HOW THE WORK IS GROUNDED

Framework Provenance

CKC Cares develops original frameworks and practical tools by connecting established research, professional standards, regulation, cross-sector experience and observed human challenges.

This provenance record distinguishes between the knowledge that already exists, the specific contribution CKC Cares has made, how each framework is intended to be used and what the available evidence currently supports.

Research grounding is not the same as independent outcome validation. We make that distinction deliberately.

What provenance means at CKC Cares

A provenance record explains where an idea comes from, what has shaped it and what has been added through the CKC Cares approach.

It is an intellectual-accountability record. It helps clients, learners, collaborators and reviewers distinguish established knowledge from original synthesis, practical application and emerging methodology.

For each selected framework, we identify:

  • The problem it addresses
  • Its recognised foundations
  • The CKC Cares contribution
  • Its intended use
  • Its evidence maturity
  • Its claim boundaries
  • Its current version or review status, where available

How to read the evidence labels

Different forms of evidence answer different questions. A framework can be useful, research grounded and commercially available before it has undergone a formal independent outcome evaluation. The language used to describe it must match its actual stage of development.

Research Grounded

The problem and core design principles draw on credible research, professional standards, regulation or established guidance.

Public wording: “Grounded in established research and professional guidance.”

Practice Informed

The framework has developed through professional experience, teaching, facilitation, advisory work or applied governance activity.

Public wording: “Developed through cross-sector professional practice.”

Externally Reviewed

Defined material has been examined through a structured external review process.

Public wording: “Reviewed for specified aspects such as factual accuracy, usability, professional relevance or claim discipline.” External review does not automatically mean certification, endorsement, academic peer review or independent evaluation.

Pilot Tested

The framework or tool has been used with a defined participant group and refined through structured feedback.

Public wording: “Refined through participant use and structured feedback.”

Outcome Evaluated

Defined outcomes have been measured through a stated method.

Public wording: “Evaluation found a specific result within a defined cohort and set of conditions.”

Independently Evaluated

An external organisation or evaluator designed or conducted the evaluation with appropriate independence.

Public wording: “Independently evaluated within the stated scope and conditions.”

No maturity label is applied to a framework unless CKC Cares has the records to support it.

Selected Framework Provenance

Each entry can be expanded for its problem addressed, recognised foundations, CKC Cares contribution, intended use, current evidence position and claim boundary.

The Digital Polycrisis

A framing for how AI, privacy, cybersecurity and social pressures interact rather than sit in separate silos.

Problem addressed

AI, privacy, cybersecurity, digital change, governance, work, identity and wellbeing are often treated as separate issues even when their effects interact and intensify one another.

Recognised foundations

  • Polycrisis and systems thinking
  • Cybersecurity
  • Privacy and data protection
  • AI ethics
  • Governance
  • Organisational resilience
  • Digital wellbeing
  • Social and technological change

CKC Cares contribution

An integrated digital lens showing how technical, ethical, psychological, organisational and social pressures can compound one another and reach the people working inside those systems.

Intended use

Sensemaking, education, strategic discussion and identifying where connected digital pressures require a joined-up response.

Current evidence position

Research grounded and practice informed.

Claim boundary

CKC Cares does not claim to have invented the general concept of polycrisis or to predict every technological and social outcome. The Digital Polycrisis is the specific CKC Cares application of interconnected-risk thinking to AI, digital systems, governance and human experience.

Human Scaffolding

A human-centred layer of support for identity, agency, voice, judgement and capability during technological change.

Problem addressed

Organisations frequently concentrate on systems, deployment and efficiency while underestimating what people need to maintain judgement, agency, confidence, voice and capability during technological change.

Recognised foundations

  • Scaffolding and learning theory
  • Organisational psychology
  • Psychological safety
  • Change and capability development
  • Human factors
  • Human oversight
  • Digital wellbeing
  • Sociotechnical systems

CKC Cares contribution

A human-centred architecture for supporting identity, agency, voice, judgement and capability as AI and digital systems change how people work, learn and make decisions.

Intended use

Learning design, leadership support, transformation, facilitated reflection, organisational assessment and the design of human-centred interventions.

Current evidence position

Research grounded and practice informed. External-review and application records should be added as the relevant processes are completed.

Claim boundary

Human Scaffolding is not therapy, clinical treatment or diagnosis. It is not a substitute for occupational-health, psychological or medical support.

Zone of Disrupted Identity (ZDI)

Language for the unsettled space that opens up when change outpaces a person’s sense of role, value or expertise.

Problem addressed

Technological and organisational change can move faster than people can integrate changes in role, expertise, value, voice and professional identity.

Recognised foundations

  • Professional identity
  • Role transition
  • Organisational change
  • Self-efficacy
  • Technology-mediated work
  • Workplace identity
  • Psychological safety
  • Digital transformation

CKC Cares contribution

Language for the unsettled space that can emerge when technological change outpaces a person’s ability to integrate what that change means for their role, value or expertise.

Intended use

Reflection, facilitated discussion, leadership development, education and the identification of human pressures during digital transformation.

Current evidence position

Research grounded and practice informed.

Claim boundary

ZDI is a reflective and organisational concept. It is not a clinical diagnosis, psychiatric condition or medical label.

Digital Twin Self

A lens on the gap between who a person is and who their digital footprint says they are.

Problem addressed

Digital platforms, organisational systems and AI may construct partial representations of a person from profiles, records, behavioural data and inferred information. These representations can affect how the person is seen or treated.

Recognised foundations

  • Digital identity
  • Profiling
  • Inferred data
  • Reputation
  • Data protection
  • Human digital twins
  • Algorithmic decision-making
  • Identity management

CKC Cares contribution

A human-identity lens distinguishing the complete person from the partial representation assembled across platforms, records and AI systems.

Intended use

Identity reflection, privacy education, digital-governance discussion and examination of the gap between a person and their digital representation.

Current evidence position

Research grounded and practice informed.

Claim boundary

The framework does not suggest that every organisation maintains a literal technical digital twin of every person.

Prime 7 Invisible Human Harms

A seven-part taxonomy for harms that conventional technical risk registers can miss.

Problem addressed

Conventional technical and compliance risk registers may miss harms affecting dignity, knowledge, identity, capability, human judgement and participation.

Recognised foundations

  • Human factors
  • Organisational risk
  • Epistemic injustice
  • Dignity
  • Sociotechnical systems
  • Workforce displacement
  • Academic displacement
  • Governance and capability gaps

CKC Cares contribution

A seven-part taxonomy for recognising human and organisational harms that may remain invisible when attention is concentrated primarily on technical performance or formal compliance: Human Scaffolding Gaps, Governance Drift, Distributed Sensemaking Loss, Epistemic Violence, Dignity Erosion, Infrastructure Solutionism and Academic Displacement.

Intended use

Awareness, learning, facilitated discussion, diagnostic prompting and the identification of risks requiring deeper examination.

Current evidence position

Research grounded and practice informed.

Claim boundary

Prime 7 is not a validated psychometric instrument and should not be presented as a clinical or employee-scoring tool.

Drift Literacy

A way of noticing when systems, governance or capability quietly drift from their original purpose.

Problem addressed

Risk can develop gradually as technology, policy, behaviour, knowledge, capability and organisational culture move away from their original purpose or expected state.

Recognised foundations

  • Model drift
  • Concept drift
  • Policy and practice gaps
  • Organisational culture
  • Capability decay
  • Knowledge management
  • Human oversight
  • Distributed sensemaking

CKC Cares contribution

An expanded drift lens that looks beyond technical model drift to governance, knowledge, capability, culture, mirrors and distributed sensemaking.

Intended use

Recognising gradual divergence, prompting review and supporting conversations about whether systems, people and governance remain aligned.

Current evidence position

Research grounded and practice informed.

Claim boundary

Drift Literacy is a recognition and discussion framework. It does not provide mathematical measurement unless a specific assessment contains defined measures.

Shoelace Framework

An architecture linking diagnosis, environment and governance into one coherent explanation.

Problem addressed

Organisations may identify human risks without connecting those risks to the environment producing them or the governance response required.

Recognised foundations

  • Risk diagnosis
  • Operating context
  • Human oversight
  • Sociotechnical governance
  • Organisational learning
  • Capability and talent governance

CKC Cares contribution

A connected architecture linking Prime 7 as the diagnostic lens, Drift Literacy as the operating environment, and Human Systems Talent Governance as the governance outcome.

Intended use

Explaining how CKC Cares diagnostic, environmental and governance approaches connect.

Current evidence position

Research grounded and practice informed.

Claim boundary

The Shoelace Framework provides a coherent architecture. Individual assessments or diagnostic instruments must have their own criteria, methodology and evidence.

AIR Assessment

An annual organisational diagnostic across Adaptability, Innovation and Resilience.

Problem addressed

Organisations need a structured way to examine whether their governance, leadership and capability are keeping pace with AI and digital change.

Recognised foundations

  • Organisational readiness
  • Resilience
  • Innovation
  • Governance
  • Continuous improvement
  • NIST approaches
  • ISO-aligned management principles
  • Human oversight

CKC Cares contribution

A structured organisational diagnostic across Adaptability, Innovation and Resilience, producing a weighted score, identification of primary drift and a prioritised roadmap.

Intended use

An annual organisational MOT supporting leadership discussion, prioritisation and follow-up action.

Current evidence position

Practice-led organisational diagnostic. Pilot and outcome labels must be added only as documented evidence becomes available.

Claim boundary

AIR does not provide ISO certification, legal advice, regulatory compliance certification or psychometric validation.

AI First Aid

A non-clinical way to pause, orient and find a next step when AI-related disruption hits.

Problem addressed

People and teams may experience confusion, uncertainty, pressure or destabilisation when AI affects their work, identity, decisions or expectations.

Recognised foundations

  • Psychological first-aid principles
  • Digital literacy
  • Incident stabilisation
  • Escalation
  • Responsible technology adoption
  • Human-centred change

CKC Cares contribution

A non-clinical stabilisation approach helping people pause, orient themselves, identify immediate concerns and find an appropriate next step.

Intended use

Initial awareness, team learning, stabilisation, signposting and support during AI-related disruption.

Current evidence position

Research grounded and practice informed.

Claim boundary

AI First Aid is not medical treatment, mental-health diagnosis, emergency response or therapy. Appropriate escalation and referral routes must accompany delivery.

E-AMP Leadership

An integrated model for staying human, deliberate and relational as a leader through change.

Problem addressed

Leaders working through digital pressure and organisational change need more than technical knowledge. They need a structure for maintaining ethical judgement, adaptability, awareness and human connection.

Recognised foundations

  • Ethical leadership
  • Empathy
  • Mindfulness
  • Authenticity
  • Adaptability
  • Purpose
  • Presence
  • Reflective leadership practice

CKC Cares contribution

An integrated leadership model supporting deliberate, relational and human-centred leadership during complex change.

Intended use

Leadership development, facilitated learning, reflective practice and team discussion.

Current evidence position

Research grounded and practice informed. Add participant-use and evaluation labels only where supported by records.

Claim boundary

E-AMP does not guarantee improved leadership performance, employee wellbeing or organisational outcomes.

Further reading and primary sources

These are genuine starting points behind some of the general foundations named above — established frameworks and public guidance, not citations for a specific CKC Cares claim. We add further sources as individual framework entries are reviewed.

We do not manufacture citations. Where a framework’s foundations do not yet have a public, linkable primary source, none is listed above, and the framework’s entry describes its foundations in general terms only.

How provenance connects to experience

Provenance shows where the thinking comes from and what CKC Cares has added. Experience and application show how that thinking has been used.

The two should not be confused.

A framework may be grounded in recognised research and professional practice while its specific application remains at an early stage. Equally, professional experience may inform a method without turning that method into a formally validated scientific instrument.

CKC Cares records these distinctions so that clients, learners, collaborators and reviewers can understand the work without inflated claims.

Continuing review and development

CKC Cares frameworks are not treated as finished simply because they have been named or published. The work continues through research review, professional application, structured external feedback, participant experience, pilots and documented revision.

As that evidence develops, this page will be updated to reflect:

  • External review
  • Participant use
  • Pilot activity
  • Evaluation
  • Material framework changes
  • Updated claim boundaries
  • New supporting evidence

Where external reviewers contribute, participation does not automatically imply endorsement by the reviewer or their organisation.

Page version: 1.0

Initial publication: September 2026

Last substantive review: September 2026

Next review: To be scheduled following the first External Framework Review Programme cycle.

A note on scope

The frameworks described on this page support education, organisational learning, assessment, advisory work and facilitated discussion. They do not constitute legal, regulatory, medical, psychological or therapeutic advice. Reference to a standard, regulation, research field or professional body does not imply certification, accreditation or endorsement.

More ways in

About CKC Cares Group

CKC Cares Group is the umbrella for our work. It sits above two registered organisations.

CKC Cares Ventures Limited

Commercial consultancy, advisory, organisational services, learning, training and related commercial activity.

CKC Cares CIC

Community-interest, education, access, digital resilience and public-benefit activity.

About the GroupAbout CKC Cares Ventures LimitedVisit the main CKC Cares websiteVisit CKC Cares CICVisit CKC Cares for Education