BIQ01 - What is the official name of your organisation/project (and any registration number if you have one, plus main contact, email address and phone number)?
An early-stage grassroots human rights support initiative.
Registration number: Not currently available / not confirmed.
Main contact: lead coordinator
Email: (to be added through controlled contact route)
Phone: (to be added through controlled contact route)
BIQ02 - Are you registered (NGO / CBO / company / informal group)? If not, do you want to register?
The project is currently an informal grassroots group, originally formed through mobile messaging and volunteer coordination to connect people experiencing or witnessing injustice. As the network grows and becomes more public-facing, the project is open to formal registration (e.g., NGO/CBO/association) if that will strengthen credibility, safeguarding, and access to partnerships and accountability pathways.
BIQ03 - What location(s) do you operate in (town/county/region)? Any plans to expand?
The network operates across multiple locations, primarily through online channels and remote coordination. It is not limited to a single region, and its model supports expansion through member growth, public advocacy, and structured case tracking. The intention is to scale from informal support into a more visible and credible advocacy platform.
BIQ04 - What problem are you solving in one sentence?
We are addressing hidden abuse and injustice by giving people a safer route to speak, and turning those concerns into structured follow-up and advocacy for change.
BIQ05 - What does "success" look like for you in 6 months and 12 months?
In 6 months: a functioning support platform where concerns raised by participants are consistently captured, organised, and tracked, with early examples of action taken (awareness activity, escalation routes, and documented outcomes).
In 12 months: a recognised advocacy initiative with a structured concerns register, stronger safeguarding practices, trusted partnerships, and the ability to contribute evidence into formal accountability channels.
BIQ06 - What is your biggest constraint right now (money / people / equipment / skills / trust / transport / time / other)?
The biggest constraint is capacity and structure — the network has powerful stories and motivation, but needs better tools, governance support, safeguarding controls, and sustainable funding to turn advocacy energy into reliable, repeatable action.
BIQ07 - What are the top 3 priorities you want help with immediately?
(1) A structured system to capture, track, and prioritise concerns (moving from conversation to documented action).
(2) Advocacy and visibility support, including safe escalation pathways.
(3) Safeguarding and data protection, ensuring that participants are protected while still enabling credible reporting.
BIQ08 - What partners do you already work with (government, clinics, schools, NGOs, churches, local leaders)?
At present, the project operates mainly as an independent grassroots network, powered by its members. It is actively open to partnerships with human rights organisations, legal support groups, domestic abuse support services, community leaders, journalists, and institutional bodies that can help convert evidence into outcomes.
BIQ09 - What systems do you currently use (paper notebook, WhatsApp, Excel, Google Drive, website, none)?
The network was built primarily using mobile messaging, supported by informal personal note-taking and conversation threads. The project is now moving toward a more structured case and governance system to enable clearer tracking, prioritisation, and coordinated action.
BIQ10 - Do you have permission/consent from people on your register to store/use their data for support services?
Consent is not yet formalised in a structured system. As the project moves into more formal tracking and visibility, the intention is to implement clear consent and data handling rules, including anonymisation where needed, safeguarding protections, and controlled access to sensitive information.
PSQ01 - What service can you name, with brief description of each that will help the beneficiaries of your project?
(1) Safe Community Support (message-first) – A moderated peer network where people can share experiences of injustice, receive solidarity, and avoid isolation.
(2) Concern Capture & Case Documentation – Turning stories into structured concerns with clear facts, risks, and actions for follow-up.
(3) Referral & Signposting – Guiding people toward appropriate local support services (domestic abuse support, counselling, legal support, shelters, medical help).
(4) Advocacy & Visibility Campaigns – Coordinated awareness efforts to bring hidden issues into public view and apply pressure for accountability.
(5) Institutional Escalation Pathways – Preparing concerns for escalation to appropriate oversight, watchdog, or accountability channels where safe and appropriate.
PSQ02 - List your current services (what you do today), and for each: how often and for how many people per month?
Currently the project operates mainly as a community-led messaging network, supporting participants through real-time discussion and mutual support. Activity is ongoing / daily, depending on the issues raised.
Formal monthly reporting volumes are not yet measured, but the project intends to track this properly once a structured system is in place.
PSQ03 - Which services are most needed but you cannot currently deliver?
(1) Formal safeguarding and triage (risk-screening, escalation rules, secure handling of sensitive cases)
(2) Verified referral pathways (trusted partners on the ground in different locations)
(3) Case resolution support (follow-up capacity, advocacy coordination, persistence over time)
(4) Secure recordkeeping beyond chat history, including consent, anonymisation and controlled access
(5) Structured evidence packs for use with appropriate accountability channels
PSQ04 - What are the top 5 needs reported by beneficiaries of your project (health, safety, work, school, counselling, etc.)?
(1) Safety and protection (especially for abuse, intimidation, and coercion cases)
(2) Emotional support and counselling (trauma, fear, isolation, burnout)
(3) Justice and accountability (abuse of authority, corruption, denial of rights)
(4) Practical help pathways (where to go, what to do next, how to report safely)
(5) Visibility and collective backing (reducing silent suffering through shared advocacy)
PSQ05 - What is the service pathway right now? (How does a person join → receive help → follow-up?)
People typically join through invitation or contact, enter the messaging community, share their concern, and receive peer support and advice informally. Follow-up currently depends on volunteer capacity and personal commitment.
The next step is implementing a clearer pathway:
(1) intake
(2) triage
(3) structured concern record
(4) action steps
(5) review and follow-up.
PSQ06 - What makes your approach different from other organisations (if any)?
The project is grassroots-first and story-driven, built directly from lived experience rather than formal bureaucracy. What makes it distinct is the move from conversation into structured advocacy, turning raw concerns into trackable issues with evidence, actions, and outcomes — creating long-term pressure for change instead of one-off exposure.
PSQ07 - What "minimum service package" could you reliably deliver every month if basic funding existed?
With basic funding, the project could reliably deliver:
(1) Moderated community support and safeguarding rules (consistent governance and protection)
(2) Structured intake + triage for new cases
(3) A tracked register of concerns with follow-up status
(4) Monthly advocacy brief (top issues, trends, and urgent cases)
(5) Referral signposting and escalation support where safe and appropriate
PSQ08 - What does a typical case look like from first contact to resolution?
A person makes contact and shares a concern (e.g., abuse, corruption, or denial of rights). The group listens, supports, and helps clarify the facts. The case is then recorded as a structured concern, risks are identified (safety, legal exposure, retaliation), and the next actions are agreed (referral, advocacy visibility, evidence gathering, or escalation). Resolution may be support-based, referral-based, or outcome-based depending on the case.
PSQ09 - What are the risks/harm points in service delivery (stigma, security threats, exploitation, misinformation)?
(1) Stigma and retaliation against people who speak out
(2) Security threats if identities or locations are exposed
(3) Exploitation by impostors pretending to help or requesting money
(4) Misinformation or harmful advice shared in urgency
(5) Re-traumatisation and emotional overload without support boundaries
These risks reinforce the need for safeguarding controls, consent rules, anonymisation, and disciplined triage.
PSQ10 - How do you measure whether a service worked? (simple indicators)
(1) Number of concerns captured and structured (not just discussed)
(2) Number of cases referred safely to an appropriate support route
(3) Number of cases with follow-up completed (even if unresolved)
(4) Documented outcomes: protection achieved, support received, escalation made, or harm reduced
(5) Beneficiary feedback: “I felt safer / I was heard / I knew what to do next / I got help.”
PSQ11 - What services could be delivered remotely (WhatsApp/phone) vs require physical presence?
Remote (message/phone): intake, listening support, case documentation, triage, planning, referral signposting, advocacy coordination, and reporting.
Physical presence required: emergency safeguarding intervention, relocation or shelter support, in-person legal support, medical support, and formal investigations (where local partners exist).
PEQ01 - What equipment do you have? mobile phone? pc? printer? monitor? - list all you have.
At present the project operates primarily through mobile phones for communication. Any additional equipment (laptop/PC, printer, monitor, scanner) is not yet confirmed and will be formally listed as the project becomes more structured.
PEQ02 - How do we contact you? Telephone number? Office Address? Main Contact? Number of people in the management team? Number of people that the project will address?
Main contact: lead coordinator.
Contact method: message / phone-based communication (details to be added through controlled contact route).
Office address: Not yet established (currently informal / remote).
Management team: Currently small and volunteer-led (exact number not confirmed).
Number of people addressed: Growing network — with scope to support many cases per month once structured systems are in place.
PEQ03 - Where are you working from? Would the office address be your home? a community centre? an internet cafe?
The project currently operates as a remote grassroots network, with administration likely handled from home-based working by the lead coordinator and trusted volunteers. The model does not currently depend on a dedicated building, but can evolve into a shared workspace as demand and resourcing grow.
PEQ04 - What equipment is working reliably, and what is broken / missing / shared / borrowed?
The mobile-phone-based messaging system is reliable and proven as the core operational tool. What is currently missing (or not yet confirmed) is dedicated admin equipment such as a laptop/PC, printer/scanner, stable data storage, and structured case-record tooling, which become essential as the project shifts from informal discussion into documented advocacy and safeguarding.
PEQ05 - How stable is your electricity and internet (daily / weekly outages)?
As a message-first network, the project can continue even with varying reliability of power and internet. However, inconsistent electricity and weak data connections can create delays in follow-up, recordkeeping, and escalation work. Improving stability (through better internet access and power backup where required) would increase reliability significantly.
PEQ06 - Where is your data stored (paper files, phone, laptop)? Is there a backup?
Currently most information exists within message history and informal notes. Backup arrangements are not yet formalised. A priority improvement is migrating into a controlled record structure with secure storage and routine backups, ensuring concerns are not lost and can be followed up consistently.
PEQ07 - Do you have a safe place to store sensitive records?
Not fully formalised yet. The project will require controlled access, anonymisation, and safe storage protocols, especially because many cases involve vulnerability, intimidation risk, and personal safety concerns. A secure structured system will be essential to ensure confidentiality and protection.
PEQ08 - Do you have transport (walking, bicycle, motorbike, car, public)? Biggest travel barrier?
The project is primarily remote and does not require regular travel for basic operation. When physical support is needed, transport may depend on volunteers and local partners. The biggest travel barrier is likely cost, safety risk, and lack of formal on-ground capacity, rather than distance alone.
PEQ09 - What are your printing/scanning options (none / pay-per-use shop / own printer)?
Printing and scanning are not currently core to operations and are likely handled through pay-per-use services where needed (e.g., local print shop), or by taking phone-based photos of documents. A dedicated printer/scanner would be useful once case documentation and formal reporting increase.
PEQ10 - If you had a small "starter kit" (phone + laptop + printer), who would be responsible for it?
The starter kit would be held and managed by the lead coordinator or a nominated trusted administrator, under clear governance rules. Custody, use, and accountability would be logged to prevent misuse and to protect sensitive records.
PEQ11 - What does your workspace need to become functional (desk, chair, lockable cabinet, internet router, etc.)?
A functional workspace would require:
(1) Reliable phone + laptop access
(2) Basic desk and chair
(3) Stable internet connection (router / data plan)
(4) Secure storage for sensitive items (lockable cabinet)
(5) Printer/scanner access for formal documents when required
These improvements would allow reliable case tracking, structured reporting, and administrative continuity.
PEQ12 - What would be the ideal operating base in 6 months (home office / shared centre / rented office)?
Within six months, the ideal base would be a home office or shared community workspace with reliable internet and secure storage — not necessarily a full rented office, but a stable coordination point for structured recordkeeping, safeguarding administration, and reporting outputs.
PEQ13 - What security risks exist at your premises (theft, harassment, privacy exposure)?
Key security risks include:
(1) Theft of devices containing sensitive data
(2) Privacy exposure if phones/laptops are accessed by unauthorised persons
(3) Harassment or intimidation if the project’s work triggers backlash
(4) Digital threats (screenshots, forwarding of sensitive messages, impersonation)
These risks strengthen the need for basic physical security, data security rules, and safeguarding discipline as the project grows.
PQ01 - Who are the key roles today (leader, admin, outreach, finance, volunteer coordinator)? Names + roles.
Lead coordinator – strategic direction, community leadership, advocacy focus.
Additional roles currently exist informally within the member network, including moderation/admin support, outreach, and peer support, but named role holders and responsibilities are not yet formally assigned.
A key next step is formalising core roles under a clearer governance structure.
PQ02 - How many are active weekly (not just "on the list")?
The group has an active grassroots presence, with engagement depending on current concerns and community needs. Weekly activity includes consistent messaging, support responses, and discussion. The exact number of consistently active contributors is not yet measured, and will be tracked more clearly once participation records are introduced.
PQ03 - What skills do you have in the team (counselling, healthcare links, social work, advocacy, fundraising, admin, IT)?
The network’s strengths include:
(1) Lived-experience support and peer solidarity
(2) Advocacy instinct and collective awareness building
(3) Community coordination and mobilisation via messaging tools
(4) Story gathering and testimony sharing
(5) Early capability for public pressure and escalation thinking (where safe)
The model also benefits from diverse member backgrounds across locations, even though skills are not yet formally mapped.
PQ04 - What skills are missing that you need most urgently?
Priority skills needed include:
(1) Safeguarding leadership and case triage
(2) Basic legal/referral knowledge (what to do, what not to do, where to refer)
(3) Case management discipline (follow-up processes, status tracking, evidence handling)
(4) Data handling and confidentiality protocols
(5) Fundraising / partnership development
(6) Structured reporting for credibility with institutions and accountability channels
PQ05 - What training would help most (basic safeguarding, data handling, case management, fundraising, reporting)?
High-impact training areas include:
(1) Safeguarding fundamentals (risk signs, duty-of-care behaviour, escalation thresholds)
(2) Confidentiality and data handling (consent, anonymisation, controlled access)
(3) Case management workflow (intake → triage → action plan → follow-up)
(4) Trauma-informed communication (support without causing harm)
(5) Basic advocacy reporting (turning incidents into structured evidence for decision-makers)
PQ06 - How do you recruit and manage volunteers (screening, agreements, supervision)?
Currently recruitment is community-led and relationship-based, with volunteers emerging naturally from active contributors. As the project becomes more formal, volunteer management will be strengthened through clearer governance: basic screening questions, role descriptions, volunteer agreements, defined boundaries, supervision routines, and clear escalation rules.
PQ07 - Do you have a safeguarding lead / safeguarding rules? If not, who could be assigned?
Safeguarding is not yet formalised as a defined role with written rules. The logical initial safeguarding lead would be the current project coordinator, with the intention to appoint a dedicated safeguarding and case-triage lead as soon as possible to reduce risk, protect participants, and prevent harmful mishandling of sensitive concerns.
PQ08 - What is your communication rhythm (weekly meeting, WhatsApp group, ad-hoc)?
The project currently operates through an active messaging group, with communication happening ad-hoc and responsively, driven by the urgency of cases and participant needs. A next phase improvement is introducing a light rhythm such as weekly admin check-ins and monthly summary reporting, without losing the fast-response nature of the community.
PQ09 - What conflicts or workload risks exist (burnout, role confusion, disagreements)?
Key risks include:
(1) Burnout for the lead coordinator and core responders due to emotional intensity and high demand
(2) Role confusion, where informal helpers carry responsibility without clarity or protection
(3) Internal disagreements about what action is safe or appropriate
(4) Emotional overload, re-traumatisation, or conflict escalation inside discussions
(5) Boundary problems, where people expect direct rescue/support beyond the group’s capacity
These risks will reduce significantly with clearer roles, escalation rules, and follow-up structure.
PQ10 - If funding arrived, which 3 positions would you pay first (and why)?
(1) Safeguarding & Case Triage Lead — to protect vulnerable participants, prevent harm, and ensure safe escalation decisions.
(2) Admin / Documentation Lead — to convert discussion into structured concerns, track follow-ups, and produce reliable reports.
(3) Outreach & Partnerships Lead — to build referral pathways and trusted links (legal support, shelters, NGOs, advocacy channels), enabling real-world outcomes beyond discussion.
FQ01 - Do you have any current income (donations, grants, sales, membership, events)? Rough monthly average.
At present the project does not have a stable or formal income stream. Activities are largely supported through volunteer time and personal resources (e.g., phone data/airtime). Any small donations received are informal and irregular, and the monthly average is not yet consistently measurable. A key goal is to introduce transparent funding channels supported by clear governance.
FQ02 - What are your fixed monthly costs (rent, airtime, transport, printing, internet)?
Fixed monthly costs are low but persistent and include:
(1) Mobile data / airtime for message-based operations
(2) Internet access (where used)
(3) Occasional transport costs for urgent support or meetings
(4) Printing/scanning costs when formal documents are required
As the project becomes structured, additional costs may include basic admin tools (secure storage, device maintenance).
FQ03 - What costs are unpredictable emergencies (medical cases, relocation, safety incidents)?
Emergency and unpredictable costs may include:
(1) Urgent relocation / safe shelter support for at-risk individuals
(2) Medical support or crisis intervention for vulnerable cases
(3) Emergency transport to reach safe support points
(4) Replacement of lost/stolen devices containing critical communication
(5) Security costs where intimidation or harassment risk escalates
These incidents are difficult to plan for but can be life-changing when they arise.
FQ04 - What are the top 10 things you spend money on when you have it?
When funds are available, typical spend areas include:
Mobile data / airtime
Internet access
Transport for urgent support needs
Printing / scanning / document handling
Basic admin supplies
Emergency support to vulnerable individuals (case-dependent)
Communications costs for outreach and coordination
Small meeting support costs (safe coordination sessions)
Device maintenance (phones, chargers, repairs)
Secure data handling needs (storage, backup tools)
FQ05 - Do you keep records (cashbook, receipts, mobile money statements)? Who holds them?
Recordkeeping is currently informal due to the early-stage grassroots structure. Where spending occurs, it is typically tracked by the lead coordinator and through personal transaction evidence (e.g., receipts or phone payment records). The intent is to formalise recordkeeping using clear logs, receipts, and structured reporting.
FQ06 - Do you have, or intend to open, a bank/mobile money account in the organisation name? If not, what do you use?
The organisation does not yet have a dedicated bank or mobile money account in its formal name (registration not yet confirmed). Current transactions are likely handled through personal accounts or direct payment methods. A priority step as funding grows is to establish a dedicated organisation account and governance rules for authorisation and transparency.
FQ07 - What is the smallest funding amount that would make a real difference this month?
Even a modest amount would make a measurable difference by covering core operating essentials such as data/internet, basic administration, secure handling of sensitive information, and consistent follow-up activity. A real-difference threshold is likely in the range of basic monthly operating support, enabling the project to move from reactive support into structured case handling and reporting.
FQ08 - What is your 12-month "ideal budget" (even if rough)?
An ideal 12-month budget would support:
(1) Basic operational running costs (data, internet, admin tools)
(2) A small paid core team (safeguarding, admin/documentation, outreach)
(3) Safe case escalation capability (referrals, urgent support mechanisms)
(4) Reporting, governance, and visibility outputs (monthly briefs, case tracking)
Exact figures are still to be developed, but the structure is designed to scale gradually from minimal funding into a stable, credible advocacy operation.
FQ09 - What funding have you tried before (who, when, result)?
Funding efforts so far have been informal and grassroots-based, relying mainly on volunteer contribution rather than formal applications. The shift into a more structured system is intended to strengthen credibility and enable appropriate approaches to donors, partners, and institutions that require evidence of governance and accountability.
FQ10 - What would you consider "good governance proof" to show donors money is safe (reports, receipts, photos, beneficiary confirmations)?
Good governance proof would include:
(1) Structured reports (activities, concerns tracked, outcomes achieved)
(2) Receipts and transaction logs tied to specific cases or service outputs
(3) Evidence of delivery: photos (where safe), timestamps, and documented actions
(4) Beneficiary confirmations (anonymised where required)
(5) Clear role controls and approvals (who spent what, why, and under what decision rule)
(6) A visible concern-tracking dashboard showing transparency, progress, and accountability
This creates donor confidence that funds are protected from misuse and linked to real outcomes.
MQ01 - Who is your audience: donors, local community, government, clinics, schools, families, beneficiaries?
The project has multiple audiences:
(1) Beneficiaries and survivors of abuse, injustice, and neglect seeking safety and support
(2) Community allies and advocates who want to help amplify voices and reduce harm
(3) Donors and funders who want trusted impact and safe governance
(4) Local and national institutions (government bodies, commissions, police oversight bodies, social services)
(5) International accountability channels and reviewers
MQ02 - What channels do you currently use (WhatsApp, Facebook, TikTok, radio, church announcements, community meetings)?
The project currently operates primarily through mobile messaging, which enables immediate peer support, storytelling, coordination, and mobilisation. As the project grows, it is expected to expand into additional visibility channels such as social media, short-form video platforms, and public reporting through a structured platform, while keeping sensitive cases protected.
MQ03 - Do you have any assets: logo, photos, short video, testimonials, case stories?
The strongest existing assets are real-life stories and testimonies shared by participants, alongside community support conversations. Formal assets such as a logo, branded templates, curated photos/videos, and written testimonials may exist informally but are not yet packaged. A key next step is producing safe, anonymised assets for public advocacy and donor trust.
MQ04 - What is your "one sentence" message to donors?
“We turn hidden suffering into structured evidence and safe advocacy — so your support funds real protection, real follow-up, and real accountability, not just awareness.”
MQ05 - What is your "one sentence" message to beneficiaries?
“You are not alone — we will listen, protect your dignity, and help turn your story into action, safely and step by step.”
MQ06 - What questions do people ask most often about your project (and what answers do you give)?
Common questions include:
“Can you help me?”
Yes, we can listen, guide you safely, and help you access the best next step for support.
“Is this confidential?”
We aim to protect privacy and will strengthen safeguarding rules as the project becomes more structured.
“Will you expose my case publicly?”
Only with consent and only when safe; sensitive cases can remain anonymous.
“Can you guarantee justice?”
We cannot promise outcomes, but we can promise structured support, follow-up, and advocacy pressure.
“Do you charge money?”
No, the network exists to help people; we seek funding to strengthen safe operations.
MQ07 - Do you have a list of contacts (supporters / organisations)? How many?
The project’s main contact base currently exists through member connections and group relationships, rather than a formal donor CRM list. Numbers are not yet confirmed. A priority improvement is building a structured contact list of supporters, professional allies, and partner organisations while respecting data protection and consent.
MQ08 - What partnerships would unlock growth fastest (hospital, police, school, local government, NGO)?
The partnerships most likely to unlock scale and real-world outcomes include:
(1) Domestic abuse support services / shelters
(2) Legal aid and human rights lawyers
(3) Counselling and trauma support networks
(4) Credible NGOs with safeguarding frameworks
(5) Local government or ombudsman-style support structures
(6) Journalists and ethical media partners (for awareness with safety controls)
These partnerships would strengthen referral pathways and reduce the risk of participants being left unsupported after disclosure.
MQ09 - What events could you run quarterly (awareness day, clinic day, school session, community meeting)?
Quarterly events could include:
(1) Awareness and testimony events (online, anonymised where necessary)
(2) Community human rights education sessions (rights, safety planning, reporting routes)
(3) Safeguarding workshops for volunteers and members
(4) Advocacy briefings presenting patterns of injustice and priority concerns
(5) Stakeholder roundtables with NGOs and professional allies to build referral networks
MQ10 - What proof would be easiest for you to publish monthly (numbers helped, photos of deliveries, short story, receipts summary)?
The easiest monthly proof to publish (without risking safety) would include:
(1) Number of concerns received and triaged (no names)
(2) Number of cases supported and referred safely
(3) 1–3 short anonymised case stories showing the pathway and outcome
(4) A simple actions-taken summary (follow-ups, referrals, escalations)
(5) Where funding exists: a small spending log summary (what funds supported and why)
This creates credibility while protecting beneficiaries from exposure.