Impact Accountability Framework
This page serves as the impact accountability framework for SisterShield — a structured mapping of every project goal, design decision, and technical deliverable to measurable evidence. Each Technovation Girls rubric category is connected to specific SisterShield outcomes, with links to the documentation pages where that evidence lives.
Rubric Category Overview
| Rubric Category | Weight | Primary Evidence Pages | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ideation | High | Motivation & Need, Global Framework | TODO |
| User Experience | High | User Feedback Loops, Design for Target Audience, Design Decisions | TODO |
| Technical | High | Visual Novel Strategy, Design Decisions, Technical Docs | TODO |
| Growth & Perseverance | Medium | Growth & Perseverance | TODO |
| Pitch | Medium | Submission Assets | TODO |
| Potential Impact | High | Global Framework, Motivation & Need | TODO |
| Entrepreneurship (Senior) | Medium | Marketing & Feedback, Financial Sustainability | TODO |
Ideation
Level 5 Criteria: The team clearly identifies a problem in their community, gathers evidence to confirm the problem exists, and designs a solution that directly addresses the root cause.
| Evidence Item | SisterShield Proof | Doc Reference | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Problem identification | TF-VAWG is a documented, growing global problem | Motivation & Need | TODO: Fill evidence table |
| Community evidence | Evidence table with verified sources | Motivation & Need | TODO: Complete table |
| User personas | Primary and secondary personas from community research | Motivation & Need | TODO: Complete personas |
| Root cause connection | Solution addresses education gap, not just symptoms | Motivation & Need | TODO |
| SDG alignment | Mapped to SDG 5 and SDG 16 with specific targets | Global Framework | Done |
Scoring Strategy
Emphasize the depth of community research and the directness of the connection between the problem (TF-VAWG education gap) and the solution (interactive, trauma-informed learning). Show that the solution was designed in response to evidence, not the other way around.
Evidence Readiness Checklist
- Evidence table has verified sources with links (more sources strengthen the case)
- Community need statement is specific and evidence-backed
- Primary persona is based on real research, not assumptions
- SDG mapping includes specific targets, not just goal numbers
- Local-to-global narrative bridge is complete
User Experience
Level 5 Criteria: The app is designed for the target audience, includes iterative user feedback loops with documented changes, demonstrates thoughtful UX decisions, and avoids causing harm.
| Evidence Item | SisterShield Proof | Doc Reference | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Target audience design | Trauma-informed principles, calm color system, Quick Exit | Design for Target Audience | Done |
| Iterative feedback loops | Documented testing cycles with evidence-based UI changes | User Feedback Loops | TODO: Complete testing cycles |
| UI Change Justifications | ”Based on Cycle X…” format with data | User Feedback Loops | TODO: Complete justifications |
| Avoid Harm | Comprehensive checklist applied to every screen | Design for Target Audience | Done |
| Accessibility | WCAG AA compliance, keyboard nav, ARIA labels | Design for Target Audience | TODO: Verify all checks pass |
Scoring Strategy
This is likely SisterShield’s strongest category. Emphasize: (1) the depth of trauma-informed design thinking, (2) the evolution from brand-heavy to priority-heavy purple as evidence of iteration, (3) the Quick Exit feature as a UX innovation specific to the target audience, and (4) the systematic Avoid Harm checklist.
Evidence Readiness Checklist
- Testing cycles documented with dates, participants, tasks, findings (recommended: 2-3 for strong evidence)
- Each cycle has UI Change Justifications with the standard format
- Before/after screenshots for each major UI change
- Avoid Harm checklist completed (all items checked or explained)
- Accessibility audit results included
- Quick Exit validated with users (discoverability test)
Technical
Level 5 Criteria: The app demonstrates full functionality, uses appropriate technology, shows technical depth, and the code is well-organized.
| Evidence Item | SisterShield Proof | Doc Reference | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full functionality | All 8 MVP phases complete, all user flows working | Technical Docs | Done |
| Appropriate tech choices | Next.js 14, Prisma, PostgreSQL, NextAuth with rationale | Technical Docs (Architecture) | TODO |
| AI integration | LLM course generation, DALL-E 3, auto-translation | Technical Docs (AI) | TODO |
| Twine integration | Upload, parse, store, review, build (inject tracking), play | Visual Novel Strategy | Done |
| Semantic token system | Scalable design system with semantic naming | Design Decisions | TODO |
| i18n architecture | Full bilingual support with locale helpers | Technical Docs | Done |
| Code organization | Clear project structure, separation of concerns | Technical Docs (Architecture) | Done |
Scoring Strategy
Highlight the breadth and depth of the technical implementation: AI integration, Twine parsing/injection, i18n, semantic tokens, role-based access, and the tracking system. The technical video should walk through architecture, AI safety, semantic tokens, and i18n in 2 minutes.
Evidence Readiness Checklist
- All 8 MVP phases verified working
- Technical video script prepared (architecture, AI, design system, i18n)
- Code repository is clean, well-commented, and has a clear README
- AI integration has safety guardrails documented
- Semantic token architecture is documented with examples
Growth & Perseverance
Level 5 Criteria: Clear evidence of challenges encountered, how they were addressed, what was learned, and how the developer grew throughout the project.
| Evidence Item | SisterShield Proof | Doc Reference | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Before/After evolutions | Documented design evolutions with evidence (recommended: 3+) | Growth & Perseverance | TODO: Complete entries |
| Challenge & Ambiguity Log | Non-trivial challenges with alternatives and resolutions (recommended: 3+) | Growth & Perseverance | TODO: Complete entries |
| Technical growth | Skill progression table with evidence | Growth & Perseverance | TODO |
| Solo narrative | Personal story of persistence and self-directed learning | Growth & Perseverance | TODO |
Scoring Strategy
Be authentic and specific. Judges can tell the difference between generic challenge descriptions and real struggles. Describe moments of genuine difficulty, the reasoning behind decisions, and transferable insights. Link to commits and code where possible.
Evidence Readiness Checklist
- Before/After evolutions with screenshots or descriptions (recommended: 3+)
- Challenge Log entries with genuine, non-trivial challenges (recommended: 3+)
- Technical growth table filled with honest self-assessment
- Solo narrative written with personal detail and reflection
- Links to specific commits, files, or code for each claim
Pitch
Level 5 Criteria: Clear, compelling presentation of the problem, solution, and impact. Engaging delivery with supporting visuals.
| Evidence Item | SisterShield Proof | Doc Reference | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pitch video | Storyboarded, rehearsed, timed | Submission Assets | TODO |
| Demo video | 8-scene storyboard covering all major features | Submission Assets | TODO |
| Technical video | 4-section talking points (architecture, AI, design, i18n) | Submission Assets | TODO |
Scoring Strategy
The pitch should lead with the problem (TF-VAWG statistics), show the human impact (persona story), and demonstrate the solution (Quick Exit, interactive course, AI generation). End with the global vision (SDG alignment, scalability).
Evidence Readiness Checklist
- Pitch video recorded, under time limit, with clear audio
- Demo video covers all 8 storyboard scenes
- Technical video covers all 4 talking points within time limit
- All videos reviewed for quality and clarity
Potential Impact
Level 5 Criteria: The solution has the potential to create meaningful, lasting impact on the target community and beyond.
| Evidence Item | SisterShield Proof | Doc Reference | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| SDG alignment | Direct mapping to SDG 5 and 16 targets | Global Framework | Done |
| Scalability | i18n architecture + AI content generation = multi-region potential | Global Framework | Done |
| Global Safety Footer | Internationally credible resources always accessible | Global Framework | Done |
| Measurable outcomes | Learning completion rates, skill assessment, user safety perceptions | TODO | TODO |
Evidence Readiness Checklist
- SDG mapping is specific (targets, not just goals)
- Local-to-global narrative is compelling and evidence-backed
- Global Safety Footer is verified with active links
- Impact metrics are defined (even if data collection is in progress)
Entrepreneurship (Senior Division)
Level 5 Criteria: A viable business/sustainability plan with marketing strategy informed by user feedback, cost structure and revenue streams, and growth pathway.
| Evidence Item | SisterShield Proof | Doc Reference | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marketing plan | Channel experiments with results | Marketing & Feedback | TODO |
| Acquisition funnel | 6-stage funnel with metrics | Marketing & Feedback | TODO |
| Financial sustainability | Revenue model, cost structure, revenue streams | Financial Sustainability | TODO |
| Business Canvas | Problem, solution, value proposition, advisor input, market research | Financial Sustainability | TODO |
| Advisor feedback | Business professional advice and what changed | Marketing & Feedback | TODO |
| UX-marketing link | UI changes driven by marketing insights | Marketing & Feedback | TODO |
| Growth pathway | Korea launch to international expansion | Financial Sustainability | TODO |
Evidence Readiness Checklist
- Marketing channel experiments documented with real data (recommended: 2+)
- Acquisition funnel has placeholder or real metrics
- Revenue model is realistic for a social impact ed-tech platform
- Cost structure includes hosting, AI API, and maintenance
- Growth narrative connects local launch to global expansion
- UX changes linked to marketing data
- Business Canvas completed (problem, solution, value proposition, market research)
- Advisor/business professional feedback documented with what changed
Cross-Reference Summary
For quick navigation, here is every rubric category linked to its primary and secondary documentation:
| Category | Primary Page | Secondary Pages |
|---|---|---|
| Ideation | Motivation & Need | Global Framework |
| User Experience | User Feedback Loops | Design for Target Audience, Design Decisions |
| Technical | Technical Docs | Visual Novel Strategy, Design Decisions |
| Growth & Perseverance | Growth & Perseverance | Design Decisions |
| Pitch | Submission Assets | All pages (for content reference) |
| Potential Impact | Global Framework | Motivation & Need |
| Entrepreneurship | Marketing | Financial Sustainability |