Developers · reviewers · supporters · funders

Help make FASO useful, testable and institutionally credible.

FASO does not need passive endorsement. It needs informed challenge, practical engagement, independent review, responsible support and funding protected from influence.

Choose your route

Different contributions. One protected purpose.

Every page states what FASO is asking for, what the participant receives and what participation does not imply.

Developers

Challenge usefulness and integration.

Help test whether the method can add decision-useful evidence without creating unsafe burden or demanding privileged disclosure.

Developer page

Reviewers

Challenge the institution and the system.

Examine the public-interest case, architecture, evidence, failure discipline, validation design and governance assumptions.

Reviewer page

Supporters

Help the institution reach the people who can test it.

Provide informed introductions, professional knowledge, public-interest scrutiny and responsible advocacy for evaluation—not endorsement.

Supporter page

Funders

Fund independent evidence and institutional readiness.

Support a defined validation bridge under conditions that protect method, findings, publication and FASO’s public-interest purpose.

Funder page

Engagement boundary

Conversation does not silently become endorsement, partnership or authority.

FASO records institutional relationships accurately and does not use another person’s or organisation’s name beyond the authority actually given.

Interest ≠ endorsementReview ≠ approvalFunding ≠ controlPreference ≠ appointment

Not sure where to enter?

Start with a direct conversation.

Explain your role and the issue you want FASO to address. The discussion will be routed to the appropriate developer, reviewer, supporter or funding pathway.