Prototype — every organisation, score and review below is illustrative sample data, not a real assessment.
About us · Editorial
Every score on TumainiBridge is produced by AI and checked by a human editor. This page explains how that process works, what we publish, and how we stay independent.
A trusted model reads each submission and extracts structured evidence against the ten-metric rubric. It produces a draft score and a short rationale, but it does not publish anything. The final score belongs to the human editor.
Editors review the submitted evidence side-by-side with the AI draft. They can override any score, leave a written note, and send the submission back for more information. Only after editorial approval does a profile go live.
The scoring methodology is public and versioned. When the rubric changes, every organisation's score is tagged with the rubric version used, so donors can compare like-for-like.
TumainiBridge does not charge listed organisations for placement, featured profiles, or higher scores. Funding comes from donors, philanthropic grants, and research partnerships so that editorial incentives stay aligned with donor trust.
Editors monitor for evidence that advantages organisations with better English, more staff, or prior grant-writing experience. We publish plain-language guidance and templates to level the playing field, and we run routine consistency checks on the AI extraction.
Organisations can resubmit evidence as their work evolves. Editors may also update a profile if new evidence is provided. Major corrections are logged with a date and note.
The pilot is supported by a small editorial panel with public health, clinical, and grant-management experience. If you are interested in joining the editorial network, email editors@tumainibridge.org.