Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
93 lines (71 loc) · 4.41 KB

File metadata and controls

93 lines (71 loc) · 4.41 KB

Digital Public Goods Standard — conformance note

This note maps constituent-reconciler against the nine indicators of the Digital Public Goods Standard. It is a self-assessment, not a registry submission or an endorsement. Each indicator is marked met, partial, or planned, with the honest reason. The note is regenerated on release alongside the responsible-tech audits.

Last verified: 2026-06-27. Recheck cadence: per release, or on a DPG Standard revision.

1. Relevance to Sustainable Development Goals

Met. The tool serves human-services nonprofits, supporting SDG 1 (no poverty), SDG 10 (reduced inequalities), and SDG 16 (access to justice and effective institutions) by reducing the administrative burden that takes staff time away from clients. The DV policy pack supports SDG 5 (gender equality) by giving survivor-serving organizations a tool that fits VAWA and FVPSA confidentiality.

2. Use of an approved open license

Met. Apache-2.0, an OSI-approved license on the DPG approved list. See LICENSE.

3. Clear ownership

Met. Ownership is recorded in pyproject.toml (author) and the repository metadata. The project is a single public repository under one maintainer.

4. Platform independence

Met. Pure Python (3.12+) with one heavy dependency (Splink, itself open). No proprietary runtime, no mandatory cloud service. The optional connectors target open or widely available systems (CiviCRM is open source; Salesforce is optional). The cloud extraction seam is optional and off by default. A one-command Docker image (Dockerfile) runs the tool anywhere Docker runs.

5. Documentation

Met. README.md for practitioners, CLAUDE.md as the build spec, docs/ROADMAP.md, MADR architecture decisions in docs/adr/, a committed eval report, and this conformance note. Module and public-API docstrings throughout.

6. Mechanism for extracting non-PII data

Met. The DV policy pack emits an aggregate, non-identifying summary (aggregate_summary.json) with small-cell suppression, designed precisely so a non-PII extract can be shared for reporting. Resolved records export to open formats (CSV) that any tool can read.

7. Adherence to privacy and applicable laws

Met, with the standard reference-implementation caveat. The DV pack encodes VAWA and FVPSA confidentiality invariants (no PII egress, consent-gated export, aggregate suppressed sharing) as merge-blocking tests, grounded in primary statutory and NNEDV sources cited in docs/RESPONSIBLE-TECH-AUDITS.md. It is a reference implementation, not legal advice; an adopting organization needs its own review. No real personal data is in the repository; all fixtures are seeded synthetic.

8. Adherence to standards and best practices

Met. The project holds a consistent engineering bar: ruff, mypy --strict, and pytest as merge-blocking CI gates; a committed, regenerated eval report with Wilson confidence intervals; declared config, connector, and report schema versions (reconcile schema); conventional commits and a Keep a Changelog history. Actions are SHA-pinned; secret, dependency, SAST, workflow, and container scans run in CI; the release workflow generates a CycloneDX SBOM and keyless build-provenance attestation. It has not yet been exercised on a real v* tag, which is reported as an operational evidence gap rather than a missing implementation.

9. Do no harm by design

Met. The asymmetry of harm drives the design: the system never auto-merges on uncertainty and routes every ambiguous decision to a person, because a false merge can corrupt or expose a record irreversibly. Consent is a technical invariant, not a checkbox. The DV pack makes data egress structurally impossible under that mode. Disaggregated synthetic results now quantify the documented name/address risk classes in docs/audits/bias-report.md, including the transliterated-name and non-Western-order misses. The limits of that small fixture and of small-cell suppression against cross-tabulation are documented in docs/RESPONSIBLE-TECH-AUDITS.md rather than omitted.

Summary

All nine indicators are met at the reference-implementation level. The honest qualifications: indicator 7 carries the not-legal-advice caveat every tool in this space must, and indicator 8's release path still needs its first real-tag exercise. Nothing here is a substitute for an organization's own review or a formal DPG registry assessment.