A Private Division of The San Scribe Pty Ltd
A digital backbone for
SAFE-PR.
Two tracks, incrementally scoped: a shared‑measurement backbone for MOSAIC's coordination team, and a survivor‑facing tool that helps someone acquire a Protection Order without her account getting lost in translation along the way.
hello@thesanscribe.com
What the numbers already tell us
and what they don't yet.
Grounded in the SAFE-PR Practitioner Booklet (2025), the live SAFE-PR reporting dashboard, and independent UCT/GWU research into Protection Order implementation (Backe, Waldman & Moult).
157 members, 271 activities — and one striking gap
- Soshanguve carries the most members (49) but middling activity (39) — Albertinia has the fewest members (12) yet the most logged activity (63). Membership size and platform activity don't move together.
- "Department of Justice / Court" appears exactly once across all 157 members. SAPS presence is fragmented across six separate station entries, roughly 7–8 officers platform-wide.
- MOSAIC's own organisation is entered three different ways in the same dataset — the cleanest evidence yet that shared measurement has no common backbone.
The disparities are already documented
- Protection order outcomes vary by paperwork, by process, and by which magistrate is on the bench — not by the severity of what a survivor experienced.
- As one police officer put it, the institutions meant to work together simply "don't talk to one another."
- Affidavits scribed by clerks or NGO staff can drift toward generic stock phrases, stripping out the specificity a magistrate needs to see.
"Access to justice should not be determined by geography or location."Research reflection, SAFE-PR conference presentation
The relational model (top two tiers) is mature and well-documented in the SAFE Book. The tooling layer beneath it has never been resourced beyond spreadsheets and messaging apps.
Two problems,
not one.
Distilled from the booklet, the research, and the live data above. Kept separate on purpose — they have different owners, different risk profiles, and different urgency.
MOSAIC can't see its own platform in real time
- Who: MOSAIC's backbone team and SAFE Platform coordinators across 7 sites.
- Undesired effect: Shared measurement — one of five non-negotiable conditions of the model — is manual, retrospective, and site-siloed.
- Why now: the booklet just launched; the current spreadsheet has visibly reached its ceiling.
A survivor's own words rarely survive the process
- Who: Walk-in clients at any SAFE-affiliated centre, at the point of first disclosure.
- Undesired effect: her account is scribed into stock legal phrases, then judged against a magistrate's unwritten preferences — and can be thrown out on a technicality with no memory of what worked last time.
- Why now: almost no court or SAPS presence exists inside the SAFE Platforms themselves (per the live data) — so nothing upstream is fixing this without deliberate design.
Two tracks,
one platform.
Built to reinforce MOSAIC's role as backbone — not to centralise power away from the partner organisations who do the frontline work.
- WhatsApp — the interface practitioners and clients already use daily, no new app to learn.
- Vercel — hosts the dashboard, fast and reliable with no server to manage.
- A managed database — one secure, backed-up home for referral and stakeholder data.
- Resend — reliable email digests to coordinators and funders, no manual compiling.
- GitHub — every change tracked and reviewable, the same discipline SAFE-PR asks of referrals.
Replaces the spreadsheet with a live view
A single source of truth for referrals, stakeholders and activity across all 7 platforms — the shared-measurement condition, finally running on real infrastructure instead of a manually reconciled sheet.
Captures her account before a clerk's stock phrases do
A guided, multilingual disclosure tool offered at any walk-in centre — structuring what a magistrate needs to see without stripping out the specificity that keeps a survivor's story her own.
Scoped incrementally,
on purpose.
Each phase stands on its own and earns the next. Track B runs on a slower, governance-gated clock alongside Track A — it never blocks it, and it's never blocked by it.
Phase 0 — Foundation
Replace the spreadsheet with a secure database and a live backbone dashboard, for MOSAIC's team only. Data protection & POPIA policy signed off before anything else moves.
Track ATrack B discovery & governance gate
Map the walk-in disclosure experience in detail across 2–3 centres. Open the conversation on whether DOJCD or legal input is needed before anything touches an actual affidavit.
Track BPhase 1 — MVP referral pathway
Digitise the SAFE Referral Form for 1–2 pilot platforms. WhatsApp-based intake, follow-through tracking, Resend digests for coordinators.
Track ATrack B pilot — disclosure capture tool
A guided, multilingual intake offered at one walk-in centre, in the survivor's own words, structured for magistrate legibility without narrative homogenisation.
Track BPhase 2 — Practitioner rollout
Extend to the remaining platforms, site by site. Live stakeholder network map, shared calendar, offline-friendly capture for low-connectivity sites.
Track APhase 3 — Shared measurement at scale
Real-time funder-facing dashboards; cross-site disparity analysis; a foundation other MOSAIC collectives could reuse.
Track AExactly what gets built.
Every row below is scoped to a single phase — nothing here assumes approval of a later one.
| # | Deliverable | What it does for MOSAIC | Phase | Timeline | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Secure referral & stakeholder database | Single source of truth, replacing the spreadsheet | Phase 0 | Weeks 1–4 | To build |
| 2 | MOSAIC backbone dashboard | Live view of referrals and activity across 7 platforms | Phase 0 | Weeks 1–4 | To build |
| 3 | POPIA / data protection policy | Sign-off before any referral data is digitised | Phase 0 | Weeks 1–4 | To build |
| 4 | Walk-in disclosure journey mapping | Detailed picture of what "indifference" looks like moment to moment | Track B | Weeks 1–6 | Governance gate |
| 5 | WhatsApp referral intake + status nudges | Replaces paper SAFE Referral Form for pilot sites | Phase 1 | Weeks 5–12 | Planned |
| 6 | Resend coordinator digests | No more manually compiled monthly reports | Phase 1 | Weeks 5–12 | Planned |
| 7 | Guided multilingual disclosure capture | Captures a survivor's own words before scribing occurs | Track B | Months 3–5 | Governance gate |
| 8 | Live stakeholder network map | Digitises Section 9 of the SAFE Book | Phase 2 | Months 4–8 | Planned |
| 9 | Shared calendar | Replaces the static annual calendar | Phase 2 | Months 4–8 | Planned |
| 10 | Funder-facing impact dashboards | Real-time evidence base instead of retrospective reports | Phase 3 | Months 9+ | Later |
Start where it proves itself.
Scale as it earns trust.
Each phase is priced from real hours at a fixed rate, not from what the budget might bear — this is the floor, and scope flexes to fit MOSAIC's budget rather than the rate moving. Each phase is a standalone commitment; nothing obligates MOSAIC to the next.
- Secure database + backbone dashboard
- POPIA / data protection sign-off
- One coordinator onboarded
- WhatsApp referral intake
- Follow-through tracking
- Resend coordinator digests
- Walk-in disclosure journey mapping, 2–3 centres
- Governance & legal-input scoping
- Affidavit-facing build (later, gated)
If MOSAIC's available budget sits below these figures, we'd rather descope what Phase 0 covers than discount the rate — talk to us before the meeting and we'll scope a version that fits.
How we work together.
A credible proposal names its own risks and ownership terms before a donor does.
MOSAIC owns all referral, stakeholder, and survivor data, and the platform itself. San Systems builds and maintains under an agreed support arrangement — nothing is locked to a vendor.
Data protection design happens in Phase 0, before any pilot goes live — not retrofitted after the fact.
No feature that shapes or touches an actual affidavit proceeds without a legal/DOJCD-input checkpoint. This is a hard gate, not a formality.
Survivor and referral data are treated as confidential by default, in line with the SAFE Code of Conduct's own standards.
50% upfront on Phase 0 sign-off, 50% on completion. Each phase invoiced and delivered independently.
R2,500/month retainer for ongoing maintenance, support, and minor enhancements. Full handover documentation provided if MOSAIC ever chooses to self-manage.
When you're ready,
this is how we begin.
This proposal is valid for 30 days from the date of issue.
Three things unlock Phase 0
- One pilot site identified, with a named coordinator as champion
- Sign-off on the data protection approach before any referral data is digitised
- A short working session to map the current referral pathway, site by site
By signing below, both parties agree to the phased scope outlined in this proposal. Each phase is invoiced and delivered independently.
Title: ____________________
Date: ____________________
The San Scribe Pty Ltd
Date: ____________________
This proposal covers the scope but can't cover everything. Reach out directly with anything unclear.
- Email: deon@thesanscribe.com
- Website: thesanscribe.com