Published reference supplement — October 9, 2026. This is the complete capacity-design text from the preserved v0.1 source, presented in the existing page layout. Historical statements below that it was not yet inserted into the website describe its source preparation, not its current publication. Dates, staffing and costs remain fictional; no service, school pilot or credential is activated. Read the corrected course and material-use restrictions.

Six-week teacher cohorts: calendar, capacity and review plan

E1 capacity supplement v0.1

Prepared and arithmetically tested as a synthetic example. Not an operating schedule, staffing commitment, school authorization, credential offer or annual cash forecast. Prepared 2026-10-09T11:41:08.906073-07:00 for James Dunn / Guidepost.us.

Main result

A six-week course can create overlapping preparation, teaching, coaching and assessment commitments. A monthly cost allowance does not show when those commitments occur. In the example below, putting all ten trainer-preparation hours into the week before a cohort starts produces a 33-hour peak against an assumed 30 program-hours available. Moving five preparation hours one week earlier reduces the peak to 28, with the same 56 trainer-hours per cohort. No hours are deleted or treated as unpaid work.

This establishes only that the revised workload fits the stated weekly-hour assumptions. Actual staff availability, subject competence, independence, school calendars, accessibility, contact slots, travel, funding and authority remain unverified. The model deliberately keeps launch blocked even when its arithmetic fits.

1. Relationship to the existing course

The v0.2 E1 source remains authoritative. The participant pathway is six one-hour facilitated modules, two one-hour preparation/class-use/reflection allocations, and a half-hour portfolio reflection: 510 minutes, or 8.5 hours. Participant effort is not the trainer’s staffing requirement. Field allocations can sit in taught weeks 3 and 5, with the final individual reflection after module 6; these placements are proposals, not compulsory deadlines or observed practice. Extra communication/access time is additional and must be planned.

The provider’s per-cohort hypothetical allowances remain 56 trainer-hours, 30 assessor-hours, 18 independent decision-review hours and 20 coordinator-hours. The trainer’s 56 hours retain the v0.2 allocation: ten preparation/adaptation, six facilitated contact, 24 classroom/coaching support, eight developmental portfolio feedback, and eight review/rework. Here only their timing is newly modeled. The 20 coordinator-hours are E1’s editorial allocation of the original $800 allowance, not a measured service standard.

Every interaction still contains Critical Reasoning, Emotional Acumen, Social Acumen and Physical Health together. Scheduling checks available information and alternatives, response to pressure or correction, coordination and independence, and workable workload/access simultaneously. A time budget is not a PA score or a reason to rush a learner, suppress disagreement, infer health from expression, or truncate required review.

2. Calendar convention and the cadence trap

The example selects the first and third Monday of each calendar month, January through April 2027. Eight cohorts therefore start across four calendar months. This is not the same as “every two weeks”: there is a three-week gap between March 15 and April 5 in this example. A fixed two-week cadence over a 52-week operating interval would produce 26 starts, not the 24 implied by two in each of twelve months. That is a counting illustration, not an annual demand or income forecast.

Dates below are hypothetical planning labels. No event has been added to a calendar, no staff or school has agreed to a date, and holidays/school breaks have not been checked. Real calendars may require a different cadence. Preserve the distinction between a start, completion of taught weeks, review of a complete portfolio, and an authorized decision.

Slot 1 is Tuesday 09:00–10:00; slot 2 Tuesday 10:30–11:30; slot 3 Thursday 09:00–10:00, expressed as illustrative local times. A cohort keeps its slot for six weeks; a slot is reused only after its prior cohort’s taught period ends. These three slots have no modeled contact collisions, with at most three cohorts in taught weeks simultaneously. No actual calendar availability has been verified. Other teaching, breaks, setup, travel and coaching commitments must fit around those contacts; a weekly total alone does not prove that they can.

Preparation starts two weeks before the first cohort, on December 21, 2026. The final review tail extends through June 6, 2027, after the April starts. These edges matter: selecting four months of starts does not confine all work or shared costs to four months. There are no assumed carry-in cohorts, and no starts after April in this bounded example. A continuing service would need those additional cohorts included before staffing could be approved.

3. Per-cohort work profile

The revised proposed hours are below. Taught week 1 is offset zero in the companion model. Negative offsets are preparation, not extra participant classes. A post-course review week is added to the provider’s work calendar, not to the learner’s 8.5-hour attendance claim.

The six contact hours and 24 coaching hours provide five trainer-hours per taught week before portfolio/rework time is added. Developmental feedback is one hour in each of weeks 3 and 4 and three hours in each of weeks 5 and 6. Review/rework is two hours in each of weeks 3–6. The resulting taught-week trainer loads are 5, 5, 8, 8, 10 and 10 hours. The two preparation blocks add five hours each.

Assessment is spread across taught weeks 5–6 and the following review week. The decision review allocated during week 6 is for completeness, independence and ready evidence; it does not authorize an early credential decision before all required evidence exists. The final 12-hour block is a planning allowance for post-course review, not a hard deadline or cap on due consideration. Missing evidence, a conflict or an appeal keeps its own unresolved status.

The model treats trainer, assessor and independent decision reviewer as distinct functions needing different qualified, unconflicted people for the same case. It does not assign actual people. The coordinator cannot turn a timetable into issuing authority, and a spare trainer-hour cannot automatically become a qualified independent-review hour. A3/A4 authority and review boundaries still control.

4. Peak-load comparison

Hypothetical weekly program capacity is 30 trainer-hours, 22 assessor-hours, 14 independent decision-review hours and 12 coordinator-hours. These are assumptions to expose constraints, not real appointments, pay entitlements or universal utilization targets.

The first 33-hour trainer peak occurs in the week beginning 2027-02-08. Existing cohorts require 10, 8 and 5 hours, while the next cohort needs ten preparation hours: 10 + 8 + 5 + 10 = 33. The revised plan moves five of the preparation hours to the preceding week, giving 10 + 8 + 5 + 5 = 28 at that peak. The shifted five hours are included in the preceding week’s total; the model checks both weeks rather than hiding displaced work.

The coordinator’s four preparation hours are likewise split into one hour two weeks before and three hours one week before. That reduces the modeled coordinator peak from 11 to 10 without reducing the 20-hour per-cohort allowance. The remaining role totals are unchanged. The baseline has three trainer-overload weeks; the revised weekly-hour model has none under the stated availability assumptions.

A useful interpretation is capacity candidate with limited headroom, not “ready to launch.” Two free trainer-hours in a peak week do not guarantee space for travel, extra support, illness or a complex review. Some functions’ peak weeks differ; do not sum the separate maxima and call that a single witnessed week. The following full table makes the actual modeled week-by-week combinations visible.

5. Complete revised weekly workload

The aggregate 992 role-hours equal eight times the per-cohort 124 role-hours. This includes preparation and the review tail; it is not learner contact time. The revised weekly table is a reproducible allocation, not a timesheet or record of delivered work.

6. Deliberately adverse tests

Trainer absence. In the week beginning 2027-02-01, the plan requires 28 trainer-hours. Setting that role’s availability to zero creates a 28-hour deficit. The model does not erase the activities or assume the following week absorbs them. The responsible owner must establish qualified cover, a supported postponement or a reduced authorized scope before accepting the affected commitment. Reviewers cannot be reassigned in a way that destroys independence. The test remains an expected capacity failure, not evidence of a failed real service.

More difficult reviews. Suppose eight cases per cohort require another half-hour of independent decision review after the course. That adds four hours per cohort, raises that function’s modeled peak from 12 to 16 and exceeds the assumed 14-hour weekly capacity by two hours in the affected weeks. Across this eight-cohort example there are eight such overload weeks. The model correctly refuses to call that stress scenario a fit. Additional capacity, a revised valid timetable or reduced intake is required; a budgeted time limit must not force a favorable or rushed decision.

At the original illustrative $40 hourly rate, four genuinely additional reviewer-hours would add $160 per affected cohort if not already funded within a valid allowance. Two such cohorts would use another $320 relative to the original $2,000 monthly operating-balance scenario, leaving $1,680 before proposed allocations and other exclusions. This is the source model’s conditional arithmetic, not an actual fee, available contingency or complete cash plan. Never count an existing contingency twice or assume protected reserve money is spendable.

Calendar interruption or access barrier. The present script does not simulate holidays, cancelled school access, learner make-up sessions or travel. Before actual use, record the affected date/activity, missing participant opportunity, remaining staff availability, necessary accommodation and decision. Recompute overlapping loads after the change. No catch-up slot is presumed free merely because another cohort has finished contact teaching.

7. Cost, receipts and actual readiness stay separate

The per-cohort delivery illustration still totals $7,000: trainer 56 × $50 = $2,800; the two independent review functions together 48 × $40 = $1,920; coordination 20 × $40 = $800; materials 24 × $20 = $480; and the original $1,000 delivery/access allowance. The revised preparation timing changes none of these per-cohort totals. Actual rates, paid hours, benefits, taxes, travel, access support and contractual treatment are unknown.

The original funding model’s $4,000 shared cost is monthly. Two starts in a month are not necessarily two completed cohorts, two collected fees or a measured $2,000 surplus in that month. For example, none of the January starts finishes all six taught weeks during January. Preparation and review also extend outside the four start months. A genuine cash forecast therefore needs receipt/refund timing, payment obligations, carry-in/out work, actual operating months, opening cash, restricted balances and allocation decisions. This supplement does not revive the withdrawn $44,000/$24,000 figures or substitute a new invented first-year total.

Before a real cohort is offered, link T05 and T07 to actual school authority, material-use permission, funded staff, subject/access checks, defined delivery scope and data custody. The public Guidepost rights notice is unchanged; this owner-development supplement grants no new classroom, reproduction, adaptation, print or commercial-use license. All cases and schedules here are fictional. There is no booking, checkout, email, certificate, software installation or legal filing.

8. Practice exercises with worked responses

Q-CAP-01 — Cadence. An organizer says “two cohorts per month means a new cohort every two weeks.” What must be corrected? Worked response: specify calendar-month dates or an interval cadence. The first/third-Monday example creates two starts in each selected month but includes a three-week interval in spring. Twenty-six starts over a 52-week every-two-weeks interval are not 24 calendar-month starts. Neither count proves demand or available staff.

Q-CAP-02 — Average versus peak. An average of 28 trainer-hours per week looks below a 30-hour allowance. A week actually requires 10 + 8 + 5 + 10. Is it feasible as written? Worked response: that week requires 33, a three-hour deficit. The average does not authorize overtime or remove a commitment. Moving five preparation hours earlier gives 28 in that week only if the earlier week’s recomputed capacity also fits. The full revised table checks that condition.

Q-CAP-03 — Independence. The trainer has two hours of headroom; the independent reviewer is two hours short in the complex-case test. May those hours simply be swapped? Worked response: no. Time units are not interchangeable qualifications or independence. Use a qualified, unconflicted additional decision reviewer or a valid scope/timetable change. Preserve the original case evidence, missing capacity and actual authority; learning-team roles do not appoint the reviewer.

Q-CAP-04 — Source preservation and cash. The staffing profile fits its assumed weekly limits. May the pilot JSON be changed to “authorized,” the course be marked operational, and monthly receipts be reported as collected? Worked response: no. Only the synthetic weekly-hour check has passed. Actual school, staffing, funds, rights, bookings, independent review and receipts are still null/unverified. Keep the source editions and prepared integration unchanged and record this as a separate capacity supplement.

For Teams of Three practice, rotate Mentor → Scribe → Referee → Mentor across changed versions of these problems. The outgoing Mentor records assumptions previously omitted, the outgoing Scribe questions using the clearer situation record, and the outgoing Referee explains the revised plan more broadly. Preserve individual answers separately from group agreement. Feedback should name a correct check or missing condition, not grade a person’s overall worth or infer motivation from presentation style.

9. Verification and reusable calculation

The companion standard-library Python program produces cohort dates, non-overlapping synthetic contact-slot assignments, per-week role totals, baseline/revised peaks and the adverse tests. It accesses no network or calendar. Run:

python E1_Cohort_Capacity_Model_v0.1.py --output result.json

Optional --year, --first-month and --months parameters change the fictional start window. Every run validates allowed inputs, profile totals, aggregate conservation, the per-cohort cost arithmetic, participant duration and a recorded absence deficit. A calendar change may produce different peaks; inspect those outputs rather than assuming the worked example still applies. The saved JSON also records the 11 additional preparation checks and source fingerprints used for this edition; a fresh basic run omits that editorial provenance wrapper.

For this edition, nine built-in invariant checks and eleven additional boundary/preparation checks passed. The checks include the year boundary, invalid-month rejection, an independent arithmetic check of both trainer peaks, the source hash, unchanged total hours, stress-test excess and blocked-launch state. “Baseline overload detected” and “absence/review overload detected” are expected successful negative tests—not execution errors or witnessed harm. No browser/display, school, human-performance, clinical, legal or paid-service acceptance test passed by this calculation.

10. Source lineage and continuation

Source inputs are the corrected PA_Teacher_Training_Classroom_Integration_v0.2.html (SHA-256 715ae7137d198045f7aff9a86ee6bd49c2c5e11e1a97e9be7bbeae5cb066b165) and PA_School_Pilot_Protocol_v0.2.json (SHA-256 7466fb5d6cfcde155e38bb82188b7d6ac02cca18774ea37fc9501a84afd5f1f2), supported by the preserved B1/A3 source comparison. Dates, contact slots, weekly workload placement, assumed staff capacities and adverse cases are new editorial designs; they are not retrospective measurements or selected school dates.

The original sources, current three-page integration package, H4 styling proposal, rights notices and preceding RPs remain unchanged. This supplement is a separate Library artifact, not an automatically inserted website section. E1 remains IN_PROGRESS. The source-level overlapping-capacity design has advanced; actual available staff and an authorized feasible schedule remain unresolved.

Next independently useful E1 work is a pilot-readiness and service-scope review packet using T05/T07: actual fields left blank, dependencies and evidence required identified, learner access and data custody separated from public organizational records, and training-only service distinguished from any consequential credential service. It should incorporate this capacity example by reference, not rewrite the v0.2 course or repeat the completed budget audit. Publication and the existing H4/E1 live visual checks remain gated.

Pilot readiness and service scope

Review packet v0.1 · October 9, 2026 · Professional Acumen / Guidepost.us

This packet turns the published T05 pilot-decision and T07 offer/cost/capacity structures into five linked review sheets. It is a development resource, not an authorization, enrollment service, contract, school trial or credential. All actual school, staff, permission, funding, custodian and signature fields are deliberately blank. The four examples below are fictional.

Use one packet for one defined activity and delivery window. Reference existing school/provider records rather than copying them into every sheet. Complete R01 and R02 together, use R03 for capacity, R04 for evidence handling, and R05 for the actual decision and later changes. T05/T07 are setup and change records, not daily teacher paperwork. These public reference sheets collect no information and grant no additional right to copy, adapt or use the materials. Any authorized working record belongs in the approved controlled system, not in website comments or a public forum. [S1, S5]

1. Choose the service before reviewing readiness

Adult rehearsal or design review. Identify the adults, allowed materials, scope and accessible participation. Use invented learner examples and label every rehearsal SIMULATION. Do not quietly include pupils, pupil work, real classroom observation or research. Adult rehearsal still needs appropriate material permissions and actual arrangements; the label does not waive them.

School instructional pilot or training-only service. State the familiar subject objective, the teacher-development deliverables and the actual school-approved activity. Keep support, observation and ordinary subject work distinct from consequential credential assessment. A factual attendance or participation note, if authorized, describes only what happened; it does not say the teacher is certified, licensed, accredited or awarded continuing-education credit.

Consequential credential service. This is a separately authorized scope, not an automatic upgrade from payment or attendance. Before any consequential decision, the actual issuer, applicable standard/version, delegation, qualified independent assessment/decision review and applicable A1–A4 review, appeal and status arrangements must exist. Required operational platform and authority conditions stay unresolved until evidenced. A trainer cannot approve their own trainees by renaming feedback as independent assessment. [S2]

Removing credential assessment does not automatically authorize a training offer. The remaining instruction, rights, access, staffing, funding and data requirements still apply. The historical provider comparison of $7,000 less $1,920 in consequential review leaves $5,080 under that limited hypothetical cost model; it is neither an approved training-only price nor a complete revised cash forecast. Review the scope and every remaining cost rather than silently carrying forward a price. [S3]

2. Evidence conditions and permissible decisions

Record a dated evidence reference and reviewer for each applicable condition: G01 accountable authority for the named activity; G02 material permissions for the actual uses; G03 subject accuracy, access and every-role opportunities; G04 qualified staff and calendar capacity; G05 available resources, spending/offer authority and reviewed terms; G06 data custody and permitted handling; G07 instructional/evaluation purpose with any research or changed-use review; G08 an accurate description of deliverables and exclusions understood by participants/payer; G09 stop, correction and change-review arrangements; G10 credential issuer, independent decision and operating arrangements when that service is requested.

A condition is NOT_REVIEWED, EVIDENCE_MISSING, VERIFIED_FOR_SCOPE, or NOT_APPLICABLE_WITH_REASON. G10 may be inapplicable to a genuinely training-only service; it is not thereby satisfied for a future credential. Do not remove a real condition merely to obtain a favorable readiness count. There is no combined readiness score and no automatic approval.

HOLD means an applicable prerequisite is missing, contradicted or unsuitable for the requested activity. Record the affected scope, needed evidence and next review; unrelated properly authorized activity need not be mislabeled stopped. READY_FOR_AUTHORIZED_REVIEW means the proposed packet is assembled for the actual decision-maker, not permission to begin. AUTHORIZED_FOR_NAMED_SCOPE requires the real empowered decision, evidence and conditions. STOPPED preserves the previous authorization and new reason without erasing either. CLOSED records what occurred, what remains unknown and the next supported action.

Unknown is not a pass, a promise is not a receipt, a signature image is not proof of authority, and a synthetic capacity fit is not reserved staffing. When evidence conflicts, preserve both accounts and resolve the material question before the affected commitment. These are proposed project controls, not a jurisdiction-specific compliance determination.

3. Five blank review sheets

Every field below is UNASSIGNED. For each completed field in an authorized controlled record, attach: value, source/evidence reference, record version/date, review result, actual reviewer and review date. Do not add invented names or signatures to make a form look complete.

R01 — T05 expansion — school purpose, authority and material permissions

School and accountable lead: ____________________

School/institution, accountable lead, teacher and proposed decision owner; record actual names only in the controlled working copy.

Purpose and boundaries: ____________________

Instructional purpose, beneficiaries, service mode, excluded activities and whether any research or consequential decision is proposed.

Lesson and window: ____________________

T01 lesson/version, subject objective, prerequisites, proposed dates, pupil/teacher scope and maximum places; dates are not bookings.

Authority evidence: ____________________

Actual authorizing role, delegation/scope, dated decision reference, conditions, expiry or review point and independent check of applicability.

Material permission: ____________________

Exact course/lesson editions, permitted uses, adaptation/distribution limits, authorized rights holder and written permission reference where needed.

Access and support: ____________________

Accessible expression/materials, all-role opportunities, supported make-up, subject-specialist check and who supplies necessary support.

Funded release: ____________________

School-side preparation, release, coverage, reflection and reporting time; payer, available allocation and commitment evidence.

Comparison and stops: ____________________

Planned ordinary-lesson comparison, missingness/confounds, explicit stop conditions and ordinary school support route.

Linked custody and offer: ____________________

Current R02/T07 and R04 references. A budget or rights notice cannot substitute for school authority.

Real approval: ____________________

Actual authorized decision, decision-maker, date and signature/reference only when supplied and verified; otherwise remain unassigned.

R02 — T07 expansion — service scope, resources and offer review

Payer, beneficiary and service scope: ____________________

Who pays, who benefits, deliverables, exclusions, maximum places, waivers, dates and selected service mode.

Provider authority and rights: ____________________

Entity/contract authority, actual permitted product uses and separate licensing terms; no default nonprofit/for-profit ownership relationship.

Deliverables and acceptance: ____________________

T01 adaptations, rehearsals, developmental feedback, T06 portfolio and T08 review actually included; specify evidence of delivery, not a promised favorable outcome.

Cost and operating period: ____________________

Each cost item, quantity, rate, cohort/month/date basis, cash or in-kind status, source and uncertainty; separate startup expense from held reserve.

Funds and commitments: ____________________

Received funds, restrictions, payment obligations, receipt/payment dates, pledges and in-kind resources separately; identify actual authority to commit them.

Staff and capacity: ____________________

R03 role-by-week reservations, qualifications, conflicts, backup and funded rework; do not substitute participant time for provider capacity.

School-side resources: ____________________

Release, cover, access, travel and local resources outside the provider allowance; confirm that neither organization counts the same resource twice.

Terms for actual review: ____________________

Payment/withdrawal/refund, cancellation/postponement, access, rework and complaint arrangements; record the actual approved terms, not invented contract clauses.

Consequential component: ____________________

Training only or a separately authorized credential service. Name the actual issuer, standard, delegated decision authority, independent reviewers and appeal/status arrangements only if established.

Offer disposition: ____________________

Draft, ready for authorized review, hold, declined, or an evidenced scoped authorization. No sales, enrollment or collection is enabled by this page.

R03 — Capacity and independent-review assignment

Calendar and cohorts: ____________________

Actual start/contact/preparation/review dates, carry-in/out cohorts, school breaks, travel and daily availability; not merely monthly averages.

Qualified roles: ____________________

Actual trainer, assessor, independent decision reviewer and coordinator where needed; domain scope, preparation evidence and accepted assignments.

Independence: ____________________

For each consequential case, check trainer/assessor/decision-review separation and material dependencies; record recusal and qualified replacement.

Weekly and daily fit: ____________________

Demand versus genuinely reserved capacity by role and week, plus contact clashes and daily constraints; retain negative results and uncertainty.

Support and rework: ____________________

Funded allowance for accessible participation, missed-role make-up, travel, clarification and complex review; do not truncate necessary work to fit the budget.

Absence and disruption: ____________________

Qualified cover or approved postponement/reduced scope; affected learners/cohorts, revised dates and recomputed overlapping loads.

Financial consistency: ____________________

Link extra hours to R02 funds/obligations. A headroom hour is neither cash nor an interchangeable qualification.

Capacity decision: ____________________

Actual reviewer, evidence references, remaining conflicts/deficits and scope/window reviewed. A synthetic fit never becomes an actual reservation.

R04 — Data custody, evidence and reporting burden

Custodian and system: ____________________

Actual school-approved custodian, controlled system, authorized users and accountability; this public page is not a submission destination.

Purpose and minimum data: ____________________

Purpose of each data field, minimum work samples/local codes required, and whether any new purpose has separately required approval.

Identity separation: ____________________

Keep identifiable learner work, support needs and mapping keys in school-controlled records. Public member-business transparency does not make pupil records public.

Access and transfer: ____________________

Who can view/edit/export what and why, permitted recipients and transfer method; check any external platform before use.

Retention and correction: ____________________

Actual applicable retention/deletion arrangements, review dates, correction/participant-clarification route and preservation of dated original entries where required; do not invent a universal retention term.

Evaluation scope: ____________________

Instructional feasibility versus research, publication or credential use; actual authority for any changed purpose. E3 owns the full research design and empirical claims.

Measurement and burden: ____________________

Selected T01–T04 records, collection days, elapsed versus nested support time, additional preparation/reporting minutes and who records them. Reuse existing records rather than create daily duplicate forms.

Missingness and adverse observations: ____________________

Denominators, absence, inaccessible tasks, unmet support, contrary/null/worse outcomes and response. No diagnosis or motivation inferred from demeanor.

Summary release: ____________________

Actual authorization for each external summary and contextual re-identification check. Removing a name alone does not establish safe release; no routine video or private health/emotion history is requested.

R05 — Decision, stop, change and restart record

Decision identity: ____________________

Packet ID/version, requested activity, exact scope/window and linked R01–R04 records; no indefinite blanket approval.

Evidence review: ____________________

Each applicable condition, evidence reference, version/date, responsible reviewer, result and unresolved issue. An unchecked box is unknown, not passed.

Disposition: ____________________

HOLD, READY_FOR_AUTHORIZED_REVIEW, AUTHORIZED_FOR_NAMED_SCOPE, STOPPED or CLOSED; only an actual empowered decision-maker can record authorization.

Conditions and owners: ____________________

Restrictions, missing evidence, named responsible role/person when actually assigned, resources and recheck trigger; do not invent a deadline or owner.

Notification and understanding: ____________________

Who must receive the actual decision, accessible explanation, participant/payer understanding of exclusions and record of delivery; this template sends nothing.

Stop and response: ____________________

Unsafe or exclusionary interaction, forced disclosure, displaced instruction, unapproved disclosure, lost independence, unavailable permission or unfunded capacity triggers pause/stop of affected activity and ordinary school response.

Change and restart: ____________________

Changed source/lesson, scope, dates, staff, evidence use, rights or funding triggers review of affected conditions; retain original decision and require actual reauthorization where necessary.

Close and handoff: ____________________

T08 keep/revise/stop reasons, observed/missing/null/adverse results, actual costs/burden, next evidence check and E3 handoff where appropriate. Completion never silently grants a credential.

4. Filled fictional examples and reviewer responses

These examples are complete fictional disposition records, not completed real applications. SIM references below are invented teaching labels, not real approvals, bank records or documents. Any facts not expressly supplied remain unknown. Apply the same evidence conditions in each case; a favorable financial or arithmetic result cannot erase a different missing requirement.

F01 — A paid cohort without school or material permission

Request: Fictional provider SIM-P01 proposes 24 places, including 20 paid and four waived, for the published six-week course. The intended beneficiaries are teachers at fictional school SIM-S01. Scope is described as a school instructional pilot with training only. No actual lesson date, authorized lead, custodian, staff reservation or signature is supplied.

Submitted evidence: SIM-E01 is an expression of interest from a purchasing contact; SIM-E02 is a proposed $10,000 cohort-receipts calculation, not a received payment; SIM-E03 is a link to the public course. There is no school delegation/decision record and no permission covering the proposed classroom reproduction or adaptation. G01, G02, G04, G05 and G06 remain missing; G10 is inapplicable only to the stated training-only scope.

R05 disposition: HOLD the school commitment, recruitment promise and classroom use. The design can continue as document review within its permitted scope. The next evidence requests are an actual accountable school decision, applicable material permission, R03 staff/calendar evidence, R02 funds/terms and R04 custody arrangements. The requesting roles are school decision owner, rights contact, provider coordinator and custodian; actual persons and dates remain UNASSIGNED. No payment or a public link substitutes for those records.

Worked lesson: A projected cohort balance is not authority. Resolve the missing conditions rather than relabel the application approved because there is apparent demand. Preserve the draft offer and its later correction.

F02 — A trainer is absent during an overlapping week

Request and model evidence: In the separate synthetic capacity model, the week beginning February 1, 2027 requires 28 trainer-hours. SIM-E11 records modeled availability of zero for that role; it is not a real absence report. All other model inputs are unchanged, and no actual authorization is claimed. [S4]

R03 finding: There is a 28-hour trainer deficit. A later week is not presumed able to absorb the work. The coordinator must identify qualified cover, a supported postponement, or reduced scope and recompute every affected cohort’s preparation, contact, feedback and review. Support needs and missed-role opportunities remain visible. Independent review cannot be reassigned to the trainer merely to fill a numerical gap.

R05 disposition: HOLD the affected delivery commitment in this simulation. SIM-A11 is an unassigned request to the provider scheduling role for a revised calendar and funded cover; no backup person, overtime entitlement or school date is invented. Restart requires the actual school/provider decisions and rechecked G03–G06 for the changed arrangement. Unaffected authorized work, if any exists in a real application, is reviewed on its own facts rather than automatically cancelled.

Worked lesson: Weekly totals are necessary but do not establish actual daily availability, qualifications or permission. Moving a task changes another week’s load; retain and check both.

F03 — More complex independent reviews

Request and evidence: The fictional cohort has 24 applicants. Eight cases need another half-hour of independent decision review each. SIM-E21 is the additional-work record; SIM-E22 refers to the published synthetic capacity model, not an actual case file. Four extra hours increase that role’s modeled peak from 12 to 16 against an assumed 14-hour capacity. [S2, S4]

R02/R03 finding: The affected week is two hours short. At the illustrative $40 hourly rate, four additional hours cost $160 per affected cohort when not already funded in an available allowance. Two such cohorts consume another $320 relative to the original $2,000 monthly operating-balance illustration, leaving $1,680 before other allocations and exclusions. No existing contingency is counted twice and no protected reserve is presumed spendable. These figures are source-model arithmetic, not new prices, receipts or a cash forecast.

R05 disposition: HOLD the affected credential decisions until qualified independent capacity, evidence time and funding are resolved. A fixed review budget is not a reason to rush a decision, discard contrary evidence or promise a pass. The actual authorized learning service may continue only within its own evidenced scope; it does not depend on issuing a favorable credential. Keep original evidence and assessor/reviewer disagreement. Actual extra reviewer, fund authority and revised decision window remain UNASSIGNED.

Worked lesson: Trainer headroom cannot be swapped for independent decision-review capacity without the necessary qualification and independence. Review time and issuing authority are different conditions.

F04 — Training remains distinct from an unavailable credential

Request: Fictional school SIM-S04 requests adult teacher rehearsal and developmental feedback only. In this example, SIM-E31–SIM-E35 are stipulated simulated evidence of scoped school/provider authority, material permission, accessible subject materials, reserved instruction capacity and controlled data/funding arrangements. SIM-E36 stipulates an understood offer with exclusions, SIM-E37 a stop/correction/restart route and SIM-E38 an instructional-only purpose review. All G01–G09 are stipulated reviewed for this fictional limited scope. They are not real approvals. Credential issuing authority and independent credential review are absent.

Scope record: Deliverables are the agreed adult rehearsal, every participant’s Mentor/Scribe/Referee practice, an individual subject response, one inference correction and developmental feedback. Exclusions are pupil participation, research collection, credential decisions, accreditation and continuing-education credit. No staff or pupil names are put on the public page. The offer wording and payer understanding must match those exclusions.

R05 disposition: READY_FOR_AUTHORIZED_REVIEW for the stipulated training-only scope, with G10 recorded NOT_APPLICABLE_WITH_REASON. No real launch is authorized and no credential is implied. A later request for certification or classroom use opens a new scope/version and the newly applicable conditions. A participation note may report only actually evidenced attendance or work under the real authorized arrangements.

Worked lesson: Missing credential machinery should not be disguised as completed certification, but it also does not automatically prohibit a separately authorized learning service. Check the actual limited scope, not a global pass/fail label.

5. Keep Professional Acumen in the work, not in extra paperwork

Every state contains Critical Reasoning, Emotional Acumen, Social Acumen and Physical Health together. In these sheets that means examining evidence and assumptions, response to uncertainty or correction, coordination and independence, and workable load/access together—not turning them into separate approval phases or a combined person score. PA is an analytical and developmental framework, not an ethical doctrine or a certificate of harmlessness.

Every learner rotates Mentor → Scribe → Referee → Mentor. The outgoing Mentor records gaps not explained well; the outgoing Scribe reviews with the improved situation record; the outgoing Referee explains from a broader perspective. Preserve independent subject evidence and supported make-up rather than equating group correctness or fluent speech with every person’s learning. Body language and intonation provide incomplete evidence; ask for clarification without demanding private emotions or diagnoses. [S1]

Keep the existing nine event fields: event context, observed contribution, interpretation, uncertainty and bias, four-dimensional relationships, conveyed response, participant clarification, subsequent evidence, and revision/next support. Reference T03 rather than duplicating it here. Reuse T01 lesson design, T02 role evidence, T04 time/resources and T06 portfolio; use T08 for changed decisions and next support. Record the time spent on these review sheets themselves. No predicted teacher-time gain is reported as an observed result.

6. Stop, change, restart and close

For unsafe or persistently exclusionary interaction, forced private disclosure, humiliation/person ranking, displaced required instruction, unapproved data disclosure, lost independence, expired/inapplicable permission or unmanageable unfunded work: pause the affected activity, use the ordinary responsible school/provider process, record a bounded account and preserve needed evidence under the actual custody arrangements. These learning roles acquire no disciplinary or investigatory power.

Record what changed, affected learners or commitments through controlled local references, support provided, actual notification, the responsible decision route and evidence needed for restart. A stopped activity does not restart automatically when a numerical deficit disappears. Recheck every condition affected by a changed lesson, calendar, personnel assignment, resource source, evidence use or permission.

At close, record delivered versus missing opportunities, individual subject evidence, access, preparation/reporting burden, actual resources and adverse/null/worse results with denominators. Do not convert two attempts into causal effectiveness or a generalizable benefit. The E3 research-design and empirical-evidence task remains separate. No actual pilot data or operational authorization is supplied by this packet.

7. Sources and boundaries

S1. Published course, T01–T08 records and pilot design, derived from corrected teacher-course v0.2 and pilot-protocol v0.2. The underlying curriculum is PA_Curriculum_Master_v0.3. The source editions remain unchanged.

S2. Assessor preparation and independent decisions, with its existing A1–A4 authority and review boundaries. This packet creates no credential authority or new appeal terms.

S3. Corrected monthly funding and reserves, preserving the B1 model and its qualifications. No annual forecast, actual receipt or approved price is asserted.

S4. Six-week cohort capacity supplement, preserved v0.1 model. Dates, role hours and adverse scenarios are hypothetical; this packet references rather than rewrites the model.

S5. Guidepost material-use restrictions. Public reading is not an additional classroom, reproduction, adaptation or commercial-use permission.

R01–R05, G01–G10 and F01–F04 are new editorial review structures/examples, not adopted policy, validated scales or a legal compliance opinion. Actual jurisdiction, authority and school/provider requirements must be established for a real activity. This is published reference development; visual/mobile/keyboard/print checks are not certified by source checks. No software, payment, message, record collection or service is activated.

Begin with the actual lesson

Choose a familiar course task. Rehearse Teams of Three, rotate every participant, and identify unclear explanations or lost participation. Adapt to class size, time, language, and access needs.

A useful training deliverable

A training service can provide a demonstration, subject-specific examples, a short role guide, reusable materials, and follow-up observation. The teacher should finish with something usable in the next lesson.

Keep workload and results visible

Compare preparation time, participation, explanations, and time for individual support. Revise activities that demand more effort than the value they produce. Observe reasoning, emotional interaction, social participation, and physical capacity.

Funding the service

Paid training can support resource development and maintenance. Identify the purchasing institution, its deliverable, cost, and evidence of usefulness. This describes a proposed service pathway; an active booking service has not been established.

Continue with developed resources

• Teams of Three
• Curriculum pathways
• Sustainable funding