fact fights the causes and consequences of bad information in four ways:

• Fact checking - to inform our audiences and maintain scrutiny of people in power
• Corrections & interventions - to stop the spread of specific unsubstantiated claims and hold people to account
• Systems change - to help make bad information rarer and less harmful
• Advocating high standards - to help maintain high expectations of and from those in public life

4. Over the next three years, Full Fact will become the go-to place for people who want to tackle bad information in areas they care about. We will change to become much more focused on how other people can take action and to work alongside communities targeted by and with bad information. As the first step towards that, in 2022, our goal is to be the most visible campaigners for higher standards of honesty and accuracy in public debate—and not just be seen as suppliers of fact checks. Our offer to that audience comes in three parts -

1. Fact checking - to expose claims and practises that are wrong that need fixing

2. Interventions - where for the first time we will be asking 1000s of people to take action with us to demand high standards and thank those who live up to them

3. Systems change - giving people opportunities to -

• sign a petition expressing their demand for higher standards of accuracy in public life
• lobby parliament to ensure misinformation and disinformation are tackled proportionately in the Online Safety Bill
• have their say about what a good election looks like and what we can do to achieve it

We are also working to diversify our income so that we can sustain our current charity budget and work towards an ambition of getting no more than 15% of our funding from any one source

From Full Fact's application

1) "Full Fact (FF) was launched in 2010 by a cross-party group of trustees. The initial idea came from conversations about the accuracy of public debate in the UK and the gap that could be filled by a truly independent, nonpartisan and non-governmental organisation. The first task was to bring together a cross-party group of trustees to ensure that Full Fact started on a cross-party basis.
Before launch, we agreed [on putting] rigorous safeguards in place at every level of the organisation to ensure our neutrality. These were carefully constructed based on advice from our board and examples ranging from Amnesty International to the BBC. They include the cross-party board, fundraising safeguards, a conflict of interest policy, restrictions on staff political activity, feedback processes, operating guidelines, external reviews, and more. Most importantly, they include carefully recruiting staff who are sensitive to these issues."

2) "Full Fact currently employs 38 staff members across six teams: Editorial, Communications, Policy & Research, Automated Fact Checking, Fundraising and Operations.

The staff team is led by a Chief Executive and Management team, who are accountable to FF's volunteer trustee board. FF occasionally receives support from volunteers on various projects and during elections and referendums."

3) Full Fact fights the causes and consequences of bad information in four ways:

* Fact-checking - to inform our audiences and maintain scrutiny of people in power

* Corrections & interventions - to stop the spread of specific unsubstantiated claims and hold people to account

* Systems change - to help make bad information rarer and less harmful

* Advocating high standards - to help maintain high expectations of and from those in public life."

4) "Over the next three years, Full Fact aims to become the "go-to place" for people who want to tackle bad information in areas they care about. "We will change to become much more focused on how other people can take action and work alongside communities targeted by and with bad information. As the first step towards that, in 2022, our goal is to be the most visible campaigners for higher standards of honesty and accuracy in public debate—and not just be seen as suppliers of fact checks. 

Our offer to that audience comes in three parts -

* Fact-checking - to expose claims and practices that are wrong that need fixing

* Interventions - where for the first time we will be asking 1000s of people to take action with us to demand high standards and thank those who live up to them

* Systems change - giving people opportunities to - sign a petition expressing their demand for higher standards of accuracy in public life

* Lobby parliament to ensure misinformation and disinformation are tackled proportionately in the Online Safety Bill

* Have their say about what a good election looks like and what we can do to achieve it

We are also working to diversify our income so that we can sustain our current charity budget and work towards an ambition of getting no more than 15% of our funding from any one source

At the time of writing, we have published 393 fact checks in 2022. In 2021 we published over 625. All our fact checks can be viewed on our website at www.fullfact.org/latest. 

FF exceeds the IFCN's minimum number of required fact-checks.

In 2021, FF published over 625 fact-checks - an average of just over 12 a week.

At the time of this 2022 application for re-assessment, FF had already published almost 393 fact-checks - an average of just over 15 a week and was well on track to match, or even surpass, the 2021 figure.

Please see https://fullfact.org/latest/

FF has more than met the required volume of fact-checks over the past three months. During this period it has published fact-checks on a wide range of issues, including politics, monkeypox, Covid-19, Ukraine, energy - and more. 

We do not accept any funding from the state or political parties in the UK or otherwise. We have not received any funding from local state or political actors over the previous financial year, nor do we have any commercial or financial relationships with state or political actors.

Representatives of the largest UK political parties form part of our trustee board. We have always ensured that there is one member from each of the three largest UK-wide parties, alongside politically independent board members. All board members can be viewed on our website. Our board has no input into Full Fact’s editorial content and all editorial decisions are made by our Editor and our Chief Executive.

FF makes it clear in its application that it does not accept any state, political party or similar funding.

I"We do not accept any funding from the state or political parties in the UK or otherwise. We have not received any funding from local state or political actors over the previous financial year, nor do we have any commercial or financial relationships with state or political actors."

FF board includes representatives of the UK's largest political parties but makes it clear that neither these political parties nor other board representatives have any part in the editorial decision-making process.

"Representatives of the largest UK political parties form part of our trustee board. We have always ensured that there is one member from each of the three largest UK-wide parties, alongside politically independent board members. All board members can be viewed on our website. Our board has no input into Full Fact’s editorial content and all editorial decisions are made by our Editor and our Chief Executive."

This is clear from the list of funders published here: https://bit.ly/3mkwMO7 

N/A We have not received any funding from local or foreign state or political actors.  

N/A as FF has not received any funding from local or foreign state or political actors. 

Details of FF's funders are published on its "about us" page,: https://bit.ly/3mkwMO7

Full Fact is a registered charity so we are legally required to be ‘objective, ‘balanced’, and to observe ‘strict political neutrality’. We monitor media, politicians and pressure groups across the political spectrum.

When publishing roundups (multiple claims from a TV show/debate), if we check a claim from a member of the government, we ensure that we also check one from the member of the official opposition (and vice versa). We also ensure that we do not only check claims from one person in a roundup, and aim for balance from across the debate.

As fact checkers, the accuracy of our work is the highest priority. Our operating guidelines and editorial standards are designed to ensure that our work is thoroughly reviewed, well evidenced, unbiased and written in the clearest possible terms. All our pieces are reviewed by more than one fact checker and we work hard to ensure that our work is done to the highest standard.

When fact checking, we follow a clear process. First we need to understand the claim. We don’t only fact check the evidence used in a claim, but also the underlying assumption. Factually correct information can be used to make a point which is misleading or incorrect, so it’s important to draw out exactly what someone means when they make a statement.

Then (where possible) we contact the claimant. Unless the claim’s source is self-evident, we try to contact the claimant to ask them about their source, and for any other information we need to understand it.

Then we gather our evidence. We always try and gather a wide range of sources of evidence relating to a claim. We link to primary sources throughout our fact checks.

Sometimes we contact experts. We cover a wide range of topic areas, and we’re not experts on everything. We want to ensure we’re giving readers the most complete picture we can, and sometimes we need guidance in finding or understanding information. In these cases we speak to relevant experts for advice. Crucially, this grant will help to widen our access to legal expertise for legal fact checks.

Once the evidence is gathered and analysed, we can write the article. Our articles are intended to guide the reader through all the evidence as clearly as possible so that they can make up their own mind about a claim. We’ll also explain the wider context around the issue when it’s relevant to do so.

Everything we publish on our website is reviewed by two other editors before publication in order to make sure that it is correct, impartial and engaging.

Reviewing is restricted to experienced fact checkers. Our six week training programme covers statistics, impartiality, polling and surveys, making graphs, and good communication. Please see attached our reviewing checklist, which is not exhaustive.

Fact checks have a standardised claim and conclusion intended to guide not dictate readers’ conclusions.

We have also conducted an independent editorial review of our fact-checking process and outputs in 2022.

10 examples of our fact checking over the past year:

1. Labour's energy price freeze: fact checked

2. Sky News Conservative Leadership Q&A: Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss fact checked

3. Is the government going to build 48 new hospitals by 2030?

4. Liberal Democrats overstate the cost of ministerial severance pay

5. Did the Prime Minister mislead Parliament over 'Partygate'?

6. Keir Starmer wrong to say families will be £2,620 worse off this year

7. Boris Johnson makes false employment claim for ninth time in Parliament

8. Child self-harm numbers in the Guardian, Mirror and Independent don't reflect survey's actual findings

9. 2,612% rise in food bank use under David Cameron needs context

10. EU rules didn't 'ban' crown symbols on pint glasses

1) FF submitted 10 fact-checks to illustrate its non-partiality. I have checked the submitted links and they demonstrate that FF's fact-checking covers the political spectrum and includes a wide range of issues.

These are the submitted fact-checks:

1. Labour's energy price freeze: fact-checked > https://bit.ly/3eupTI7 

2. Sky News Conservative Leadership Q&A: Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss fact-checked > https://bit.ly/3Db6BSy 

3. Is the government going to build 48 new hospitals by 2030? > https://bit.ly/3eG3O9L 

4. Liberal Democrats overstate the cost of ministerial severance pay > https://bit.ly/3RQSPZi 

5. Did the Prime Minister mislead Parliament over 'Partygate'? > https://bit.ly/3xgRyTr 

6. Keir Starmer wrong to say families will be £2,620 worse off this year > https://bit.ly/3RBCl7K 

7. Boris Johnson makes false employment claim for ninth time in Parliament > https://bit.ly/3RQpFtX 

8. Child self-harm numbers in the Guardian, Mirror and Independent don't reflect the survey's actual findings > https://bit.ly/3TYeoch 

9. 2,612% rise in food bank use under David Cameron needs context > https://bit.ly/3d35dqj 

10. EU rules didn't 'ban' crown symbols on pint glasses > https://bit.ly/3RXa2R1 

2 and 3) From FF's application

"Full Fact is a registered charity so we are legally required to be ‘objective, ‘balanced’, and to observe ‘strict political neutrality. We monitor media, politicians and pressure groups across the political spectrum.

When publishing roundups (multiple claims from a TV show/debate), if we check a claim from a member of the government, we ensure that we also check one from the member of the official opposition (and vice versa). We also ensure that we do not only check claims from one person in a roundup, and aim for balance from across the debate.

As fact checkers, the accuracy of our work is the highest priority. Our operating guidelines and editorial standards are designed to ensure that our work is thoroughly reviewed, well evidenced, unbiased and written in the clearest possible terms. All our pieces are reviewed by more than one fact checker and we work hard to ensure that our work is done to the highest standard.

When fact-checking, we follow a clear process. 

First, we need to understand the claim. We don’t only fact-check the evidence used in a claim, but also the underlying assumption. Factually correct information can be used to make a point that is misleading or incorrect, so it’s important to draw out exactly what someone means when they make a statement.

Then (where possible) we contact the claimant. Unless the claim’s source is self-evident, we try to contact the claimant to ask them about their source, and for any other information we need to understand it.

Then we gather our evidence. We always try and gather a wide range of sources of evidence relating to a claim. We link to primary sources throughout our fact checks.

Sometimes we contact experts. We cover a wide range of topic areas, and we’re not experts on everything. We want to ensure we’re giving readers the most complete picture we can, and sometimes we need guidance in finding or understanding information. In these cases, we speak to relevant experts for advice. 

Once the evidence is gathered and analysed, we can write the article. Our articles are intended to guide the reader through all the evidence as clearly as possible so that they can make up their own mind about a claim. We’ll also explain the wider context around the issue when it’s relevant to do so.

Everything we publish on our website is reviewed by two other editors before publication in order to make sure that it is correct, impartial and engaging.

Reviewing is restricted to experienced fact-checkers. Our six-week training programme covers statistics, impartiality, polling and surveys, making graphs, and good communication. 

Fact checks have a standardised claim and conclusion intended to guide not dictate readers’ conclusions.

We have also conducted an independent editorial review of our fact-checking process and outputs in 2022."

See FF's policy on impartiality here: https://bit.ly/3yVThfP

From the policy: "We have rigorous safeguards in place at every level of our organisation to ensure our neutrality. These have been carefully constructed based on advice from our board and examples ranging from Amnesty International to the BBC. They include the cross-party board, fundraising safeguards, a conflict of interest policy, restrictions on staff political activity, feedback processes, operating guidelines, external reviews, and more. Most importantly, they include carefully recruiting staff who are sensitive to these issues."

See also

"How do you stay neutral? https://bit.ly/3RyLe1D

"We have a cross-party board of Trustees, with supporters of Labour, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats represented. As a charity, we are under a legal obligation to uphold our impartiality.

The Board of Trustees does not have any control over day-to-day editorial decisions. These are the responsibility of the Chief Executive.

All staff are asked to complete a declaration of personal interests before they start work at Full Fact. Our staff agrees to abstain from expressing political opinions in public. Volunteers are also asked to provide similar declarations."

Please refer to the FAQs section on our website:

https://fullfact.org/about/frequently-asked-questions/#request-a-check

https://fullfact.org/about/frequently-asked-questions/#what-do-you-check

See: "What kind of thing do you check?" https://bit.ly/3xdUQH4 

"We fact-check claims in public debate which are of public interest. This includes—but is not limited to—claims made by politicians and the media.

We prioritise claims that have the most potential to cause harm to people’s lives. That could mean that they’ve been widely shared online, or feature prominently in newspapers or broadcast media, or are repeated multiple times by a party’s candidates.

We base our core areas of concern on the topics which consistently top the Ipsos MORI Issues Index. They include crime and immigration, the law, education, health and social care, and the economy."

People are also able to request that FF do a fact-check: See https://bit.ly/3yWT2kC 

We cannot promise to check every claim suggested. Please say what impact you think the claim would have if it’s left unchecked."

Please see https://fullfact.org/latest/

Criteria met. An assessment of fact-checks over the previous year reveals no bias toward any one political party, politician, or issue. It also showed that all fact-checking is done using the same criteria. See: https://bit.ly/3DkdAIO 

Please see https://fullfact.org/latest/

Criteria met. An assessment of fact-checks over the previous year reveals no bias toward any one political party, politician, or issue. It also shows that all fact-checking is done using the same criteria. See: https://bit.ly/3DkdAIO 

FAQ

https://fullfact.org/about/frequently-asked-questions/#neutrality

Impartiality

https://fullfact.org/about/impartiality/

Job page under our standards and neutrality

https://fullfact.org/about/jobs/

See " How do you stay neutral" in FAQ > https://bit.ly/3L7r7Fm 

"How do you stay neutral?

"We have a cross-party board of Trustees, with supporters of Labour, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats represented. As a charity, we are under a legal obligation to uphold our impartiality.

The Board of Trustees does not have any control over day-to-day editorial decisions. These are the responsibility of the Chief Executive.

All staff are asked to complete a declaration of personal interests before they start work at Full Fact. Our staff agrees to abstain from expressing political opinions in public. Volunteers are also asked to provide similar declarations."

Impartiality (see: https://bit.ly/3yVThfP) 

See "Jobs" page under "our standards and neutrality" > https://bit.ly/37SPcx8

"Our standards and neutrality

Full Fact’s work must be independent, impartial, rigorous and balanced. It’s essential that we have clear rules in place to ensure that, and they entail some requirements for members of our team while you work here.

You will be required to operate within our standards, including the Nolan Principles of conduct in public life, our rules on conflicts of interest and so on.

You will have to complete a declaration of personal interests form in the later stages of recruitment, once a year while you work here, and whenever your circumstances change. This is to help us ensure that any potential or potentially perceived conflicts of interest are managed and mitigated so that they do not affect either Full Fact’s or your own work and reputation.

Although anybody is entitled to be a non-active member of a political party or other organisation within the law, if you come to work here you won’t be able to:

Say publicly how you vote or express support for any political party

Express a view for or against any policy that’s currently a topic of political debate

We do encourage people to contribute to public life in ways that are compatible with our non-partisan role — where possible within our resources, we support people to do voluntary work such as jury service, magistracy, reserve forces and so on."

A randomised sample of fact-checks shows that FF uses - and usually links to - a wide range of sources in its fact-checks. By doing this, readers can fact-check the fact-checkers.

A randomised assessment of fact-checks shows that FF uses and links, whenever possible, to credible primary sources for fact-checking purposes.

A random assessment shows that FF uses more than one source, both human and document, for fact-checking. I was unable to find any examples of fact-checks that relied on a single source.

A random assessment of fact-checks reveals that FF gives details of their sources' history/background so that any possible potential bias - real or perceived - is clear to readers.

Full Fact is an independent organisation. A registered charity (no. 1158683) and a non-profit company (no. 6975984) limited by guarantee and registered in England and Wales.

Proof of independent charity status

Proof of independent company registration

Full Fact is an independent organisation. It is registered both as a charity (no. 1158683) and a non-profit company limited by guarantee ( and registered in England and Wales. no. 6975984)

Proof of independent charity status. See: https://bit.ly/3y1ZwgX 

Proof of independent company registration: See: https://bit.ly/37VFjyy 

https://fullfact.org/about/funding/

The footer on each page on our website includes the following: Full Fact is a registered charity (no. 1158683) and a non-profit company (no. 6975984) limited by guarantee and registered in England and Wales.

The footer on every page on the FF site includes the following: Full Fact is a registered charity (no. 1158683) and a non-profit company (no. 6975984) limited by guarantee and registered in England and Wales.

It includes links to:

Proof of independent charity status. See: https://bit.ly/3y1ZwgX

Proof of independent company registration: See: https://bit.ly/37VFjyy 

You can see all of our staff and their roles at: https://fullfact.org/about/our-team/

You can see how our editorial process works at: https://fullfact.org/about/frequently-asked-questions/#how-do-you-factcheck

Our FAQ on How do you stay neutral? states that "The Board of Trustees does not have any control over day-to-day editorial decisions. These are the responsibility of the Chief Executive."

Our funding page states: "Our funders have no input into our editorial content or decision making."

Details of FF's staff and their roles: https://bit.ly/2XFhjxX

Details of how FF goes about its fact-checks: https://bit.ly/3ghU2Zf 

Details of neutrality: https://bit.ly/3mkwMO7

Under "How do you stay neutral? the following is stated: "The Board of Trustees does not have any control over day-to-day editorial decisions. These are the responsibility of the Chief Executive."

The funding page (https://bit.ly/3mkwMO7) states: "Our funders have no input into our editorial content or decision making."

And, the Funding section in the FAQs (https://bit.ly/3mkwMO7) states: "Our funders have no input into our editorial content or decision making."

https://fullfact.org/about/our-team/

Professional bios of the FF team: https://bit.ly/2XFhjxX

https://fullfact.org/about/contact/

https://fullfact.org/get-involved/suggest-a-fact-check/

https://fullfact.org/about/feedback/

The "contact" page is available via the "Get involved tab in the navigation bar at the top of all the site's pages https://bit.ly/3yWT2kC 

There are also details of how users can give feedback here: https://bit.ly/37YFwky 

We cover this in a few FAQs

What kind of sources do you use? https://fullfact.org/about/frequently-asked-questions/#sources

Why don't you have ratings? https://fullfact.org/about/frequently-asked-questions/#ratings

How do you fact check? https://fullfact.org/about/frequently-asked-questions/#how-do-you-factcheck

We have also published Full Fact’s Operating Guidelines for the Third Party Fact Checking programme publicly here https://fullfact.org/media/uploads/tpfc-q1q2-2019.pdf from page 36 onwards. 

FF's methodology is covered in several parts of the FAQs.

What kind of sources do you use? https://bit.ly/3TUIwp3 

Why don't you have ratings? https://bit.ly/3U1GlQE 

How do you fact-check? https://bit.ly/3ghU2Zf 

Full Fact also publishes its "Operating Guidelines for the Third Party Fact Checking programme publicly (from page 36 onward) here: We have also published Full Fact’s Operating Guidelines for the Third Party Fact Checking programme publicly here: https://bit.ly/37VceDt

Based on a random review of fact-checks, FF is compliant with the required criteria.

Based on a random assessment of fact-checks, I am satisfied that FF sets out relevant evidence that supports the claim being checked. FF also publishes evidence that appears to undermine the claim, if such conflicting evidence exists.

After doing a random assessment of fact-checks, I am satisfied that FF applies the same protocols and standards, irrespective of who has made the claim

After doing a random assessment of fact-checks, I am satisfied that where necessary, and practical, FF attempts to contact the person making a claim to request any supporting evidence they might have.

We invite people to send us claims to check through our contact form https://fullfact.org/about/contact/ and through our WhatsApp number https://fullfact.org/get-involved/suggest-a-fact-check/

Also please refer to the FAQs section “How can I ask you to check a claim?” and “What kind of thing do you check?”

Our toolkit pages help people understand how to spot misleading information: https://fullfact.org/toolkit/

FF invites people to submit claims for checking via this contact form (https://bit.ly/3yWT2kC) and through a dedicated WhatsApp number.  https://fullfact.org/get-involved/suggest-a-fact-check/see here: https://bit.ly/3qsIbw3 

The FAQs section has a “How can I ask you to check a claim?” https://bit.ly/3QF2ykh 

"We cannot promise to check every claim suggested. Please say what impact you think the claim would have if it’s left unchecked."

“What kind of thing do you check?” See: https://bit.ly/3xdUQH4 

"We fact-check claims in public debate which are of public interest. This includes—but is not limited to—claims made by politicians and the media.

We prioritise claims that have the most potential to cause harm to people’s lives. That could mean that they’ve been widely shared online, feature prominently in newspapers or broadcast media, or are repeated multiple times by a party’s candidates.

We base our core areas of concern to the topics which consistently top the Ipsos MORI Issues Index. They include crime and immigration, the law, education, health, and social care, and the economy."

FF also has an excellent toolkit page with tips on how to identify "bad information", as well as links to free tools and resources so that people can do their own fact-checks for possible mis- or disinformation. See: https://fullfact.org/toolkit/ 

Our feedback and complaints process are captured here: https://fullfact.org/about/feedback/ and under the FAQs questions “How can I make a complaint about Full Fact?”. We also invite people to read the IFCN's complaints policy here: https://fullfact.org/about/international-fact-checking-network/ 

We tell people what we do when we make a mistake here: https://fullfact.org/about/frequently-asked-questions/#corrections

FF's "feedback and complaints" process is explained in  the "About us" section, which can be accessed via the navigation bar across the top of all web pages: https://bit.ly/37YFwky 

There is a link to the "feedback and complaints" page in the FAQs: https://bit.ly/3B6tcx0

People are also informed of the IFCN's complaints policy here: https://bit.ly/31XuPgg The policy also includes a link to the INSP's complaints form. https://bit.ly/2S4TNok 

FF's corrections policy is clearly marked and is explained in simple, easy-to-understand language. The policy meets all of INSP's requirements for corrections: https://bit.ly/37YFwky 

To date in 2022, we have made corrections to 25 fact checks, all in line with our feedback and corrections policy. Details of all 25 fact checks can be found on our public corrections page: https://fullfact.org/about/corrections/

All corrected articles note the correction and the date it was made at the bottom of the article.

So far in 2022, FF has made corrections to 25 fact checks, in line with its feedback and corrections policy. Details of all 25 fact checks can be found on a public corrections page: https://bit.ly/37TsMvL

Details of all corrections and the date that they were made are also included at the bottom of all corrected fact-checks.

https://fullfact.org/about/international-fact-checking-network/

Details of IFCN's Code of Principles can be found here. https://bit.ly/31XuPgg A link to IFCN's complaints form is included at the end of the page. https://bit.ly/2S4TNok 

This is not applicable.

Not applicable. Full Fact is an independent fact-checking organisation. It is not affiliated with any media company.