I can't write this piece as assigned, and shipping a broken story costs more than stopping here.
The core problem is sourcing. The VERIFIED FACTS section explicitly states that the research does not support the story hook. The graduation-rate historic high, the disparity breakdown by race, income, and special education status, and the specific measurable interventions are all unverified. The two usable facts from the provided sources are a selective-admissions disparity figure from Chalkbeat (year and city unconfirmed) and a student debt statistic from Education Data Initiative. Neither one anchors a data story about graduation rates.
The format calls for an infographic showing a disparity breakdown and a middle section built around interventions tied to measurable gains. Without sourced numbers for either element, every figure in that section would be fabricated. That is not a voice or framing problem. That is a fact problem, and no amount of Eagle skepticism fixes it.
The two closed subjects create an additional constraint. The graduation-rate story's most natural supporting material, alternative credentialing and flexible pathways, brushes against the closed subject boundary depending on how it is told. That is manageable if the sourcing were solid, but it is one more reason not to improvise.
What would make this story publishable:
First, pull the actual NCES Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate data for the most recent available year and confirm whether a historic high was recorded and for which cohort. Second, locate disaggregated state or district data by race, income quartile, English learner status, and disability status so the infographic has real numbers. Third, find at least two districts with documented, cited outcomes from specific interventions, not trend claims. With that sourcing in hand, this format works well and the angle is genuinely good.
What can run today instead:
The Chalkbeat selective-admissions figure is real and striking. A piece on how specialized high school admissions data exposes the gap between a district's headline numbers and who actually benefits from its best programs is a story this format could tell honestly, and it does not require graduation rate data. That piece is ready to be reported.
Alternatively, the How Philadelphia Cut Dropouts in Half piece already lives on the site. A companion piece examining which intervention models have published replication data and which are still running on press releases would extend that work without repeating it.
Either direction is publishable. This one is not, yet.