diff --git a/CONTEXT.md b/CONTEXT.md
index 047087e97..259096bfd 100644
--- a/CONTEXT.md
+++ b/CONTEXT.md
@@ -28,8 +28,8 @@ The date an EPC was lodged with the government register; used to identify the mo
 _Avoid_: assessment date, submission date
 
 **EPC Band**:
-A single letter A–G representing a property's current or potential energy efficiency rating.
-_Avoid_: energy rating, EPC grade, EPC score
+A single letter A–G representing a property's current or potential energy efficiency rating. A dwelling is in a band by its **published rating** — the continuous SAP rounded **half up** to the integer printed on the certificate (SAP 10.2 §13; Python's built-in `round` is half-to-*even* and must not be used for this). Anything holding a continuous score therefore judges band membership via `Epc.from_sap_continuous`, and any "has it reached band X?" test compares against `Epc.sap_lower_bound_continuous()` — the integer floor **less half a point** (C → 68.5), which is where the published rating enters the band. Comparing a continuous score against the raw integer floor makes a dwelling that already publishes in the band read as a fraction short (ADR-0064).
+_Avoid_: energy rating, EPC grade, EPC score; comparing a continuous SAP against `sap_lower_bound()`
 
 **Schema Type**:
 The versioned RdSAP or SAP schema that describes the structure of an EPC's raw data (e.g. `RdSAP-Schema-21.0.1`).
@@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ The SAP / EPC Band / carbon emissions / Primary Energy Intensity recorded on the
 _Avoid_: original performance, raw EPC values, recorded baseline
 
 **Effective Performance**:
-The SAP / EPC Band / carbon emissions / Primary Energy Intensity the modelling pipeline actually scored against — equal to Lodged Performance when no Rebaselining trigger fires, replaced by **SAP10 Calculation** output (the deterministic `Sap10Calculator`, which superseded the old ML-API rebaseliner; an ML residual head over the calculator is future — ADR-0009/0013) when triggered. The half of Baseline Performance that says "what we modelled".
+The SAP / EPC Band / carbon emissions / Primary Energy Intensity the modelling pipeline actually scored against — equal to Lodged Performance when no Rebaselining trigger fires, replaced by **SAP10 Calculation** output (the deterministic `Sap10Calculator`, which superseded the old ML-API rebaseliner; an ML residual head over the calculator is future — ADR-0009/0013) when triggered. The half of Baseline Performance that says "what we modelled". **Modelling does not read it**: it re-scores the Effective EPC itself (it needs a continuous score and a `SapResult` to bill from, and ADR-0011 forbids an in-memory hand-off between stages), then **asserts** its re-score agrees with this persisted figure and logs an error when it does not. The two are deliberately *not* reconciled — a divergence means the stages scored different pictures, and anchoring the Plan's SAP to this integer would leave it disagreeing with its own carbon, energy and bill figures (ADR-0066). Because a Plan's `post_*` are read against this figure, an unchecked divergence surfaces to the user as a gain nobody modelled.
 _Avoid_: modelled performance, rebaselined performance (only correct when rebaselining ran), scored values
 
 **Calculated SAP10 Performance**:
@@ -309,7 +309,7 @@ A "selecting A requires B" edge between **Recommendations**, for couplings that
 _Avoid_: best-practice measure (legacy term), forced measure
 
 **Optimised Package**:
-The subset of a Property's Recommendations selected by the Optimiser Service for installation. For an **Increasing EPC** goal the objective is **least-cost-to-target**: the cheapest package that reaches the goal band — so it **stops at the target and does not overshoot** into a higher band, leaving surplus budget unspent. When the target is **unreachable within budget**, it falls back to the **maximum improvement the budget buys** (best effort, below target). With **no budget** it is simply the cheapest package that reaches the target. Reaching the target is judged on the **true whole-package re-score** (ADR-0016), not on summed per-measure scores. (Other goals — Energy Savings, Reducing CO₂ — don't yet set a target and currently maximise improvement within budget; future work.)
+The subset of a Property's Recommendations selected by the Optimiser Service for installation. For an **Increasing EPC** goal the objective is **least-cost-to-target**: the cheapest package that reaches the goal band — so it **stops at the target and does not overshoot** into a higher band, leaving surplus budget unspent. When the target is **unreachable within budget**, it falls back to the **maximum improvement the budget buys** (best effort, below target). With **no budget** it is simply the cheapest package that reaches the target. Reaching the target is judged on the **true whole-package re-score** (ADR-0016), not on summed per-measure scores — and on the **published** band (see **EPC Band**): the target is the goal band's floor on the continuous scale, so a dwelling whose published baseline already meets the goal is **already at target** and gets an empty, £0 package rather than a marginal top-up (ADR-0064). (Other goals — Energy Savings, Reducing CO₂ — don't yet set a target and currently maximise improvement within budget; future work.)
 _Avoid_: selected measures, default measures, optimal solution, recommended bundle
 
 **Measure Type**:
diff --git a/datatypes/epc/domain/epc.py b/datatypes/epc/domain/epc.py
index ae4fd8241..e1b6d95aa 100644
--- a/datatypes/epc/domain/epc.py
+++ b/datatypes/epc/domain/epc.py
@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
+from decimal import ROUND_HALF_UP, Decimal
 from enum import Enum
 
 
@@ -32,6 +33,17 @@ class Epc(Enum):
             return cls.F
         return cls.G
 
+    @classmethod
+    def from_sap_continuous(cls, score: float) -> "Epc":
+        """The band an un-rounded SAP rating is *published* in.
+
+        A dwelling is banded on the integer published on its EPC, which rounds
+        half up (SAP 10.2 §13) — so this is `from_sap_score` over that rounding
+        rather than over Python's half-to-even `round`, which would drop an
+        exact x.5 at a band floor into the band below."""
+        published: int = int(Decimal(score).quantize(Decimal("1"), rounding=ROUND_HALF_UP))
+        return cls.from_sap_score(published)
+
     def sap_lower_bound(self) -> int:
         """The minimum SAP rating in this band — the inverse of
         `from_sap_score` (A → 92, B → 81, C → 69, D → 55, E → 39, F → 21,
@@ -46,3 +58,15 @@ class Epc(Enum):
             Epc.G: 1,
         }
         return bounds[self]
+
+    def sap_lower_bound_continuous(self) -> float:
+        """The band floor on the **continuous** SAP scale — the lowest un-rounded
+        rating whose *published* rating falls in this band (C → 68.5).
+
+        A dwelling is in a band by its published rating, which is the continuous
+        score rounded half up, so the published rating enters the band half a
+        point below the integer floor. Anything judging "has this dwelling
+        reached band X?" against a continuous score must compare with this, not
+        with `sap_lower_bound`: a dwelling at a continuous 68.6 publishes as SAP
+        69 and *is* band C, but reads as 0.4 short of an integer floor of 69."""
+        return self.sap_lower_bound() - 0.5
diff --git a/docs/adr/0064-band-membership-is-judged-on-the-published-rating.md b/docs/adr/0064-band-membership-is-judged-on-the-published-rating.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..0615c76c7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/adr/0064-band-membership-is-judged-on-the-published-rating.md
@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+---
+status: accepted (extends ADR-0016; constrains ADR-0062's Increasing EPC path)
+---
+
+# Band membership is judged on the published rating, not on a raw continuous score
+
+A dwelling is in an EPC band by the **integer rating printed on its
+certificate** — the continuous SAP rounded to the nearest whole point. The
+Optimiser, however, works in continuous SAP, and judged "has this dwelling
+reached band X?" by comparing that continuous score against the band's
+**integer** floor (`Epc.sap_lower_bound()`, band C → `69.0`).
+
+Those two rules disagree in the half-point window below every band floor. A
+dwelling at a continuous 68.6 publishes as SAP 69 and **is** band C, but read as
+0.4 short of an integer floor of 69 — so the Optimiser bought the cheapest
+measure available to close a gap that did not exist. In portfolio 796 / scenario
+1268 ("Reach EPC C") this sold **630 homes already published at band C** about
+one SAP point of works each, £282k in total; portfolio 824 / scenario 1278 added
+172 more at £56k. The measures were real and were installed against real
+budgets; the gap they closed was an artefact of comparing two different scales.
+
+A second, smaller disagreement sat underneath it: `sap_rating_integer` published
+the rating using Python's built-in `round`, which is half-to-**even**, so an
+exact `x.5` fell to `x` for even `x` — at a band floor, publishing a whole band
+low. SAP rounds half **up**, the convention the mapper already followed
+(`_round_half_up_2dp`).
+
+Found and fixed while working #1652 / #1654 with Khalim, 2026-07-21.
+
+## Decision
+
+**One rule decides band membership everywhere: round the continuous SAP half up,
+then band the integer. Anything comparing a continuous score to a band judges it
+on that basis.**
+
+- **`sap_rating_integer` rounds half up** (`Decimal` + `ROUND_HALF_UP`), matching
+  SAP 10.2 §13 and the mapper's existing convention. A continuous 68.5 publishes
+  as SAP 69.
+- **`Epc.sap_lower_bound_continuous()`** is the band floor expressed on the
+  continuous scale — the integer floor less half a point (C → 68.5), i.e. the
+  lowest un-rounded score whose *published* rating is in the band.
+- **`_target_sap` returns the continuous floor.** The Optimiser's target must be
+  in the currency of everything it is compared against. This single change fixes
+  all four comparison sites (`target_gain`, the two reached-target checks, and
+  `_repair_to_target`'s loop) without touching optimiser control flow.
+- **`Epc.from_sap_continuous()`** bands a continuous score as it would be
+  published, replacing the repeated `from_sap_score(round(x))` idiom at every
+  call site (`Plan.post_epc_rating`, `Plan.baseline_epc_rating`, the plan table
+  harness, the anomaly auditor).
+- Scoped to the **SAP-goal path only**: goal-aligned CO2 / bill objectives pass
+  `target_sap=None` (ADR-0062) and are untouched.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- A dwelling whose **published** baseline already meets the goal band gets a
+  **£0, measure-free** plan. Dwellings genuinely below the band still get plans
+  that reach it — the target moved by half a point, not the ambition.
+- Re-modelling 796/1268 should drop ~630 plans and £282,763 of `cost_of_works`
+  (642 measures), and 824/1278 ~172 plans and £56,226 (176 measures). Both are
+  unbudgeted, so no budget interaction confounds the change. The remaining spend
+  is an upper bound: a lower target may also let genuinely-below dwellings stop
+  one measure earlier.
+- Half-up publishing can move a rating by one point only when the continuous
+  score is *exactly* `x.5`. No fixture in the accuracy corpus is, and the full
+  SAP suite (2,072 tests, including the Elmhurst worksheet pins) passed
+  unchanged — but the corpus should be re-checked if the calculator's arithmetic
+  ever shifts onto exact halves.
+- `already-meets-goal-with-works` moves MEDIUM → HIGH in the anomaly auditor.
+  It was firing correctly all along and was bucketed as expected stale-plan
+  noise, which is how this survived: a check nobody believes is not a check.
diff --git a/docs/adr/0066-modelling-asserts-baseline-coherence-rather-than-anchoring.md b/docs/adr/0066-modelling-asserts-baseline-coherence-rather-than-anchoring.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..21f3f25a6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/adr/0066-modelling-asserts-baseline-coherence-rather-than-anchoring.md
@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+---
+status: accepted (extends ADR-0002, ADR-0004; composes with ADR-0011)
+---
+
+# Modelling asserts baseline coherence rather than anchoring to the persisted Effective
+
+The Baseline stage persists **Effective Performance** — what the app reports as a
+Property's current state, and what a Plan's `post_*` figures are read against
+(ADR-0002 / ADR-0004). The Modelling stage does not read that row: it re-scores
+the Effective EPC itself, because it needs a continuous score and a `SapResult`
+to price bills from (ADR-0011 forbids an in-memory hand-off between stages).
+
+Both stages hydrate the same aggregate through the same repo and call the same
+calculator, so they normally agree — measured across portfolios 796 and 824,
+mean divergence is **0.008 SAP** over 25,838 measure-free plans. But nothing
+*enforces* that, and when they drift the failure is silent and user-visible: the
+app subtracts one stage's baseline from the other's post score and reports a gain
+nobody modelled. Property 749719 displayed **"+9.65 SAP"** on a plan whose own
+CO2, bill and consumption savings were all exactly `0.0` — the plan was empty and
+correct; the +9.65 was `post_sap` (72.65, modelling's baseline) minus
+`effective_sap` (63, the Baseline stage's). Two baselines, subtracted.
+
+#1655 originally proposed **anchoring**: read the persisted Effective and use its
+`effective_sap_score` as the Optimiser's baseline. We rejected that.
+
+Decided with Khalim, 2026-07-21, while working #1652 / #1655.
+
+## Decision
+
+**Modelling keeps its own re-score, and checks it against the persisted Effective
+Performance. A divergence beyond rounding is logged as an error; it is never
+silently reconciled.**
+
+- **`_check_baseline_coherence(property_id, modelled_baseline_sap, persisted)`**
+  runs once per Property, off the Plan's already-computed `baseline` Score — the
+  baseline picture is scenario-independent, and re-scoring a dwelling per
+  Property purely to check it would not pay for itself across a 31k batch.
+- **Tolerance is 1.0 SAP.** The persisted figure is the *rounded* integer, so up
+  to half a point is rounding alone (ADR-0064); firing at 0.5 would be noise.
+- **A missing baseline row warns and continues**, modelling against the
+  re-score. A data gap should degrade one Property, not abort a portfolio;
+  ADR-0012 reserves the abort for a load-bearing calculator raise.
+
+### Why not anchor
+
+- **It would break a different coherence to fix this one.** A `Score` carries
+  CO2 and primary energy beside SAP, and Bills are derived from the same
+  `SapResult`. Overwriting only the SAP with the persisted integer leaves a Plan
+  whose SAP disagrees with its own carbon, energy and bill figures.
+- **It hides the defect instead of surfacing it.** A divergence means the two
+  stages scored different pictures — a real fault upstream. Anchoring makes the
+  numbers *agree* without making them *right*, and removes the evidence.
+- **The figure being anchored to may itself be wrong.** #1656 documents SAP 10.2
+  certs where the persisted Effective sits 6–10 points below the accredited
+  lodged rating. Hard-wiring Modelling to that number would propagate a known
+  error into every Plan's `post_*`.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- Plan `post_*` figures are unchanged. This adds a signal, not an arithmetic
+  change — no re-modelled figure moves because of this ADR.
+- A future drift surfaces as an error naming the Property and both figures,
+  instead of as a phantom gain in a board pack.
+- The guarantee is **detection, not prevention**: a divergent Property still
+  gets a Plan, and the app will still show the mismatched gain until the
+  underlying cause is fixed. Making it fatal is a live option if the error
+  proves rare enough in practice.
+- Paired with a HIGH `costed-plan-without-real-gain` anomaly check, closing the
+  auditor's coverage hole: `plan-score-below-baseline` fired only on a *drop*
+  beyond 0.5 and `zero-works-post-differs` only on £0 plans, so a **costed** plan
+  landing flat against its baseline — the 112 "no real improvement" homes in 796
+  — was caught by neither.
+- The divergence this was built for was **not reproducible at the time of
+  writing**: the properties that showed it now agree with the persisted baseline,
+  most likely resolved by intervening calculator fixes. This is a guard against
+  recurrence, not a fix for live breakage.
diff --git a/domain/modelling/plan.py b/domain/modelling/plan.py
index 9e8349e9d..bd14da3af 100644
--- a/domain/modelling/plan.py
+++ b/domain/modelling/plan.py
@@ -91,13 +91,13 @@ class Plan:
 
     @property
     def post_epc_rating(self) -> Epc:
-        """The post-retrofit EPC band, from the rounded SAP rating."""
-        return Epc.from_sap_score(round(self.post_retrofit.sap_continuous))
+        """The post-retrofit EPC band, as it would be published."""
+        return Epc.from_sap_continuous(self.post_retrofit.sap_continuous)
 
     @property
     def baseline_epc_rating(self) -> Epc:
-        """The baseline EPC band, from the rounded baseline SAP rating."""
-        return Epc.from_sap_score(round(self.baseline.sap_continuous))
+        """The baseline EPC band, as it would be published."""
+        return Epc.from_sap_continuous(self.baseline.sap_continuous)
 
     @property
     def valuation(self) -> ValuationUplift:
diff --git a/domain/sap10_calculator/worksheet/rating.py b/domain/sap10_calculator/worksheet/rating.py
index ca132479a..6ed2e73fd 100644
--- a/domain/sap10_calculator/worksheet/rating.py
+++ b/domain/sap10_calculator/worksheet/rating.py
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ Table 12 (page 191).
 
 from __future__ import annotations
 
+from decimal import ROUND_HALF_UP, Decimal
 from math import log10
 from typing import Final
 
@@ -59,8 +60,14 @@ def sap_rating_integer(*, ecf: float) -> int:
     """SAP 10.2 §13: round the continuous SAP rating to the nearest integer
     and clamp to a minimum of 1 ("if the result of the calculation is less
     than 1 the rating should be quoted as 1"). The integer value is the
-    one published on the EPC."""
-    return max(1, round(sap_rating(ecf=ecf)))
+    one published on the EPC.
+
+    "Nearest" is half-UP, as everywhere else the spec rounds (see the mapper's
+    `_round_half_up_2dp`). Python's built-in `round` is half-to-EVEN and would
+    drop an exact x.5 to x for even x — at a band floor that publishes a whole
+    band low (a continuous 68.5 as SAP 68 / band D rather than 69 / band C)."""
+    rating: Decimal = Decimal(sap_rating(ecf=ecf))
+    return max(1, int(rating.quantize(Decimal("1"), rounding=ROUND_HALF_UP)))
 
 
 def environmental_impact_rating(
diff --git a/harness/console.py b/harness/console.py
index 2f33a3f70..a87197b38 100644
--- a/harness/console.py
+++ b/harness/console.py
@@ -29,6 +29,10 @@ from domain.modelling.recommendation import Recommendation
 from domain.modelling.scenario import Scenario
 from domain.modelling.solar_potential import SolarPotential
 from domain.property.property import Property, PropertyIdentity
+from domain.property_baseline.performance import Performance
+from domain.property_baseline.property_baseline_performance import (
+    PropertyBaselinePerformance,
+)
 from domain.property_baseline.rebaseliner import StubRebaseliner
 from domain.sap10_calculator.calculator import Sap10Calculator
 from harness.plan_table import format_plan_table
@@ -49,6 +53,7 @@ from repositories.product.product_repository import ProductRepository
 from tests.orchestration.fakes import (
     FakeEpcRepo,
     FakePlanRepository,
+    FakePropertyBaselineRepo,
     FakePropertyRepo,
     FakeScenarioRepository,
     FakeSolarRepo,
@@ -230,7 +235,26 @@ def run_modelling(
             )
         },
     )
+    # The Baseline stage this harness has no database for. Modelling asserts its
+    # re-score agrees with the persisted Effective Performance (ADR-0066), so
+    # establish it here the way `PropertyBaselineOrchestrator` would — from the
+    # calculator on this same EPC. Drift is structurally impossible in this lane
+    # (one process, one code version, one picture), so the assertion is a no-op;
+    # seeding it keeps the check honest instead of reporting "no baseline" once
+    # per Property across a whole re-model batch. ~1% of a run_modelling call.
+    baseline_repo = FakePropertyBaselineRepo()
+    baseline_repo.save(
+        PropertyBaselinePerformance(
+            lodged=None,
+            effective=Performance.from_sap_result(Sap10Calculator().calculate(epc)),
+            rebaseline_reason="physical_state_changed",
+            space_heating_kwh=0.0,
+            water_heating_kwh=0.0,
+        ),
+        _PROPERTY_ID,
+    )
     unit = FakeUnitOfWork(
+        property_baseline=baseline_repo,
         property=property_repo,
         solar=FakeSolarRepo(
             by_uprn={_UPRN: solar_insights}
diff --git a/harness/plan_table.py b/harness/plan_table.py
index 7c6e96f1a..ddb5d2513 100644
--- a/harness/plan_table.py
+++ b/harness/plan_table.py
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ _KG_PER_TONNE = 1000.0
 
 
 def _band(sap_continuous: float) -> str:
-    return Epc.from_sap_score(round(sap_continuous)).value
+    return Epc.from_sap_continuous(sap_continuous).value
 
 
 def _signed_gbp(value: Optional[float]) -> str:
diff --git a/orchestration/modelling_orchestrator.py b/orchestration/modelling_orchestrator.py
index 69e88feac..d4248f3f1 100644
--- a/orchestration/modelling_orchestrator.py
+++ b/orchestration/modelling_orchestrator.py
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 from __future__ import annotations
 
 from collections.abc import Callable
+import logging
 from typing import Final, Optional
 
 from datatypes.epc.domain.epc import Epc
@@ -27,6 +28,9 @@ from domain.modelling.plan import Plan, PlanMeasure
 from domain.modelling.recommendation import MeasureOption, Recommendation
 from domain.modelling.generators.roof_recommendation import recommend_roof_insulation
 from domain.modelling.portfolio_goal import PortfolioGoal
+from domain.property_baseline.property_baseline_performance import (
+    PropertyBaselinePerformance,
+)
 from domain.modelling.scenario import Scenario
 from domain.modelling.scoring.scoring import (
     MeasureImpact,
@@ -51,6 +55,14 @@ from repositories.product.product_repository import ProductRepository
 from repositories.solar.solar_repository import SolarRepository
 from repositories.unit_of_work import UnitOfWork
 
+logger = logging.getLogger(__name__)
+
+# How far Modelling's continuous re-score may sit from the persisted Effective
+# SAP before it counts as a divergence. The persisted figure is the *rounded*
+# integer, so up to half a point is rounding alone; beyond a full point the two
+# stages are scoring different pictures (#1655).
+_MAX_BASELINE_DIVERGENCE: Final[float] = 1.0
+
 # Best-practice install sequence for the role-3 attribution cascade (ADR-0016):
 # walls → roof → ventilation → floor, per the legacy `Recommendations` class.
 # Ventilation sits after the fabric that triggers it so its (negative) marginal
@@ -111,6 +123,11 @@ class ModellingOrchestrator:
         # Resolve Fuel Rates once and reuse the BillDerivation across the batch,
         # so every baseline/post bill is priced at the same snapshot (ADR-0014).
         bill_derivation = BillDerivation(self._fuel_rates.get_current())
+        # Properties the Baseline stage never established. Collected and reported
+        # once at the end of the batch — a whole batch can legitimately have none
+        # (the database-free harness), and one line each would bury the real
+        # divergence errors under a duplicate per Property.
+        without_baseline: list[int] = []
         with self._unit_of_work() as uow:
             properties = uow.property.get_many(property_ids)
             scenarios: list[Scenario] = uow.scenario.get_many(scenario_ids)
@@ -124,6 +141,7 @@ class ModellingOrchestrator:
                     uow.solar, prop.identity.uprn
                 )
                 has_recommendations = False
+                checked_baseline = False
                 for scenario in scenarios:
                     plan = self._plan_for(
                         scorer,
@@ -136,6 +154,18 @@ class ModellingOrchestrator:
                         solar_potential=solar_potential,
                         considered_measures=considered_measures,
                     )
+                    # The baseline is the same picture for every Scenario, so
+                    # check it once per Property — and off the Plan's own
+                    # baseline Score, which is already computed, rather than
+                    # paying for another whole-dwelling re-score per Property.
+                    if not checked_baseline:
+                        if _check_baseline_coherence(
+                            property_id,
+                            plan.baseline.sap_continuous,
+                            uow.property_baseline.get_for_property(property_id),
+                        ):
+                            without_baseline.append(property_id)
+                        checked_baseline = True
                     uow.plan.save(
                         plan,
                         property_id=property_id,
@@ -150,6 +180,14 @@ class ModellingOrchestrator:
                 uow.property.mark_modelled(
                     property_id, has_recommendations=has_recommendations
                 )
+            if without_baseline:
+                logger.warning(
+                    "%s of %s properties had no persisted Baseline Performance "
+                    "and were modelled against their own re-score; first ids: %s",
+                    len(without_baseline),
+                    len(property_ids),
+                    without_baseline[:10],
+                )
             uow.commit()
 
     def _plan_for(
@@ -489,12 +527,69 @@ def _objective_for(
     return build_objective(bill_derivation)
 
 
+def _check_baseline_coherence(
+    property_id: int,
+    modelled_baseline_sap: float,
+    persisted: Optional[PropertyBaselinePerformance],
+) -> bool:
+    """Assert that Modelling and the Baseline stage agree on what the Property
+    scores now, and say so loudly when they do not (ADR-0002, #1655).
+
+    Modelling re-scores the Effective EPC rather than reading the persisted
+    Effective Performance, so the two can drift apart. The app treats the
+    persisted figure as the Property's current state and reads a Plan's `post_*`
+    against it, so a drift is not cosmetic: it surfaces to the user as a gain
+    nobody modelled (property 749719 reported "+9.65 SAP" on a plan whose own
+    CO2, bill and consumption savings were all exactly 0.0).
+
+    We flag rather than anchor deliberately. Overwriting the Plan's SAP with the
+    persisted integer would make it disagree with its own CO2 / primary energy /
+    bill, which all come off the same SapResult — trading one incoherence for
+    another, and hiding the drift instead of surfacing it. A divergence here is
+    a real defect upstream (see #1656) and should be investigated, not papered
+    over.
+
+    A missing row is a data gap, not a modelling fault, so it is **returned**
+    (``True``) for the caller to aggregate rather than logged here: it degrades
+    one Property instead of aborting the batch (ADR-0012 reserves the abort for a
+    load-bearing calculator raise), and an entire batch can legitimately have no
+    Baseline stage at all — the database-free harness the ``modelling_e2e``
+    handler runs on has none, so a per-Property line would bury the real errors
+    under one duplicate per Property.
+
+    A divergence stays per-Property: it is rare, and the Property is the thing
+    you need to go and look at."""
+    if persisted is None:
+        return True
+    effective_sap: int = persisted.effective.sap_score
+    if abs(modelled_baseline_sap - effective_sap) <= _MAX_BASELINE_DIVERGENCE:
+        return False
+    logger.error(
+        "modelling baseline diverges from persisted Effective Performance for "
+        "property_id=%s: modelled=%.2f effective=%s (%s). Plan post_* figures "
+        "are read against the effective baseline, so this surfaces as an "
+        "unmodelled gain — see #1655/#1656.",
+        property_id,
+        modelled_baseline_sap,
+        effective_sap,
+        persisted.rebaseline_reason,
+    )
+    return False
+
+
 def _target_sap(scenario: Scenario) -> Optional[float]:
     """The SAP rating the Optimiser repairs toward — the floor of the goal
-    band for an INCREASING_EPC goal, else None (no SAP target)."""
+    band for an INCREASING_EPC goal, else None (no SAP target).
+
+    On the **continuous** scale, because that is the currency every figure the
+    Optimiser compares it against is in. The dwelling is in the goal band once
+    its *published* rating is, which happens half a point below the integer
+    floor — target the integer and a dwelling publishing at the floor reads as a
+    fraction short, and the Optimiser buys works toward a band it is already in
+    (#1654)."""
     if scenario.goal != PortfolioGoal.INCREASING_EPC.value:
         return None
-    return float(Epc(scenario.goal_value).sap_lower_bound())
+    return Epc(scenario.goal_value).sap_lower_bound_continuous()
 
 
 def _best_practice_key(option: MeasureOption) -> int:
diff --git a/scripts/audit/anomalies.py b/scripts/audit/anomalies.py
index 0ee0386d4..8c341cd3d 100644
--- a/scripts/audit/anomalies.py
+++ b/scripts/audit/anomalies.py
@@ -26,6 +26,11 @@ be justified against the real distribution, not guessed.
 Read-only: this script never writes to the DB.
 """
 
+# Every check is reached through `_REGISTRY` via the `@check` decorator, never by
+# name, so pyright sees each one as an unused function. That is the design, not a
+# defect — suppress it for the module rather than tagging a dozen definitions.
+# pyright: reportUnusedFunction=false
+
 from __future__ import annotations
 
 import argparse
@@ -42,6 +47,11 @@ from scripts.e2e_common import build_engine, load_env
 # A..G, A best — index is the rank (lower = better) for band comparisons.
 _BANDS = "ABCDEFG"
 
+# The smallest SAP movement that counts as a real improvement. The effective
+# baseline is a rounded integer, so anything at or under half a point is within
+# the rounding the published band already absorbs — invisible on a certificate.
+_MIN_REAL_SAP_GAIN = 0.5
+
 
 def _band_rank(band: Optional[str]) -> Optional[int]:
     if band is None or band not in _BANDS:
@@ -52,7 +62,7 @@ def _band_rank(band: Optional[str]) -> Optional[int]:
 def _band_of(score: Optional[float]) -> Optional[str]:
     if score is None:
         return None
-    return Epc.from_sap_score(round(score)).value
+    return Epc.from_sap_continuous(score).value
 
 
 def _int_or_none(value: object) -> Optional[int]:
@@ -163,10 +173,22 @@ def _plan_score_below_baseline(a: PropertyAudit) -> Optional[str]:
     return f"post SAP {a.post_sap:.1f} below effective baseline {a.effective_sap:.1f} (Δ{a.post_sap - a.effective_sap:.1f})"
 
 
-@check("already-meets-goal-with-works", Severity.MEDIUM)
+@check("already-meets-goal-with-works", Severity.HIGH)
 def _already_meets_goal_with_works(a: PropertyAudit) -> Optional[str]:
     """The property already meets/exceeds the scenario's goal band, yet the plan
-    spends money on measures — nothing should be recommended."""
+    spends money on measures — nothing should be recommended.
+
+    Provenance: #1652 / #1654. Ranked HIGH because it bills real money and is the
+    signature of the Optimiser judging the goal against something other than the
+    published band. It ran at MEDIUM and was waved through as stale-plan noise
+    while 630 homes in portfolio 796 published at band C were each sold ~1 SAP
+    point of works toward a band they had already reached (£282k), and 172 more
+    in 824. The cause there was a continuous baseline compared against the
+    *integer* band floor, so a dwelling publishing at the floor read as a
+    fraction short; the goal is now judged on the continuous floor
+    (`Epc.sap_lower_bound_continuous`). Any fresh firing means a baseline the
+    Optimiser used has diverged from the published one again — re-debug it,
+    do not re-bucket it."""
     goal, base = _band_rank(a.scenario_goal_band), _band_rank(a.effective_band)
     if goal is None or base is None or base > goal:
         return None
@@ -175,6 +197,38 @@ def _already_meets_goal_with_works(a: PropertyAudit) -> Optional[str]:
     return f"already {a.effective_band} >= goal {a.scenario_goal_band} but cost_of_works £{a.cost_of_works:.0f}"
 
 
+@check("costed-plan-without-real-gain", Severity.HIGH)
+def _costed_plan_without_real_gain(a: PropertyAudit) -> Optional[str]:
+    """Money was spent but the modelled post-retrofit SAP barely moves off the
+    effective baseline — works that buy no real improvement.
+
+    Provenance: #1652 / #1655. This closes a coverage hole rather than adding a
+    new opinion: `plan-score-below-baseline` only fires on a *drop* beyond 0.5,
+    and `zero-works-post-differs` only on £0 plans, so a **costed** plan landing
+    flat against the baseline was caught by neither. It is what the 112
+    "no real improvement" homes in portfolio 796 looked like — priced plans whose
+    post-retrofit SAP sat ~0.2 *below* the effective baseline — and what the
+    band-boundary defect (#1654) produced at scale: 630 homes each sold ~1 SAP
+    point of works toward a band they had already reached.
+
+    The 0.5 threshold is the same "within rounding is not a real move" line the
+    published banding uses: the effective baseline is a rounded integer, so a
+    sub-half-point shift is not a change anyone can see on a certificate. Spend
+    that buys less than that is not a retrofit."""
+    if a.effective_sap is None or a.post_sap is None:
+        return None
+    cost = a.cost_of_works or 0.0
+    if cost <= 0.0:
+        return None
+    gain = a.post_sap - a.effective_sap
+    if gain > _MIN_REAL_SAP_GAIN:
+        return None
+    return (
+        f"£{cost:.0f} of works for {gain:+.1f} SAP "
+        f"(effective {a.effective_sap:.1f} → post {a.post_sap:.1f})"
+    )
+
+
 @check("plan-stops-short-of-goal", Severity.HIGH)
 def _plan_stops_short_of_goal(a: PropertyAudit) -> Optional[str]:
     """The default plan ends BELOW the scenario's goal band on a scenario that is
@@ -538,11 +592,14 @@ def _load(
             rollups = {
                 m["property_id"]: (m["solar_sap"], m["solar_bill"], m["n_measures"])
                 for m in (
-                    row._mapping for row in conn.execute(_ROLLUP_QUERY, params)
+                    # `Row._mapping` is public API in SQLAlchemy 2.0; only the
+                    # stub marks it protected.
+                    row._mapping  # pyright: ignore[reportPrivateUsage]
+                    for row in conn.execute(_ROLLUP_QUERY, params)
                 )
             }
         for r in conn.execute(_QUERY, params):
-            m = r._mapping
+            m = r._mapping  # pyright: ignore[reportPrivateUsage]
             solar_sap, solar_bill, n_measures = rollups.get(m["id"], (None, None, 0))
             out.append(
                 PropertyAudit(
diff --git a/tests/datatypes/epc/domain/test_epc.py b/tests/datatypes/epc/domain/test_epc.py
index 474c5e890..8731c5af3 100644
--- a/tests/datatypes/epc/domain/test_epc.py
+++ b/tests/datatypes/epc/domain/test_epc.py
@@ -4,6 +4,8 @@ target)."""
 
 from __future__ import annotations
 
+from decimal import ROUND_HALF_UP, Decimal
+
 import pytest
 
 from datatypes.epc.domain.epc import Epc
@@ -24,3 +26,41 @@ def test_sap_lower_bound_returns_the_band_floor() -> None:
 def test_band_floor_round_trips_through_from_sap_score(band: Epc) -> None:
     # Act / Assert — a band's floor scores back to that band.
     assert Epc.from_sap_score(band.sap_lower_bound()) is band
+
+
+def test_a_continuous_score_bands_on_its_published_rating() -> None:
+    # Arrange — callers holding a continuous SAP want the band the dwelling
+    # would be *published* in, which means rounding half up. Rounding half to
+    # even (Python's `round`) drops an exact x.5 at a band floor into the band
+    # below: a continuous 68.5 is published SAP 69 and so band C, not band D.
+
+    # Act / Assert — the half point carries the score into the band above.
+    assert Epc.from_sap_continuous(68.5) is Epc.C
+    assert Epc.from_sap_continuous(54.5) is Epc.D
+    # And either side of a floor still bands the obvious way.
+    assert Epc.from_sap_continuous(68.49) is Epc.D
+    assert Epc.from_sap_continuous(69.4) is Epc.C
+
+
+@pytest.mark.parametrize("band", list(Epc))
+def test_continuous_band_floor_is_where_the_published_rating_enters_the_band(
+    band: Epc,
+) -> None:
+    # Arrange — the Optimiser judges "reached band X" on the calculator's
+    # *continuous* SAP, but a dwelling is in a band by its *published* rating
+    # (the half-up-rounded integer). The continuous floor is the point those two
+    # agree: the lowest continuous score whose published rating is in the band.
+    # Asserted against the real publishing path (round half up → from_sap_score)
+    # rather than an arithmetic literal, so the two cannot drift apart.
+    def published_band(continuous: float) -> Epc:
+        rounded = int(Decimal(continuous).quantize(Decimal("1"), rounding=ROUND_HALF_UP))
+        return Epc.from_sap_score(rounded)
+
+    # Act
+    continuous_floor: float = band.sap_lower_bound_continuous()
+
+    # Assert — at the floor the dwelling publishes into the band; a hair below
+    # it publishes into a worse one. (Band G has no worse band to fall into.)
+    assert published_band(continuous_floor) is band
+    if band is not Epc.G:
+        assert published_band(continuous_floor - 0.01) is not band
diff --git a/tests/domain/sap10_calculator/worksheet/test_rating.py b/tests/domain/sap10_calculator/worksheet/test_rating.py
index 8eccda886..3867abe9f 100644
--- a/tests/domain/sap10_calculator/worksheet/test_rating.py
+++ b/tests/domain/sap10_calculator/worksheet/test_rating.py
@@ -109,6 +109,29 @@ def test_sap_rating_integer_rounds_to_nearest_and_clamps_to_minimum_one() -> Non
     assert catastrophic == 1
 
 
+def test_sap_rating_integer_rounds_a_half_point_up_not_to_even() -> None:
+    # Arrange — §13 "rounded to the nearest integer" is half-UP under SAP, the
+    # convention the mapper already follows (`_round_half_up_2dp`). Python's
+    # built-in `round` is half-to-EVEN, so it drops an exact x.5 to x whenever x
+    # is even. That bites hardest at the band floors, where one point is a whole
+    # band: a continuous 68.5 must publish as SAP 69 (band C), not 68 (band D).
+    # The linear branch (9) inverts exactly, so these ECFs land on a true .5:
+    #   ECF = (100 − 68.5) / 13.95 → SAP 68.5   (band C floor)
+    #   ECF = (100 − 54.5) / 13.95 → SAP 54.5   (band D floor)
+    ecf_at_band_c_floor = (100.0 - 68.5) / 13.95
+    ecf_at_band_d_floor = (100.0 - 54.5) / 13.95
+    assert sap_rating(ecf=ecf_at_band_c_floor) == 68.5
+    assert sap_rating(ecf=ecf_at_band_d_floor) == 54.5
+
+    # Act
+    at_band_c_floor = sap_rating_integer(ecf=ecf_at_band_c_floor)
+    at_band_d_floor = sap_rating_integer(ecf=ecf_at_band_d_floor)
+
+    # Assert — the half point rounds up into the band above.
+    assert at_band_c_floor == 69
+    assert at_band_d_floor == 55
+
+
 def test_environmental_impact_rating_linear_branch_below_threshold() -> None:
     # Arrange — Equations (10)/(12): CF = CO2/(TFA+45); when CF < 28.3,
     # EI = 100 − 1.34 × CF. For a 100 m² home emitting 1500 kg CO2/yr:
diff --git a/tests/harness/test_report.py b/tests/harness/test_report.py
index 84330584e..a89c79943 100644
--- a/tests/harness/test_report.py
+++ b/tests/harness/test_report.py
@@ -30,13 +30,20 @@ _GOLDEN = (
 _WITHIN_TOLERANCE = "0036-6325-1100-0063-1226"
 _DIVERGENT = "0240-0200-5706-2365-8010"
 
-# 0390 fires three measures — an uninsulated solid floor, low-energy lighting,
+# 0380 fires three measures — an uninsulated solid floor, low-energy lighting,
 # and the ASHP bundle — so every fired measure's trigger attributes are
-# exercised together. (0330, the previous fixture, now reaches band C on the
-# correctly-sized ASHP alone: ADR-0049 sizes the pump to the dwelling's design
-# heat loss, so the undersized-pump-era companion solid_floor_insulation is no
-# longer needed there.)
-_THREE_MEASURES = "0390-2254-6420-2126-5561"
+# exercised together.
+#
+# Fixture history, both times because the *package* changed rather than the
+# trigger logic under test:
+#   0330 -> 0390: ADR-0049 sizes the pump to the dwelling's design heat loss, so
+#     the undersized-pump-era companion solid_floor_insulation stopped firing.
+#   0390 -> 0380: ADR-0064 judges the goal band on the *published* rating, so
+#     0390's floor+ASHP package (post 68.772, published 69 = band C) now meets
+#     the target and no longer buys low-energy lighting to clear an integer 69.
+# 0380 reaches band C at post 74.4 — clear of a band floor, so it does not ride
+# on the rounding rule it is standing in for.
+_THREE_MEASURES = "0380-2530-6150-2326-4161"
 
 
 def _triggers_by_measure(report: PropertyReport) -> dict[str, MeasureTrigger]:
diff --git a/tests/orchestration/fakes.py b/tests/orchestration/fakes.py
index 9820e4ebf..0271ae2a9 100644
--- a/tests/orchestration/fakes.py
+++ b/tests/orchestration/fakes.py
@@ -178,17 +178,24 @@ class FakeSpatialRepo(SpatialRepository):
 
 
 class FakePropertyBaselineRepo(PropertyBaselineRepository):
-    def __init__(self) -> None:
+    def __init__(
+        self, by_property: Optional[dict[int, PropertyBaselinePerformance]] = None
+    ) -> None:
         self.saved: list[tuple[PropertyBaselinePerformance, int]] = []
+        self._by_property = by_property or {}
 
     def save(self, baseline: PropertyBaselinePerformance, property_id: int) -> int:
         self.saved.append((baseline, property_id))
+        self._by_property[property_id] = baseline
         return len(self.saved)
 
     def get_for_property(
         self, property_id: int
-    ) -> Optional[PropertyBaselinePerformance]:  # pragma: no cover
-        raise NotImplementedError
+    ) -> Optional[PropertyBaselinePerformance]:
+        """None for a Property the Baseline stage never established — the real
+        repo's behaviour, and what the Modelling coherence check treats as a
+        data gap rather than a fault."""
+        return self._by_property.get(property_id)
 
 
 class FakeScenarioRepository(ScenarioRepository):
diff --git a/tests/orchestration/test_modelling_baseline_coherence.py b/tests/orchestration/test_modelling_baseline_coherence.py
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..752b1c14f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/orchestration/test_modelling_baseline_coherence.py
@@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
+"""Modelling and the Baseline stage must agree on what the Property scores now.
+
+Per ADR-0002 the persisted Effective Performance is what the app reports as the
+Property's current state, and a Plan's `post_*` figures are read against it. The
+Modelling stage re-scores the Effective EPC itself rather than reading that row,
+so the two can drift apart silently — and when they do, the app subtracts one
+baseline from the other and reports a gain nobody modelled (#1652 / #1655:
+property 749719 showed "+9.65 SAP" on a plan whose own CO2, bill and consumption
+savings were all exactly 0.0).
+
+Modelling keeps its own re-score — anchoring the SAP to the persisted integer
+would leave the Plan's SAP disagreeing with its own CO2 / primary energy / bill,
+which all come off the same SapResult. Instead the divergence is made *loud*, so
+a future drift surfaces as an error instead of a phantom gain in a board pack.
+"""
+
+from __future__ import annotations
+
+import logging
+from typing import Optional
+
+import pytest
+
+from datatypes.epc.domain.epc import Epc
+from domain.property_baseline.performance import Performance
+from domain.property_baseline.property_baseline_performance import (
+    PropertyBaselinePerformance,
+)
+from orchestration.modelling_orchestrator import (
+    _check_baseline_coherence,  # pyright: ignore[reportPrivateUsage]
+)
+
+
+def _persisted(effective_sap: int) -> PropertyBaselinePerformance:
+    """A Baseline Performance whose Effective half scores `effective_sap`."""
+    effective = Performance(
+        sap_score=effective_sap,
+        epc_band=Epc.from_sap_score(effective_sap),
+        co2_emissions=2.0,
+        primary_energy_intensity=200,
+    )
+    return PropertyBaselinePerformance(
+        lodged=None,
+        effective=effective,
+        rebaseline_reason="physical_state_changed",
+        space_heating_kwh=0.0,
+        water_heating_kwh=0.0,
+    )
+
+
+def test_divergence_beyond_rounding_is_logged_as_an_error(
+    caplog: pytest.LogCaptureFixture,
+) -> None:
+    # Arrange — the 749719 case: the Baseline stage persisted an Effective SAP of
+    # 63, but Modelling scored the same Property at 72.65.
+    persisted: Optional[PropertyBaselinePerformance] = _persisted(63)
+
+    # Act
+    with caplog.at_level(logging.ERROR):
+        _check_baseline_coherence(749719, 72.65, persisted)
+
+    # Assert — loud, and it names the Property and both figures.
+    assert "749719" in caplog.text
+    assert "72.65" in caplog.text
+    assert "63" in caplog.text
+    assert any(r.levelno == logging.ERROR for r in caplog.records)
+
+
+def test_a_baseline_agreeing_within_rounding_is_silent(
+    caplog: pytest.LogCaptureFixture,
+) -> None:
+    # Arrange — the persisted Effective SAP is the *rounded* score, so a
+    # continuous 63.22 against a stored 63 is agreement, not divergence.
+    persisted: Optional[PropertyBaselinePerformance] = _persisted(63)
+
+    # Act
+    with caplog.at_level(logging.WARNING):
+        _check_baseline_coherence(749719, 63.22, persisted)
+
+    # Assert
+    assert caplog.records == []
+
+
+def test_a_property_with_no_persisted_baseline_is_reported_not_logged(
+    caplog: pytest.LogCaptureFixture,
+) -> None:
+    # Arrange — the Property never went through the Baseline stage. A data gap
+    # should degrade one Property, not abort the batch (ADR-0012 reserves the
+    # abort for a load-bearing calculator raise) — but it must not log per
+    # Property either: whole batches legitimately have no Baseline stage (the
+    # database-free harness the modelling_e2e handler runs on), and one line per
+    # Property buries the real errors in tens of thousands of duplicates.
+
+    # Act
+    with caplog.at_level(logging.WARNING):
+        missing = _check_baseline_coherence(749719, 63.22, None)
+
+    # Assert — reported back to the caller to aggregate, silent in itself.
+    assert missing is True
+    assert caplog.records == []
+
+
+def test_a_property_with_a_baseline_is_not_reported_as_missing() -> None:
+    # Arrange
+    persisted: Optional[PropertyBaselinePerformance] = _persisted(63)
+
+    # Act
+    missing = _check_baseline_coherence(749719, 63.22, persisted)
+
+    # Assert
+    assert missing is False
diff --git a/tests/orchestration/test_modelling_goal_band_floor.py b/tests/orchestration/test_modelling_goal_band_floor.py
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..63210345b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/orchestration/test_modelling_goal_band_floor.py
@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+"""The Optimiser judges "already at the goal band" on the *published* rating.
+
+A dwelling is in a band by the rating published on its EPC — the continuous SAP
+rounded half up. The Optimiser works in continuous SAP, so a goal of "reach band
+X" has to be met at the point the published rating enters band X (the integer
+floor less half a point), not at the integer floor itself. Comparing a
+continuous score against the integer floor makes a dwelling that already
+publishes in the band read as a fraction short, and the Optimiser buys the
+cheapest measure to close a gap that does not exist (#1652 / #1654 — 630 homes
+in portfolio 796 published at SAP 69 / band C, each sold ~1 marginal SAP point
+of works toward a band they had already reached).
+
+End-to-end through ``run_modelling`` (no database) with the real calculator,
+against Elmhurst certs that sit in the boundary window.
+"""
+
+from __future__ import annotations
+
+from datatypes.epc.domain.epc_property_data import EpcPropertyData
+from domain.modelling.plan import Plan
+from harness.console import run_modelling
+from tests.domain.modelling._elmhurst_recommendation import (
+    parse_recommendation_summary,
+)
+
+
+def _dwelling(fixture: str) -> EpcPropertyData:
+    return parse_recommendation_summary(fixture)
+
+
+def test_dwelling_published_at_the_goal_band_is_sold_no_works() -> None:
+    # Arrange — cert 001431 with a flat roof scores a continuous 54.575, which
+    # publishes as SAP 55: exactly the band D floor, so the dwelling already IS
+    # band D. Against an integer floor of 55 it reads as 0.425 short.
+    already_band_d = _dwelling("flat_roof_001431_before.pdf")
+
+    # Act — ask for the band it is already in.
+    plan: Plan = run_modelling(already_band_d, goal_band="D", print_table=False)
+
+    # Assert — nothing to buy: the goal is already met.
+    assert plan.measures == ()
+    assert plan.cost_of_works == 0.0
+
+
+def test_dwelling_below_the_goal_band_is_still_taken_to_it() -> None:
+    # Arrange — the same cert with an uninsulated loft scores a continuous
+    # 37.349, published SAP 37: band F, genuinely short of band D. Lowering the
+    # target by half a point must not let the package stop short of the band.
+    below_band_d = _dwelling("loft_001431_before.pdf")
+
+    # Act
+    plan: Plan = run_modelling(below_band_d, goal_band="D", print_table=False)
+
+    # Assert — real works, and they carry the dwelling into band D.
+    assert plan.measures != ()
+    assert plan.cost_of_works > 0.0
+    assert plan.post_retrofit.sap_continuous >= 54.5
diff --git a/tests/scripts/test_audit_anomalies.py b/tests/scripts/test_audit_anomalies.py
index dd8771500..e34bf250d 100644
--- a/tests/scripts/test_audit_anomalies.py
+++ b/tests/scripts/test_audit_anomalies.py
@@ -1,12 +1,19 @@
+import dataclasses
 from typing import Optional
 
-import pytest
-
+# The checks are registry-driven: production reaches them through `_REGISTRY`,
+# never by name, so the underscore marks "not a direct call site" rather than
+# "untestable". Naming them here is the only way to exercise one check in
+# isolation, hence the private-usage waivers.
 from scripts.audit.anomalies import (
+    _REGISTRY,  # pyright: ignore[reportPrivateUsage]
     PropertyAudit,
-    _effective_lodged_divergence,
-    _implausible_lodged_score,
-    _plan_stops_short_of_goal,
+    Severity,
+    _already_meets_goal_with_works,  # pyright: ignore[reportPrivateUsage]
+    _costed_plan_without_real_gain,  # pyright: ignore[reportPrivateUsage]
+    _effective_lodged_divergence,  # pyright: ignore[reportPrivateUsage]
+    _implausible_lodged_score,  # pyright: ignore[reportPrivateUsage]
+    _plan_stops_short_of_goal,  # pyright: ignore[reportPrivateUsage]
 )
 
 
@@ -155,3 +162,122 @@ class TestPlanStopsShortOfGoal:
 
         # Assert
         assert result is None
+
+
+class TestAlreadyMeetsGoalWithWorks:
+    """Costed works on a dwelling already in the goal band (#1652 / #1654).
+
+    Ranked HIGH: this is the signature of the Optimiser judging the goal against
+    something other than the published band, and it bills real money — 630 homes
+    in portfolio 796 published at band C were each sold ~1 SAP point of works
+    toward a band they had already reached. It must not sit in the
+    lower-severity bucket that gets waved through as stale-plan noise.
+    """
+
+    def test_fires_when_a_dwelling_already_at_goal_is_sold_works(self) -> None:
+        # Arrange — published band C, scenario goal C, yet £678 of works.
+        audit = _make_audit(scenario_goal_band="C", cost_of_works=678.0)
+        audit = dataclasses.replace(audit, effective_band="C")
+
+        # Act
+        result = _already_meets_goal_with_works(audit)
+
+        # Assert
+        assert result is not None
+        assert "678" in result
+
+    def test_silent_when_the_dwelling_is_below_the_goal_band(self) -> None:
+        # Arrange — published band D against a goal of C: works are warranted.
+        audit = _make_audit(scenario_goal_band="C", cost_of_works=678.0)
+        audit = dataclasses.replace(audit, effective_band="D")
+
+        # Act
+        result = _already_meets_goal_with_works(audit)
+
+        # Assert
+        assert result is None
+
+    def test_silent_when_an_already_compliant_dwelling_is_sold_nothing(self) -> None:
+        # Arrange — already band C and a £0 plan: the correct outcome.
+        audit = _make_audit(scenario_goal_band="C", cost_of_works=0.0)
+        audit = dataclasses.replace(audit, effective_band="C")
+
+        # Act
+        result = _already_meets_goal_with_works(audit)
+
+        # Assert
+        assert result is None
+
+    def test_is_registered_at_high_severity(self) -> None:
+        # Act — the severity the runner reports it under.
+        registered = {name: severity for name, severity, _ in _REGISTRY}
+
+        # Assert
+        assert registered["already-meets-goal-with-works"] is Severity.HIGH
+
+
+class TestCostedPlanWithoutRealGain:
+    """Money spent for no meaningful SAP movement (#1652 / #1655).
+
+    The coverage hole the #1652 diagnosis found: `plan-score-below-baseline`
+    only fires on a *drop* beyond 0.5 and `zero-works-post-differs` only on £0
+    plans, so a costed plan landing flat against the effective baseline was
+    caught by neither — including the 112 homes whose modelled post-retrofit SAP
+    sat ~0.2 *below* their effective baseline.
+    """
+
+    def test_fires_when_works_are_bought_for_no_real_gain(self) -> None:
+        # Arrange — £6,240 of works moving the dwelling 0.2 SAP.
+        audit = _make_audit(
+            effective_sap=63.0, post_sap=63.2, cost_of_works=6240.0
+        )
+
+        # Act
+        result = _costed_plan_without_real_gain(audit)
+
+        # Assert
+        assert result is not None
+        assert "6240" in result or "6,240" in result
+
+    def test_fires_when_the_post_score_lands_below_the_baseline(self) -> None:
+        # Arrange — the likely-downgrade case: paid works, post *below* baseline.
+        audit = _make_audit(
+            effective_sap=63.0, post_sap=62.8, cost_of_works=1029.0
+        )
+
+        # Act
+        result = _costed_plan_without_real_gain(audit)
+
+        # Assert
+        assert result is not None
+
+    def test_silent_when_the_works_deliver_a_real_uplift(self) -> None:
+        # Arrange — £6,240 buying 9 SAP points: what a retrofit should look like.
+        audit = _make_audit(
+            effective_sap=63.0, post_sap=72.0, cost_of_works=6240.0
+        )
+
+        # Act
+        result = _costed_plan_without_real_gain(audit)
+
+        # Assert
+        assert result is None
+
+    def test_silent_on_a_zero_cost_plan(self) -> None:
+        # Arrange — no money spent, so there is nothing to justify; a £0 plan
+        # that moves nothing is the correct outcome for an already-compliant
+        # dwelling, and is covered by its own check.
+        audit = _make_audit(effective_sap=63.0, post_sap=63.0, cost_of_works=0.0)
+
+        # Act
+        result = _costed_plan_without_real_gain(audit)
+
+        # Assert
+        assert result is None
+
+    def test_is_registered_at_high_severity(self) -> None:
+        # Act
+        registered = {name: severity for name, severity, _ in _REGISTRY}
+
+        # Assert
+        assert registered["costed-plan-without-real-gain"] is Severity.HIGH