Project: Bunyole Institute – Model School Assurance

The project is Bunyole Institute – Model School Assurance (PHC P530). The school is known as BUNYOLE INSTITUT and operates in association with the Bureau d’Informations, Formations, Échanges et Recherches pour le Développement (BIFERD), a non-governmental organisation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Jonas Habimana is BIFERD's founder and CEO; Maoneo Barakengera is the school Headmaster; and Blaise Rushikama leads local PHC coordination. Contact details are listed under PEQ02. The school's official registered name, legal status, education approvals, relationship with BIFERD and authorised signatories remain [to verify].

BIFERD (Bureau d’Informations, Formations, Échanges et Recherches pour le Développement) is a registered NGO in the Democratic Republic of the Congo working in humanitarian assistance, community development, food security, WASH, education and child protection [registration documentation and operating scope to verify]. BIFERD is the proposed institutional partner for receiving funding and entering project agreements, subject to confirmation of its authority, authorised signatories and funder requirements [to verify]. Bunyole Institute's own legal and registration status, ownership and educational operating permissions must be established separately [to verify].

Bunyole Institute is located in the Kabaya/Nyamirazo area of Masisi Territory, North Kivu Province, Democratic Republic of the Congo. Its precise address, site boundaries and access arrangements remain [to verify]. P530 focuses on this school as the initial PHC Community Assurance pilot. A successful model could later be adapted to other existing schools or new school developments; no further pilot sites are presently agreed.

Bunyole Institute needs to address deteriorating school facilities and related learning and safety concerns through locally agreed, evidence-based improvements, while demonstrating responsible use of resources and building a credible case for further educational investment.

Within six months, the proposed PHC pilot aims to establish an independently checkable baseline of buildings, enrolment and learning conditions; agree local roles and priorities; maintain evidence-backed action, risk and spending records; and produce a costed, phased proposal for the next stage, with a review around month three. Within twelve months, subject to funding, access and approvals, the school aims to demonstrate measurable progress on agreed priority improvements and document the results, costs and lessons learned. A reusable school-assurance model should emerge from the pilot. Completion of full rehabilitation or new construction is not yet a funded or agreed commitment.

The principal immediate constraints are insufficient funding and incomplete information for reliable school improvement planning. Pupil enrolment, buildings, land rights, staff capacity, local construction resources, security, transport and costs require a verified baseline [to verify]. The school also lacks electricity and dedicated administrative equipment [to verify]. Funding for the initial PHC Service must be distinguished from school operating income and physical improvement costs. The relative urgency of these needs, particularly safeguarding and immediate building safety, will be agreed with school leadership.

The three proposed priorities are: (1) confirm school leadership, the relationship with BIFERD, safeguarding and decision rights, then compile verified pupil, staffing, finance and premises baselines; (2) inspect the site, confirm land tenure and access, identify urgent risks and compare practical phased repair, rehabilitation and construction options; and (3) develop a costed six-month PHC plan with named action owners, evidence and financial controls, monthly reporting and a decision review around month three. All priorities should be validated with the school community.

BIFERD is the school's current supporting NGO, providing guidance, advocacy and engagement through the Education Cluster [to verify]. Basic contributions of chalk, notebooks, pens and sanitary pads are also identified, but the nature, quantities, dates and classification of those contributions require reconciliation with the school's statement that it has not received direct material support [to verify]. No substantial financial or infrastructure support is yet established. Relevant authorities, other educational organisations, churches, NGOs and potential sponsors remain prospective additional partners, with commitments [to verify].

Bunyole Institute uses paper notebooks for enrolment, attendance and other routine school records. Administration and communication rely mainly on manual processes and privately owned mobile phones. No school-owned computer or established digital record system has been identified [equipment and systems inventory to verify]. The PHC setup will retain practical paper records while gradually introducing locally maintainable registers for concerns, actions, risks, funding and evidence. Digital tools will be introduced only where power, connectivity, skills and data security make them workable.

Formal arrangements for collecting, using, storing and sharing pupil, family and staff information must be agreed before the PHC Service expands record collection [existing permissions and legal requirements to verify]. School leadership, parents or legal guardians, and pupils where appropriate to their age should be involved. Personal records will be accessible only to authorised people, with additional safeguards for identifiable photographs and stories about children. Until permissions and procedures are established, public reports will rely on aggregate, non-identifying information.

P530 proposes five complementary services: (1) PHC Community Assurance—record concerns, responsibilities, decisions, spending, evidence and outcomes with school and community participation; (2) school needs assessment and phased improvement planning—assess classrooms, roofing, WASH, furniture, accessibility, learning materials and risks; (3) evidence-based funding preparation—develop budgets and proposals for suitable sponsors and institutions; (4) community engagement and accountability—seek input and feedback from teachers, parents, pupils and local representatives; and (5) practical record-keeping and reporting—strengthen attendance, resource and project records and produce regular progress reports. Teaching remains the school's own service. Any construction requires separate competent technical assessment, authorisation and funding.

Bunyole Institute provides teaching from Monday to Saturday during the school year, approximately September to July [school calendar to verify]. Teachers and administrative staff also maintain attendance records and routine paper documentation. The working figures are approximately 100 pupils and 13 teachers; actual enrolment by grade, attendance, staffing and the monthly number of children served remain [to verify]. PHC is at the preparation stage and is not yet delivering an established monthly service.

The main unmet needs are safe, weatherproof classrooms; clean water and suitable toilets; classroom furniture and teaching materials; reliable administration and secure records; and qualified technical support for school assessments, cost estimates and improvement planning. Replacement of school equipment lost during insecurity is also required [inventory and loss details to verify]. Immediate hazards and the priorities of pupils, families and teachers will be established through consultation and assessment [to verify]. PHC operating costs, school services and capital improvement works will be budgeted separately.

Five initial areas of need are (1) safe, dry and adequate classrooms; (2) clean water, handwashing and hygienic toilets; (3) suitable textbooks, learning supplies and classroom equipment; (4) private, safe facilities for girls, including menstrual-hygiene provision; and (5) uninterrupted, inclusive education during improvements, including appropriate access for children with disabilities. Their priority ranking and the extent to which these needs are shared by pupils, parents and staff remain [to verify through appropriately conducted consultation].

The current school service pathway is: a parent or guardian approaches school administration to enrol a child; pupil information is entered into paper registers; lessons take place Monday to Saturday; teachers monitor attendance and learning; and concerns are followed up with parents or guardians. Needs beyond the school's capacity may be referred to BIFERD or local authorities; any formal referral arrangements remain [to verify]. The PHC improvement pathway will be separate: register a concern, check its evidence and urgency, agree responsibility, authorise and resource the response, monitor action, and document resolution or escalation.

The intended distinction is to combine locally led school improvement with a continuously maintained, evidence-based PHC Community Assurance record. School leaders, teachers, families, BIFERD and relevant authorities would agree priorities, responsibilities, expenditures, risks and verifiable outcomes rather than relying solely on a one-off construction or donation proposal. The pilot should also test a practical template for other schools. These are design intentions; performance, community ownership, cost-effectiveness and transferability must be demonstrated through actual implementation and evaluation.

Subject to basic PHC funding, a named local contact and access to suitable records, the minimum proposed monthly package is: a school/community progress check; updates to the action, risk and needs registers; an accountable record of funds, resources and available evidence; review of high-priority unresolved issues; engagement with relevant partners; and a concise report describing work completed, expenditure, decisions required and next steps. Regular local communication and urgent safety escalation would supplement this monthly cycle. The package is proposed, not yet an operating service. Teaching and building work remain separate funded responsibilities.

An illustrative case could begin when a parent, pupil or teacher reports a leaking or unsafe classroom. A nominated local contact records the concern; school leaders verify the condition and assess urgency, consulting qualified technical advisers if safety is in question; priorities, permissions, costs and responsibility are agreed; funds or materials are sought where necessary; and any authorised work is documented and checked. The case closes only when the outcome and supporting evidence have been reviewed, or remains open/escalated if unresolved. This describes a proposed PHC handling process, not a completed case.

Service risks include local insecurity and armed-group activity, past equipment losses, theft, unsafe or weather-damaged school buildings, potential floods or landslides, interrupted teaching and difficult site access. Other risks include child safeguarding concerns, sexual exploitation or abuse, exclusion, unsafe construction near pupils, land or permit disputes, financial misuse and exposure of confidential personal data. The present location-specific security position, likelihood and severity of hazards are [to verify]. Before PHC visits or school works, the team will agree risk owners, safe-access criteria, safeguarding and referral processes, emergency arrangements and independent technical inspection where needed.

Separate school outcomes from PHC assurance performance. Proposed school indicators include verified enrolment and attendance by month, actual teaching days versus scheduled days, improvements to identified safety/WASH conditions, and appropriately gathered feedback from pupils and families. Proposed PHC indicators include completion of planned reviews, timely updates to actions and risks, overdue high-priority concerns, evidence-backed completion of agreed tasks, completeness of financial records, participation in consultations, monthly reports issued and resources secured. Record baseline, source, owner, reporting period and realistic target for each indicator before claiming progress. PHC activity counts do not by themselves prove that educational outcomes have improved.

Subject to connectivity and appropriate record-access controls, remote PHC work may cover stakeholder coordination, action follow-up, review of available records and expenditure, coaching, reports, budgets and funding proposals. Physical presence is required for credible verification of site conditions, local consultation, asset checks and qualified structural or technical inspections, and for monitoring approved works as appropriate. The team must assess security, travel, mobile coverage and the school's lack of electricity before setting visit frequency. Photographs or calls can support evidence collection but cannot replace professional on-site safety checks.

Bunyole Institute has no dedicated school-owned smartphone, computer, printer/scanner, internet equipment or backup power for administration [current asset inventory to verify]. Staff rely on personal mobile phones and paper registers. The proposed starter equipment comprises a school smartphone, one laptop or suitable computer, affordable connectivity, essential registers and stationery, secure document storage, suitable charging or backup power, and a printer/scanner and digital backup where justified. Furniture may also be needed. Any purchase will follow a physical inventory, local cost check and agreement on custody, maintenance and access.

Project contacts are Maoneo Barakengera, Headmaster (+243 842 339 777); Blaise Rushikama, DRC Project and PHC Service Lead (+250 784 078 140; nkomeziblaise@gmail.com); Jonas Habimana, BIFERD founder and CEO (+243 990 634 880; biferutch@gmail.com); and David Winter, PHC Project Strategist (+44 7484 323 339). The school's location is Nyamirazo/Kabaya, Masisi Territory, North Kivu, DRC; its precise postal address is [to verify]. Alternative spellings of the email addresses appear in project records; correct addresses and permission to publish contact details are [to verify]. The provisional population includes about 100 pupils, 13 teachers, 25 parent-committee members, eight local-authority representatives, an accountant, two cleaners, two security officers and seven nursery caregivers, plus the Headmaster. These category figures total 158 before possible overlaps or inclusion of the Headmaster, whereas the overall figure stated for the project is 150; distinct people, roles, staffing and beneficiary totals are [to verify].

Bunyole Institute operates from existing school buildings near a community centre in the Kabaya/Nyamirazo area of Masisi Territory, North Kivu. The school occupies approximately two hectares of land [land area, ownership, boundaries and permissions to verify]. The PHC team can use BIFERD's Goma office for coordination and documentation, at Avenue Tulipier, Quartier Les Volcans, Commune de Goma [office address and use arrangements to verify]. Visits to the school will depend on transport, access, security and staff availability. School records require agreed secure storage and controlled access.

School administration equipment was destroyed or stolen during armed-group insecurity [loss details, dates and remaining assets to verify]. There is currently no functioning school-owned administration equipment identified, and staff use personal phones. Replacement priorities are a laptop, a dedicated smartphone, affordable data/connectivity, essential registers, secure paper and digital storage, practical charging equipment and a printer/scanner if justified. The exact inventory, quantities, prices and procurement order are [to verify]. BIFERD also provides guidance and school advocacy; its contributions of chalk, notebooks, pens and sanitary pads require reconciliation with the separate statement that no direct material aid has been received [to verify]. No major equipment replacement or construction funding is confirmed.

Bunyole Institute has no electricity supply [to verify]. Charging availability away from school, mobile coverage, internet availability and data costs are also [to verify]. High-capacity power banks may support essential communication if they can be recharged reliably. A generator is one possible solution, but the required capacity, safe installation, fuel access, maintenance, security and operating costs must be evaluated before purchase. PHC reporting will accommodate paper records and offline workflows until dependable power and communication arrangements are in place.

The school's pupil, financial and other paper records are kept at the Headmaster's home because school buildings do not provide sufficiently secure, weatherproof storage [current arrangements to verify]. The Headmaster and accountant control access [roles and access procedures to verify]. There is no established digital backup. Priorities are an inventory of records, named custodians, dry lockable storage, restricted access and a practical duplicate/backup process. Confidential information will not be placed on personal devices or shared services without appropriate access and protection arrangements.

No secure, weatherproof on-site facility for sensitive records is yet established [to verify]. The Headmaster keeps school records at home as an interim arrangement, with access managed by the Headmaster and accountant [current permissions to verify]. Proper lockable storage, clear handling and retrieval rules, authorised access, duplication/backup and incident procedures are required before expanding the collection of pupil, staff and financial information.

Bunyole Institute serves a rural community where walking is a principal mode of local travel. Access to the site is a practical constraint [usual travel methods, times, seasonal road conditions and security to verify]. The school and PHC team will map safe routes and the costs of transporting staff, advisers, equipment and building materials. Access requirements will inform the PHC visit schedule and the design and phasing of school improvements.

The school uses a pay-per-use local printing service rather than its own printer/scanner [service availability and costs to verify]. The PHC setup will initially use economical, secure paper-based processes, with confidential documents handled appropriately. A school-owned printer/scanner will be purchased only if usage, access, confidentiality and total cost justify it.

The proposed custodians for a PHC starter kit are Headmaster Maoneo Barakengera and school accountant Baraka Deo. The Headmaster would supervise authorised use, while the accountant would maintain the equipment/asset register and associated records. Formal responsibility, storage location, maintenance budget, permitted users, handling of pupil information, incident reporting and handover arrangements are [to agree and verify] before any purchase or transfer.

Administrative workspace needs include a desk and chairs, lockable storage for school records, paper registers, reliable communication and charging, and a laptop or printer/scanner where justified. Separate school improvement needs include weatherproof roofing and building repairs, adequate classrooms and blackboards, learning materials and safe WASH facilities, including separate toilets and privacy for girls. Precise priorities, specifications and costs remain [to verify]. Office setup, teaching provision, urgent safety measures and capital works will be assessed and funded as distinct cost categories.

The preferred operating base within six months is a secure school-based administration area accessible to teachers, pupils and authorised project staff. It needs suitable building conditions, dry and lockable records storage, basic furniture, communications and practical power/charging. If the school premises cannot meet these needs in the required period, temporary secure shared space may be arranged with an appropriate partner, potentially BIFERD [site and arrangements to agree]. A separate rented office is not presently assumed.

The school has experienced theft and destruction of equipment during insecurity [incident details to verify]. Current risks include unauthorised entry, further theft, building deterioration and rain penetration, unsafe conditions for pupils and staff, exposure of records held away from the school, and disruption due to local security conditions. Any building works must separate construction activities from children and protect teaching continuity. A location-specific security and premises assessment, appropriate safeguarding procedures, secure storage, access control and an emergency response plan must be completed before procurement or major works.

The project's principal people are Maoneo Barakengera (Headmaster: school leadership and teaching coordination), Blaise Rushikama (DRC PHC Project Lead: local coordination, planning and reporting), Jonas Habimana (BIFERD founder and CEO: institutional partnership and advocacy), David Winter (PHC Project Strategist: methodology and strategic assurance) and Baraka Deo (school accountant: cashbooks, receipts and financial records). The school also has approximately 13 teachers, two cleaners, two security officers and seven nursery caregivers, with parent-committee and local-authority participation [names, headcounts and active roles to verify]. Decision-making authority, spending approval, safeguarding accountability and the right to sign contracts will be formally assigned [to verify].

School teaching and support activities run Monday to Saturday, involving the Headmaster, approximately 13 teachers, an accountant, two cleaners, two security officers and seven nursery caregivers across differing schedules [actual weekly staffing to verify]. An initial PHC planning allowance is five hours each per week for Blaise Rushikama, Jonas Habimana and David Winter, subject to individual agreement, funding and availability [to verify]. The service plan will be based on actual working hours and clearly assigned PHC duties rather than nominal staff numbers.

The team brings together school leadership and teaching, school accounting and record-keeping, humanitarian programme coordination and community engagement, BIFERD's education-sector relationships, and PHC planning and assurance expertise. Relevant contributors include the Headmaster and teachers, accountant Baraka Deo, local PHC lead Blaise Rushikama, BIFERD's Jonas Habimana and strategist David Winter. Individual qualifications, experience and time available for project activities are [to verify]. Qualified building/structural, safeguarding, counselling, healthcare referral and IT specialists have not yet been appointed to this project [to verify].

The most important capacity gaps to assess are reliable project and financial controls; evidence collection and donor reporting; child safeguarding and safe referral procedures; digital and confidential information management; sponsor development and credible funding proposals; and qualified technical advice for building condition, WASH, design and construction costs. A skills-and-availability review will distinguish training needs from tasks requiring external qualified professionals [to verify].

Training priorities include child safeguarding and protection, prevention of sexual exploitation, abuse and harassment (PSEAH), inclusive teaching, literacy and numeracy support, protection of pupil and family information, evidence and financial reporting, and development of funding proposals. A skills assessment will establish which staff need which training [to verify]. Training will be proportionate to actual duties, local languages and available resources, with competent specialists for subjects requiring professional expertise.

Volunteer recruitment and management procedures will be developed with the Headmaster and BIFERD, with PHC strategic support where agreed. The framework will cover suitable identity and reference checks, clear role descriptions, written conduct and confidentiality expectations, child safeguarding/PSEAH induction, supervision, attendance and performance records, and a safe mechanism for reporting misconduct. Existing volunteer arrangements, formal approvals and responsibilities remain [to verify]. No volunteer will undertake unsupervised child-contact, finance or confidential-record duties without suitable checks and safeguards.

A formally appointed school safeguarding lead and approved safeguarding policy are not yet established [to verify]. Headmaster Maoneo Barakengera is a possible school safeguarding focal person, subject to suitability, acceptance, training and formal designation. Blaise Rushikama may coordinate related PHC procedures, and BIFERD will be responsible for matters within its own agreed remit. A confidential alternative reporting channel is essential for complaints concerning any appointed focal person. Written child-protection and PSEAH rules, response/referral arrangements and clear accountability must be approved before the safeguarding system is described as operational.

The proposed communication structure comprises a brief weekly school review led by the Headmaster, local PHC coordination by Blaise Rushikama, and a monthly PHC review bringing together school updates, accountant's records, BIFERD input and strategic PHC advice as appropriate. Meeting frequency, participants, chairing, language, record keeping and decision rights remain [to agree and verify]. Each review will record actions, risks, evidence, spending, decisions, owners and deadlines. Phone and messaging may support coordination; sensitive safeguarding information must use a restricted and safe channel.

Workload and coordination risks include overloading teachers, unclear boundaries between school and PHC responsibilities, dependence on a small number of people, conflicting donor and community expectations, and disagreement about spending or building priorities. No specific active dispute is established [to verify]. Controls will include clear role descriptions, realistic time commitments, spending and decision authority, deputy cover, an accessible route for concerns and routine review of unresolved differences.

If funding permits, the first three staffing or professional-service priorities are: (1) qualified teaching or learning support to sustain literacy, numeracy and continuity; (2) local PHC coordination and administration for action, finance and evidence records; and (3) qualified infrastructure/building advice to assess safety and develop costed options. These are priority functions, not approved full-time appointments. Existing staffing, workload, costs, financing restrictions and the case for part-time or consultancy support remain [to verify].

Pupil fees paid by families are the school's regular cash income. No recurring external grants, donations, sales or other cash revenue are currently established [income sources and recent cashbooks to verify]. Monthly fee income varies with enrolment and families' ability to pay; the actual monthly average remains [to verify]. Any BIFERD educational or hygiene supplies will be accounted for as in-kind contributions, not school cash revenue [items and values to verify]. Existing school fees are needed to support core teaching and cannot be assumed available for PHC fees or capital works without an agreed school budget.

School operating costs include teaching and support staff payments, upkeep of premises, communications, transport, registers and stationery, learning materials, administration and security [monthly amounts and actual categories to verify]. The lack of school electricity means that any new generator, batteries, charging or connectivity would also introduce capital and running expenses [to verify]. The Headmaster and accountant will establish current monthly averages from available records. School operations, PHC Service costs and equipment, repairs or construction will be shown as separate budgets.

Unpredictable needs may include urgent roof or building repairs, temporary teaching accommodation, theft or loss of equipment, medical or safeguarding incidents, disruption of site access, exceptional transport and sanitation or records-protection measures. School equipment has previously been lost during insecurity [incident and financial effect to verify]. The school and PHC team will assess the likelihood, severity and local response cost of these risks before setting a contingency. No evidence-based emergency reserve amount has yet been established.

Ten initial spending priorities for review are: (1) teaching and support-staff payments; (2) textbooks, chalk and other learning materials; (3) desks, blackboards and classroom equipment; (4) roof and building maintenance; (5) clean water, toilets and menstrual-hygiene needs; (6) airtime and data; (7) transport; (8) paper records, printing and office supplies; (9) security and safeguarding; and (10) qualified technical services or approved building improvements. The actual amounts and historical ranking are [to verify from school financial records]. BIFERD in-kind support, PHC fees and major capital expenditure will be recorded separately.

Bunyole Institute maintains school cashbooks and receipts under Headmaster Maoneo Barakengera and accountant Baraka Deo. The paper records are kept at the Headmaster's home [completeness, custody and review process to verify]. The PHC system will link income and spending entries to available evidence, record exceptions clearly, and where practical separate payment authorisation, execution, bookkeeping and checking. The use of bank statements or mobile-money records and the adequacy of current transaction controls are [to verify].

The school currently uses cash transactions, receipts and cashbook records and intends to open an account in its own name [banking arrangements and legal capacity to verify]. An interim, formally authorised funding account through BIFERD or another suitable institutional partner may be considered only with that organisation's approval, funder consent and explicit project financial controls. No such interim account has yet been agreed. Each payment route must identify authorisers, payers, record keepers and independent reviewers, with supporting records. Personal accounts will not be used without explicit authorisation and suitable safeguards.

The minimum immediately useful funding amount is [to verify through the PHC Proposal and an agreed school-needs assessment]. The initial PHC readiness and six-month service costs will be established from a defined scope; the former £10,000 placeholder has been superseded and the revised fee is [to confirm]. Any urgent school needs will be separately costed rather than included without evidence in the PHC Service fee.

The school's 12-month funding requirement is [to verify through a costed budget]. Separate budgets will cover existing school operations, the initial six-month PHC Service, priority repairs and equipment, and any phased construction. A forward-funding review is planned around month three. The former £10,000 PHC fee placeholder is superseded. An earlier construction estimate of 200,000–300,000 remains provisional, with currency, assumptions, scope and local costs [to verify].

No formal external funding applications or donor grants to the school have been identified to date [previous applications and informal approaches to verify with school leadership and financial records]. BIFERD advocacy or occasional supplies do not constitute a cash grant to the school. The PHC pilot will support a structured funding case based on a verified baseline, credible budget, clear responsibilities and staged improvement options. Any prior promises, restrictions or pending applications will be documented [to verify].

Donor assurance will be based on approved budgets, defined payment authority, cashbooks and receipts, an in-kind contributions register, evidence-backed action and risk records, suitable site verification and monthly reports showing both progress and unresolved issues. The proposed division of work is: the Headmaster provides weekly school updates; accountant Baraka Deo maintains financial records; Blaise Rushikama compiles monthly PHC reports; Jonas Habimana reviews BIFERD-related responsibilities; and David Winter supports strategic review. The allocation of these duties and independent checking arrangements are [to agree and verify]. Sponsor-specific reporting will follow the agreed terms; documentary records alone are not proof that funds are secure or outcomes achieved.

Proposed audiences: school leadership, staff, pupils and families; community representatives and relevant education authorities; prospective PHC sponsors and future building funders; and organisations interested in adapting the school assurance template. Specific contacts remain to be confirmed.

Current school communication channels are unverified. Proposed channels are direct local discussions, a practical phone or messaging channel for coordination, and short email updates for sponsors, subject to access and preferences.

School photographs were shared in the earlier conversation; their dates, context and permissions for publication need confirmation. The project has a working title. Availability and approved use of a logo, video, testimonials or other materials remain to be checked.

Help fund an initial six months of PHC Service at Bunyole Institute so school priorities, spending and building options can be assessed openly before further funding decisions.

We propose to work with the school and families to agree practical improvements, track what happens and explain the decisions, while longer-term funding is explored.

No enquiry history is available. Suggested questions and draft answers: Why PHC first? To establish needs and support accountable decisions. Does initial sponsorship build the school? Construction needs separate scope and funding. When will costs be clearer? A review is targeted around month three, subject to information. What if the plan is not viable? Review the evidence and agree whether to change direction, pause or stop.

No verified contact list or count has been supplied. Compile an appropriately managed list of local decision-makers, community contacts, prospective sponsors and technical advisers, showing each relationship and agreed next action.

Proposed priorities: committed school leadership and community participation; relevant education and land authorities; locally capable design and construction advisers; and a sponsor for the initial PHC phase. Low-cost or 3D-printing providers may be consulted early, but suitability, availability and savings are unverified.

Proposed: an initial school and community priorities meeting, followed by a review around month three and a six-month learning and funding discussion. Timing and format should suit the school calendar, local access and resources; no events are booked.

Proposed monthly public summary: activities completed, aggregate school indicators where verified, spending totals, outstanding issues and next decisions. Use photographs only with appropriate permission and context; keep sensitive personal information and detailed financial evidence in controlled records for authorised review.