CovCare V6.0 / Enterprise reference
Service blueprints
Eight proposed workflows across participant, visible interface, staff, coordination, systems, information, approvals and recovery lanes.
Proposed design, not organizational approval or operational evidence. Public fictional demonstrations only; no sensitive information, live submissions or authority changes.
WF-001 · From Need to Support
Trigger: Choose whether to share a selected goal and barrier. Outcome: A need moves toward reviewed support, not unrestricted data sharing.
Open guided workflow| Lane | Youth expresses a need | Central reviews | Navigator is assigned | Site checks suitability | Partner is reviewed | Support is fulfilled | Evidence is verified | Youth reviews progress |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participant | Choose whether to share a selected goal and barrier. | Assess the consented request using an approved human process. | Verify a current scoped recipient. | Validate local capacity; do not promise fictional availability. | Check current vetting before sharing a task. | Deliver only an authorized service under required supervision. | Separate offered support from actual delivery. | Offer a milestone; youth chooses whether the goal is complete. |
| Visible | Multi-party storyboard: youth expresses a need. This is not an operational queue. | Multi-party storyboard: central reviews. This is not an operational queue. | Multi-party storyboard: navigator is assigned. This is not an operational queue. | Multi-party storyboard: site checks suitability. This is not an operational queue. | Multi-party storyboard: partner is reviewed. This is not an operational queue. | Multi-party storyboard: support is fulfilled. This is not an operational queue. | Multi-party storyboard: evidence is verified. This is not an operational queue. | Multi-party storyboard: youth reviews progress. This is not an operational queue. |
| Staff | Young person | Central coordinator | Central coordinator | Site staff | CHI partner coordinator | Approved partner | Independent verifier | Young person |
| Coordination | Continue to central reviews after the stated approval. | Continue to navigator is assigned after the stated approval. | Continue to site checks suitability after the stated approval. | Continue to partner is reviewed after the stated approval. | Continue to support is fulfilled after the stated approval. | Continue to evidence is verified after the stated approval. | Continue to youth reviews progress after the stated approval. | Review the outcome, limit retention and close the proposed workflow. |
| Systems | Future reviewed scoped consent, assignment and audit services; public navigation invokes none. | Future reviewed scoped consent, assignment and audit services; public navigation invokes none. | Future reviewed scoped consent, assignment and audit services; public navigation invokes none. | Future reviewed scoped consent, assignment and audit services; public navigation invokes none. | Future reviewed scoped consent, assignment and audit services; public navigation invokes none. | Future reviewed scoped consent, assignment and audit services; public navigation invokes none. | Future reviewed scoped consent, assignment and audit services; public navigation invokes none. | Future reviewed scoped consent, assignment and audit services; public navigation invokes none. |
| Information | Only the explicitly selected goal or minimum necessary task summary; never private reflections. | Only the explicitly selected goal or minimum necessary task summary; never private reflections. | Only the explicitly selected goal or minimum necessary task summary; never private reflections. | Limited referral | De-identified need until approved | Minimum delivery detail | Task evidence | Consented goal update |
| Gate | Explicit youth consent | Trust scope and safeguarding policy | Verified assignment | Site scope and consent | Vetting and task assignment | Activity and financial authorization | Verification policy | Youth approval |
| Recovery | If explicit youth consent is missing or invalid, stop this step. The responsible young person would review an appropriate alternative; the prototype sends no escalation or notification. | If trust scope and safeguarding policy is missing or invalid, stop this step. The responsible central coordinator would review an appropriate alternative; the prototype sends no escalation or notification. | If verified assignment is missing or invalid, stop this step. The responsible central coordinator would review an appropriate alternative; the prototype sends no escalation or notification. | If site scope and consent is missing or invalid, stop this step. The responsible site staff would review an appropriate alternative; the prototype sends no escalation or notification. | If vetting and task assignment is missing or invalid, stop this step. The responsible chi partner coordinator would review an appropriate alternative; the prototype sends no escalation or notification. | If activity and financial authorization is missing or invalid, stop this step. The responsible approved partner would review an appropriate alternative; the prototype sends no escalation or notification. | If verification policy is missing or invalid, stop this step. The responsible independent verifier would review an appropriate alternative; the prototype sends no escalation or notification. | If youth approval is missing or invalid, stop this step. The responsible young person would review an appropriate alternative; the prototype sends no escalation or notification. |
| Safeguarding | Qualified humans review risk; clinical detail and private reflections stay outside general handoffs. | Qualified humans review risk; clinical detail and private reflections stay outside general handoffs. | Qualified humans review risk; clinical detail and private reflections stay outside general handoffs. | Qualified humans review risk; clinical detail and private reflections stay outside general handoffs. | Qualified humans review risk; clinical detail and private reflections stay outside general handoffs. | Qualified humans review risk; clinical detail and private reflections stay outside general handoffs. | Qualified humans review risk; clinical detail and private reflections stay outside general handoffs. | Qualified humans review risk; clinical detail and private reflections stay outside general handoffs. |
| Outcome | Proposed reviewed handoff; no actual service state changed. | Proposed reviewed handoff; no actual service state changed. | Proposed reviewed handoff; no actual service state changed. | Proposed reviewed handoff; no actual service state changed. | Proposed reviewed handoff; no actual service state changed. | Proposed reviewed handoff; no actual service state changed. | Proposed reviewed handoff; no actual service state changed. | A need moves toward reviewed support, not unrestricted data sharing. |