POA Nexgen Technologies
NYA-YOP · Proposal
Proposal · Youth Operations Platform for the National Youth Authority

NYA-YOPThe operational system that runs NYA's programmes end to end — and makes the National Youth Tracker true.

Application, verification, training, field delivery, disbursement and placement to a verified employment or enterprise outcome, captured once at the point it happens and published as verified events into the National Youth Tracker. Government can already say how many young people registered; NYA-YOP lets it say what happened to each of them afterwards — and prove it.

Prepared by
POA Nexgen TechnologiesAccra, Ghana
Prepared for
National Youth AuthorityMinistry of Youth Development and Empowerment
Document
Master Proposal, version 3September 2026
Decision requested
10-week discovery, then a 90-day proofGated — it can stop
01 · Executive summary

Ghana does not need another youth app. It needs the system that produces trustworthy delivery data in the first place.

Government can currently say how many young people registered. It cannot reliably say what happened to them afterwards. That is not a failure of intent — it is a failure of instrumentation. The transactions that would answer the question, such as an officer verifying a beneficiary, a trainer marking attendance or an employer confirming a placement held, either happen on paper or do not happen at all.

The Ministry's own 2026–2029 Medium-Term Development Plan already names the gap in its sector SWOT: an "inadequate and unreliable data base on youth programmes", "inadequate monitoring and evaluation systems", "paucity of youth related data" and the "absence of real-time data on youth". NYA-YOP is a direct answer to a problem the Ministry has written down.

The problem in one number

141,954 registered · 5,812 completed · afterwards, unknown

As at 2 August 2026 the One Million Coders Programme reported 141,954 registrations, 27,782 active learners and 5,812 completions. Nobody can currently say what happened to those 5,812. That is the gap NYA-YOP closes — first for NYA's own programmes, then as a pattern the Ministry can extend.

The pathway made measurable

Every arrow is a place a young person is lost from the record

Opportunity → application → verification → selection → participation → training → assessment → certification → placement → employment or business → income → follow-up → verified outcome. NYA-YOP instruments each step, once, at the point it happens.

The question changes

From "how many registered?" to "what happened to each of them — and can we prove it?"

Headline outcomes are reported only where a third party or an authorised system confirmed them. A number produced this way can be defended in front of Parliament, IMANI or a development partner.

02 · Position

What NYA-YOP is — and what it is not

The position this proposal takesNYA-YOP is the operational system that runs the National Youth Authority's programmes end to end — from application through verification, training, field delivery, disbursement and placement to a verified employment or enterprise outcome — and publishes trustworthy, real-time data into the National Youth Tracker. It is where the Tracker's data comes from. It makes the Tracker true.

Phase 1 is NYA's own house: NYA's programmes, NYA's field officers, NYA's outcomes — entirely within the mandate of Act 939 and approvable by the NYA Board. The architecture — a common programme lifecycle, an event model, the journey record, outcome evidence levels and published API contracts — is built so that when the Ministry chooses to extend the pattern across YEA, NEIP and NSA, the integration cost is near zero. NYA volunteers to be the reference implementation for the Ministry's harmonisation agenda, not a competitor to it.

"Isn't this just the Youth Tracker?"No. The Youth Tracker reports what agencies submit. NYA-YOP is what NYA submits from. Today a district officer confirms an apprentice's attendance on paper and it reaches the Tracker weeks later as a total. With NYA-YOP that same officer confirms it once, offline, on a phone, against a verified identity, and it reaches the Tracker the same day as a structured event with an audit trail. We are not building a second dashboard. We are building the thing that makes the first one worth looking at.
03 · Product

Twenty modules, one lifecycle

Every NYA programme — the National Apprenticeship Programme, SkillsConnekt, the National Youth Volunteer Programme, Youth Innovate and the Youth Leadership and Skills Training Institutes — runs on the same workflow. Six modules are new in this version; disbursement control is the one that pays for the platform.

Programme management
Beneficiary management and journey record
Applications and selection
Identity verification ladderNew
Cohorts, training and attendance
Field operationsHighest priority
Workplace and master-craftsperson managementNew
Case management, referral and grievanceExpanded
Safeguarding — restricted tierNew
Disbursement controlNew · highest value
Placement and outcome verificationReframed against GLMIS
Entrepreneurship follow-up
Volunteer management
Mentorship
Monitoring, evaluation and outcomes
Data quality
Evidence, audit and consent registerExpanded
Integration and event services
Notifications, SMS and USSD
Dashboards and reporting
04 · The mechanisms

Three controls that turn activity counts into defensible outcomes

A verification ladder decides who a record can be used for, an evidence level decides what an outcome is worth, and a disbursement control chain decides when money can move. Each is recorded on every record and reported separately, never blended.

The verification ladder — V0 to V3

NYA-YOP issues a Youth Reference Number: an internal, non-public key that links NYA programme interactions. It is not an identity and confers no entitlement. A young person can enter at any tier; the tier constrains what the record can be used for. If the NIA service is unavailable the platform degrades to V1/V2 and keeps operating.

TierMethodWhat it permits
V0 — Self-assertedName, date of birth, phone, districtRegistration and expression of interest only. Cannot receive any payment.
V1 — Officer-attestedA district or field officer confirms in person and records evidenceParticipation in non-cash programmes. A first-class path, not a failure state, with a route to V3.
V2 — Document-checkedGhana Card number captured and format-validated, or an approved alternative documentProvisional payment eligibility, time-limited, subject to upgrade.
V3 — NIA-verifiedVerified through the NIA Identity Verification Service PlatformFull eligibility, including stipend and grant disbursement.

Outcome evidence levels — A to D

Headline outcome figures report levels C and D only. Levels A and B are shown separately and clearly labelled. This single control is what prevents inflated success statistics.

Level A

Self-reported

The young person reports the outcome — a survey response: "I am working".

Level B

Programme verified

An NYA officer confirms — a field visit records the placement.

Level C

Third-party verified

The employer, training provider or master craftsperson confirms retention at six months.

Level D

System-linked

Confirmed through an authorised integration — a credential via CTVET, a placement via a data exchange.

The disbursement control chain

NAP pays monthly allowances during training and start-up capital on completion, against a 2026 enrolment target of 100,000. Every other module is a cost; this one is a saving with a number attached. No payment above verification tier V1; no cash-equivalent payment below V3; attendance is immutable once the gate has run; payment files are generated by the system, never assembled by hand; reconciliation is mandatory before the next cycle can run.

Programme disbursement ruleFor example: NAP monthly allowance, payable where verified attendance is at least 80% of scheduled days in the period.
Attendance captured in the fieldOffline-capable, timestamped, officer-attributed, against a participant at the required verification tier.
Automated eligibility gatePass, fail or exception — each with a recorded reason.
Exception queueImpossible attendance, duplicate marks, single-officer clustering, centre-level outliers, late submissions.
Maker → checker → approverThree named roles, no user holding two, conflict-of-interest declaration recorded.
Payment instruction fileTo the paying channel — mobile money, bank or GhIPSS — with a per-beneficiary reference.
ReconciliationPaid, failed or returned, matched back per beneficiary.
GIFMIS reconciliationProgramme spend agrees to the government financial system.
Exception and recoveryOverpayment, ghost detection, clawback, referral — every adverse gate result is appealable through the grievance workflow.

At 100,000 apprentices on monthly allowances, the platform pays for itself if it prevents leakage of a low single-digit percentage of disbursements. This is a sensitivity, not a finding: no leakage rate for these programmes is published, and today there is no mechanism that could measure one. That is itself the argument. estimate

05 · Compliance

Aligned to the law by design

Security and privacy here are statutory obligations, not good practice. The platform is designed to the Data Protection Bill 2025 as well as the current Act, because building to the current Act alone guarantees non-compliance mid-build.

Data Protection Act, 2012 (Act 843)

Registered controller, purpose-limited by design

Accountability, lawfulness, purpose specification and limitation, security safeguards and data-subject participation. Verification results are stored, not identity documents; consent is designed, not mentioned; a DPIA is a Phase 0 deliverable.

Data Protection Bill 2025

GPS traces, photos and voice notes treated as personal data from day one

The Bill broadens personal data to biometrics, location and online identifiers and converts the Commission into a Data Protection Authority. A compliance re-baseline is budgeted at enactment.

Cybersecurity Act, 2020 (Act 1038)

A CSA determination on Critical Information Infrastructure — before build

Every penetration test, audit or SOC vendor must evidence a current CSA licence as a condition precedent. Enforcement is active: sanctions since January 2026, and a GH¢360,000 fine in August 2026.

Safeguarding

A restricted tier, not a case category

Separate authorisation, a separate audit trail, and access that is logged and reviewed. Sensitive case data never sits in the general case queue.

NITA e-GIF

Interoperability by standard, not by bespoke integration

Published API contracts and a signed event envelope carry NIA verification, YouthXplore intake, the Youth Tracker feed, GLMIS vacancies and GIFMIS reconciliation, in dependency order.

Public Procurement Act (Act 914)

Procured through GHANEPS, with a recurrent line

The procurement strategy is a Phase 0 deliverable; Phase 5 cannot be passed without a confirmed recurrent budget line for years two to five.

Security controls in full: MFA for all privileged users · role- and attribute-based access · privileged access management · API authentication and rate limiting · WAF · secrets management · encryption in transit and at rest · backup and disaster recovery with tested restore · immutable audit logs · vulnerability scanning · penetration testing by a CSA-licensed provider · continuous monitoring · a defined incident-response path with regulator notification.

06 · Hosting and ownership

NYA holds the accounts, the domains, the certificates and the keys

Where the system runs is a policy question, a cost question and a procurement question. NITA regulates the data-centre and cloud market and owns the government's interoperability standards; the decisions below are taken in Phase 0 with NITA and the Data Protection Commission, not after build. A platform whose infrastructure is owned by its vendor is not government-owned, whatever the contract says about data.

DecisionOptionsOwner
Where production runsNITA government data centre · a commercial Ghanaian data centre · cloudNYA ICT with NITA
Data residencyIn-country only, or permitted foreign processing with safeguardsNYA DPO with DPC guidance
Backup and disaster recoveryLocation, restore testing and recovery objectivesNYA ICT
Environment separationProduction, staging, training and developmentDelivery partner
Who holds the keysAccounts, domains, certificates and encryption keysNYA, not the vendor
07 · Delivery

A ninety-day proof with a gate that can fail, then twelve months to a scale decision

One programme — NAP, because it is NYA's own, has money attached and has a 100,000 target for 2026. One region. Ten districts. No employer portal, no entrepreneurship module, no mentorship, no AI, no executive dashboard and no cross-agency integration beyond NIA verification. The gate: did attendance data quality and payment exception rates improve measurably against the paper baseline? If not, stop. A stop costs NYA three months instead of three years.

Phase 0 · 8–12 weeks

Discovery and governance

Stakeholder workshops, system and data inventory, process mapping with time and cost per step, legal and privacy review including the DPIA, scope agreements in writing with MYDE and the Labour Department, the CSA determination request, NIA commercial terms, build-versus-adapt, architecture, pilot region selection, prototype, costed roadmap and procurement strategy.

Phase 1 · Months 3–5

The 90-day proof

Participant register with the V0–V3 ladder, offline field attendance capture, the disbursement eligibility gate, one maker–checker–approver cycle, one real end-to-end payment cycle reconciled, and a district dashboard.

Phase 2 · Months 5–8

Field operations proper

Cases, referrals, the grievance workflow, the safeguarding tier, centre and workplace inspections, evidence capture and sync-conflict resolution. A second region with a different connectivity profile.

Phase 3 · Months 7–10

Outcomes

Placement records, employer and master-craftsperson confirmation, evidence levels C and D, three- and six-month follow-up, the first verified conversion measurement and entrepreneurship outcome recording.

Phase 4 · Months 8–11

Integrations, in dependency order

NIA (live from Phase 1) → YouthXplore intake → Youth Tracker event feed → GLMIS vacancy consumption → GIFMIS reconciliation. OMCP and CTVET/TVETMIS only when those systems can expose data.

Phase 5 · Months 10–12

Evaluation and scale decision

Independent evaluation, security and data-quality audit, user research, the recurrent-budget decision and the national rollout business case. Phase 5 cannot be passed without a confirmed recurrent budget line.

08 · Costs

Deliberately small first, and honest about year two

Every figure here is an order-of-magnitude planning estimate — none is a quotation and none is sourced; real quotations replace them before any submission. estimate MYDE's 2026 budget is roughly GHS 1.6 billion, most of it ring-fenced or absorbed by allowances, so Phase 0 is sized under 0.1% of it and the funding routes proposed do not depend on the Ministry's discretionary budget.

Phase 0 — discovery and pilot design, 8–12 weeksIndicative GHS
Discovery team — product, architect, data and privacy, service design, research350,000 – 600,000
Field research across three regions — travel, translation, participant costs90,000 – 160,000
Data Protection Impact Assessment and legal review70,000 – 140,000
Interactive prototype, seven priority screens120,000 – 220,000
Architecture, integration assessment, costed roadmap, procurement strategy90,000 – 160,000
Total~720,000 – 1,280,000
Phases 1–5 — pilot build and run, 12 months, three regionsIndicative GHS
Platform configuration and build (hybrid build-and-adapt)2,500,000 – 5,000,000
Integrations — NIA IVSP, YouthXplore intake, Youth Tracker feed, payment channel700,000 – 1,500,000
Field devices and accessories (about 250 officers)500,000 – 900,000
Connectivity and data bundles, 12 months200,000 – 400,000
Hosting, backup and disaster recovery, 12 months250,000 – 600,000
Security assurance — CSA-licensed penetration test, CII compliance200,000 – 450,000
NIA verification fees, volume-drivenrate to be obtained from NIA
Training, change management, super-user network400,000 – 800,000
Service desk and operations, 12 months350,000 – 700,000
Independent evaluation300,000 – 600,000
Contingency, 15%—
Total~5.4m – 11.0m, plus NIA fees and contingency

The number that actually matters is the recurrent cost from year two.

Hosting, support, device refresh, connectivity, NIA verification fees, licences, the service desk and a small permanent product team. If this is not in NYA's recurrent budget line, the platform dies in year three however well it is built — the failure mode of almost every donor-funded government system in the region.

GHS 2.5m – 5.0mper year at pilot scale, rising with national rollout estimate
09 · The decision requested

Not approval to build a national platform

The decision requested is approval for a ten-week Youth Delivery Discovery, followed by a ninety-day single-programme proof in one region, with an explicit stop/go gate before any platform investment. Indicative cost GHS 720,000 – 1,280,000 estimate — the ability to make the real decision on evidence, at roughly one-tenth of one percent of the Ministry's annual budget.

  1. Verified inventory of NYA's current programme systems, spreadsheets and paper processes
  2. Process maps for NAP and two other NYA programmes, with time and cost per current step
  3. Baseline measurement — attendance completeness, application turnaround, share of outcomes verified at level C/D, officer time per verification
  4. Scope agreement with MYDE on the Youth Tracker boundary — in writing
  5. Scope agreement with the Labour Department on the GLMIS boundary — in writing
  6. Data Protection Impact Assessment, and a CSA determination on CII status
  7. NIA IVSP commercial and technical terms, in writing
  8. Build-versus-adapt evaluation and recommended architecture
  9. Interactive prototype of seven priority screens, tested with real district officers and real young people
  10. Costed roadmap with a recurrent-cost line for years 2–5
  11. Procurement strategy compliant with Act 914 and GHANEPS
Immediate next actionsTest this positioning with the Chief Executive's office · obtain three numbers from NYA — the current outcome-verification rate, application-to-selection turnaround and attendance completeness · confirm the district office and YLSTI footprint · establish MYDE's plan for the Youth Tracker's next phase · open the GLMIS scope conversation with the Labour Department · request NIA IVSP terms in writing · ask the World Bank country office about a GJSP successor · seek the CSA's view on CII designation · name the full-time product owner inside NYA · then, and only then, submit the Phase 0 request.
10 · Documents and demo

Read the full proposal, or walk through the working prototype

The executive summary is also available as a web page. Sign in to the demo with any username and password, then any six-digit code. Every name, figure and record in the demo is invented for demonstration and is not NYA data.