Adversarial re-check: all four cited sources were independently fetched and confirmed real, live, and accurately quoted. (1) The American Presidency Project copy of the Feb 18, 2025 White House fact sheet is genuine and confirms Trump signed an executive order 'expanding access to in vitro fertilization (IVF) for Americans' that 'directs policy recommendations to protect IVF access and aggressively reduce out-of-pocket and health plan costs.' (2) The Oct 16, 2025 whitehouse.gov fact sheet is live and confirms three concrete actions: a most-favored-nation pricing agreement with EMD Serono (Gonal-F sold at a discount via TrumpRx.gov, up to ~$2,200 savings per cycle), an FDA priority-review voucher for a lower-cost fertility drug, and tri-agency (DOL/HHS/Treasury) action so 'employers can now offer standalone benefit packages to employees interested in coverage for treatment of infertility, including IVF.' (3) The Federal Register API confirms document 2026-09479, 'Excepted Fertility Benefits,' a PROPOSED RULE from Treasury/IRS/DOL/EBSA/HHS published May 13, 2026, creating fertility benefits as a new category of limited excepted benefits. (4) KFF (Oct 27, 2025) is real and states the proposal 'is not likely to make a significant dent to the current gaps in access to IVF services,' noting the discount 'does not address the majority of IVF costs, such as egg retrieval and embryo transfer' and that there is 'no mandate, nor are there any federal subsidies nor new tax incentives.' Standard applied party-neutrally: an executive who self-initiates an EO on the promise topic, personally negotiates and announces a manufacturer pricing deal, and launches agency rulemaking to implement it has LED the effort — well beyond a single supporting vote — which is CHAMPIONED (+0.75) regardless of party. Not FULL, because nothing enacted guarantees or mandates IVF coverage: the drug discount leaves the bulk of a $12,000-$25,000 cycle untouched, the employer benefit is voluntary, and the excepted-benefits rule remains only proposed as of this review. Not merely PARTIAL/ATTEMPTED, because the record shows sustained self-driven leadership across 15 months rather than passive support. NOTE: the prior rating's rationale also asserted that CMS proposed rules obstructing states (e.g. California) from adding IVF to essential health benefits; that claim carried no attached source and could not be independently verified in this session, so it is dropped from the rationale rather than carried forward as fact. Its removal does not change the outcome. Outcome, confidence, and source set all stand as rated.