Project summary

Green Light will create the standard for sexual-health verification without revealing or requiring private information.

What are this project's goals? How will you achieve them?

Authorized labs or providers would verify that a qualifying screening was completed within a defined timeframe. Green Light would validate the source, identity match, qualifying panel, and freshness, then discard the underlying medical payload and issue a time-limited credential.

Verified pass, or nothing. Green Light would never display a negative or failed status. The absence of a credential shouldn’t be viewed as information about someone’s health.

The initial project would define the verification and privacy standard, develop a prototype, connect at least one healthcare-data source, create a standalone verification experience using a link or QR code, and test user comprehension and willingness to use the system. A later phase could provide an API/SDK for integration into dating platforms and other services.

How will this funding be used?

Funding would help take Green Light from a concept into a testable prototype, make sure it’s designed with assisting people in mind each step of the way and not rushed to make money.

Primary expenses include technical development, healthcare-data interoperability, privacy and security review, user research, design, hosting and infrastructure, and consultation on healthcare/privacy compliance.

The goal is not to build a full-scale company with this initial funding. It’s to determine whether the verification model can work technically, preserve privacy as intended, and provide useful information without creating new opportunities for health-status inference or discrimination.

Who is on your team? What's your track record on similar projects?

I’m building Green Light alone at the moment.

My background includes pharmacy, health insurance, care coordination, medical documentation, and navigating the systems connecting patients, providers, pharmacies, insurers, and employers. That experience exposed me to both the usefulness and sensitivity of health information and to how easily systems can request or disclose more information than is actually necessary.

My independent work focuses on consent, selective disclosure, accessibility, institutional design, and how technology can assist people without unnecessarily removing their control. Related projects include the Adaptive Layer, a consent-based personalization framework; DocumentDNA, a machine-readable instruction layer for documents; and the Application Feedback Standard. I also participate in the W3C Adaptation and Personalization Community Group.

Green Light applies my same principles to health verification: prove only what needs to be proven while revealing as little underlying information as possible.

What are the most likely causes and outcomes if this project fails?

Likely risks are integration barriers, insufficient adoption by labs or platforms, regulatory complexity, and users misunderstanding what a Green Light credential does and does not establish. Simplification and integration and use is key, not actually holding onto the medical data will boost security as well.

Possible safety risk: a privacy-preserving credential could create social pressure to participate or cause people to infer health information from someone choosing not to display one. The “verified pass, or nothing” design is meant to reduce that, but user testing would determine whether it succeeds.

A failed prototype would still help determine the limits of private health verification, especially around selective disclosure, consent, not participating, interoperability, and unintentional inference. This could help inform future credentialing and health systems if Green Light itself isn’t ultimately deployed.

How much money have you raised in the last 12 months, and from where?

Zero. Currently my independent project