OrganizationVerified record

Foundation Classroom Partner

School

Gainesville, Florida

This prototype school profile demonstrates how an institution can participate in learning pilots while curriculum approval remains separate.

AcademyStudentsCurriculum

Record Facts

What is known, claimed, or pending.

Each fact carries its own status. A verified identity does not automatically verify every role, contribution, affiliation, or statement on the profile.

Organization

Verified

School partnership reviewed

Pilot role

Verified

Academy learning pilot

Curriculum adoption

Verified

No institutional adoption claimed

Evidence Drawer

Visible support, source status, and constitutional authority.

Academy pilot lesson notes

Verified

Lesson notes and reflections support participation in a limited learning pilot.

Source: Academy Review Team
Authority status: Research and deliberation

No curriculum adoption claim

Verified

Record explicitly limits participation to pilot feedback rather than institutional adoption.

Source: Curriculum guardrail review
Authority status: Foundational

Constitutional Trace

Principle: Education cultivates discernment rather than conformity
Authority: SCS-001 Article V
Application: Pilot participation does not imply endorsement of every draft curriculum claim.

Correction and Review

A person or organization represented here may request correction, submit evidence, challenge a status, or ask for human review. Requests now route into the Directory intake queue before any public fact, affiliation, or trust status changes.

Current correction path

Available

Initial human review within 7 civic working days

1
Name the claim
Identify the exact fact, status, affiliation, or contribution being challenged.
2
Attach evidence
Provide a source, witness note, record, or explanation that supports the correction.
3
Route to review
A review owner checks the request against Directory guardrails before changing the public record.

Request correction Request review

Intake is saved locally in this browser until server storage and reviewer accounts are added.

Reviewer Workflow

Intake requirements and reviewer checkpoints.

The demo now shows what reviewers need before a profile changes and which guardrails keep the decision narrow, evidenced, and correctable.

Evidence intake checklist

Affected record field

Required

Name the exact profile claim, evidence item, affiliation, or status being challenged.

Corrected statement

Required

State the replacement language or explain why the current statement should be removed.

Supporting evidence

Required

Attach a document, source note, meeting record, direct attestation, or explanation of first-hand knowledge.

Contact and consent

Required

Provide a contact path for follow-up and confirm the request may be reviewed by the assigned human steward.

Urgency explanation

Recommended

Explain whether the claim creates immediate reputational, safety, or operational harm.

Reviewer decision checkpoints

Purpose limitation

Is the claim being reviewed only for the limited Directory purpose stated on the record?

Guardrail: Trust is purpose-specific and must not become a general personal worth score.

Evidence boundary

Does the proposed status match the evidence currently visible to reviewers?

Guardrail: Claims should not outrun evidence, enthusiasm, relationship, or reputation.

Correction right

Has the affected person, organization, or chapter been given a clear path to correct or contextualize the record?

Guardrail: Directory records remain reviewable and open to correction.

Authority disclosure

Is the source authority marked as foundational, draft for ratification, or research and deliberation?

Guardrail: The platform must distinguish moral authority, draft governance language, and research claims.

Decision Log

Review history and outcome policy.

Reviewer decisions become part of the profile record so future stewards can see what changed, who owned the review, and what authority was actually granted.

Outcome policy

Education partner records must separate pilot participation from curriculum adoption, endorsement, or institutional policy claims.

Pilot participation review

July 5, 2026

Academy Review Team

Verified pilot evidence while preserving no-adoption guardrail.

Chapter Affiliation

Affiliation is visible, limited, and separately reviewable.

Campus Stewardship Circle

Self-reported

Academy pilot relationship is reviewed; chapter affiliation remains descriptive, not governing.

Directory inclusion is not endorsement. Trust status is purpose-specific, evidence-linked, reviewable, and open to correction.