Milestone map
Milestone map
3 milestones
Identify the problem, map stakeholders, get plan approved
3–4 weeks (problem scoping, stakeholder contact, approval)
Identify a specific, localised civic problem — a broken piece of infrastructure, a missing service, an unsafe public space, a gap in community provision — that you do not have institutional authority to fix on your own. Map the stakeholders who are affected and the stakeholders who have the authority to approve or enable a solution. Get the plan approved by at least one stakeholder with relevant authority (a council representative, a school principal, a community board) before starting work. The approval requirement distinguishes a civic project from an individual act: you are working within a civic system, not around it.
Proof required
Share a written description of the civic problem: what it is, where it is, who is affected, and how you know it is a real problem (not just your perception). Share a stakeholder map: who is affected, who has authority to enable a solution, and how you contacted each group. Share written evidence of plan approval from at least one stakeholder with relevant authority — an email, a meeting minutes reference, or a formal letter.
What gets checked
- The civic problem is specific and localised — 'fix the broken streetlight on Station Road outside the library' is specific; 'improve public safety in our area' is not.
- Plan approval is from someone with relevant authority — a friend who agrees it sounds good is not civic approval.
- The stakeholder map distinguishes between people affected by the problem and people with authority to enable the solution — these are often different groups.
Common mistakes
- Choosing a problem that is entirely within your control — a civic project requires navigating systems and people who are not obligated to help you.
- Skipping the approval step and beginning work immediately — the approval is what makes this a civic engagement rather than a unilateral act.
- Stakeholder map that only lists people who already agree with you — civic engagement requires mapping those who will resist or need to be convinced.
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
What a verifier looks for
- The civic problem must be specific enough to be independently verifiable — can a stranger confirm this problem exists without the submitter's explanation?
- Plan approval must be from someone with institutional authority — check the approver's role in relation to the problem.
- The stakeholder map should include at least one person who could resist or block the solution — a map that only lists supporters is incomplete.
You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.
Project underway — midpoint evidence submitted
4–6 weeks (project execution, midpoint documentation)
Begin executing the civic project with approval and submit midpoint evidence that the project is real and in progress. Midpoint evidence must include observable work, not just plans. The most important credibility signals at this milestone are: the approved stakeholders are still involved (they did not withdraw after approval), and something visible has happened that a stranger could observe.
Proof required
Share photos, a meeting record, or a document showing the project in progress. Include a brief status update: what has happened since M1, whether the original stakeholders are still involved, and one specific obstacle that has come up and how you are addressing it. If the project is on track to deliver what you planned, explain why. If it has changed, explain what changed and why.
What gets checked
- Midpoint evidence shows observable progress — not just a description of plans.
- At least one original stakeholder is still actively involved.
- A specific obstacle is described — every civic project involving multiple stakeholders encounters at least one.
Common mistakes
- No stakeholder involvement after approval — if the stakeholders approved the plan but are no longer involved, the civic engagement ended at M1.
- Midpoint evidence is identical to M1 planning documents — photos and records must be from after the project started.
- Obstacle description is absent or trivial: 'it was busier than I expected' is not a specific civic project obstacle.
Resources
Foundationstart here
What a verifier looks for
- Photos or documents should be dated or timestamped — ask when they were created if not evident.
- Confirm the original stakeholders are still involved — not just that you are still working on it.
- The obstacle description is a credibility signal: a real civic project always produces friction. If there were no obstacles, ask specifically: 'Was there ever a moment when you thought the project might not happen?'
You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.
Project complete — before/after documentation and impact summary
3–4 weeks (completion, documentation, write-up)
Complete the civic project and document the before-and-after state of the problem you addressed. The before/after documentation is the primary proof: it shows that something real changed in a specific place as a result of this project. The impact summary should state what changed, by how much (even if only qualitatively), and who confirmed the change independently of you.
Proof required
Share before photos or documentation (from before the project started — from M1 or earlier) and after photos or documentation (from after completion). Share your impact summary: what specifically changed, how the change was confirmed by someone other than you, and one sentence on what you would do differently if you ran this civic project again.
What gets checked
- Before and after documentation are clearly different — the change is observable, not just described.
- The change is confirmed by someone other than the submitter — a council acknowledgement, a stakeholder sign-off, or community observation.
- The 'what I would do differently' sentence is specific — not 'plan better' but a specific decision that would have changed the outcome.
Common mistakes
- Before and after photos from the same date — check the metadata or ask when each was taken.
- No independent confirmation of the change — the submitter's testimony alone is insufficient for a civic proof.
- 'What I would do differently' is absent or formulaic — every civic project of this length involves at least one real decision that could have been made differently.
Resources
Foundationstart here
What a verifier looks for
- Request both before and after photos with metadata or ask when each was taken — they must be from genuinely different times.
- Independent confirmation of the change is the core requirement: a council email, a stakeholder message, or community members' statements all qualify.
- Cross-reference the final state against the civic problem identified in M1 — if the original problem is still unresolved but a different problem was addressed, ask for an explanation.
You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.
Part of