What it is
Two dates for one system: the most recent filing its regulator has published, and the most recent audited financial statement it has filed. The distance between them is operating record that exists, is public, and is not in the document a buyer is pricing from.
Regulator filings are annual and they are not the audit. They land on a different cycle, they describe the physical system rather than the fund, and in some states they arrive months before the ACFR does.
What you hand us
An issuer list or a CUSIP list. Matching an issuer to the system that filed is part of the work: the same utility appears under different names at the finance disclosure and at the water regulator, and no agency publishes the match.
What you get back
One row per system: the last regulator filing and its date, the last audited statement and its date, and the span between them. Each date names the document it came from.
What it is built from
The regulator filing date comes from this corpus and resolves to an archived file. The audited-statement date does not. It is pulled per engagement from the issuer’s own continuing disclosure, and where it cannot be established the row reports the filing date alone and says the statement date was not established. It is never estimated and never inferred from a fiscal year end.
What it does not do
A stale filing is not, by itself, evidence of a problem. Reporting cycles differ by state, small systems file on multi-year cycles by rule in at least one of them, and a system that filed eighteen months ago may be entirely compliant and entirely healthy. The gap is a question to ask, not a finding.
It is not a rating, not a credit opinion and not investment advice. It reports two dates and the distance between them.
It does not tell you what changed in the gap. It tells you there is a period the disclosure does not cover; what happened in it is why you would read the filing.