health

name	health
description	Use when a proposal concerns public-health systems, health programmes, facilities, health informatics, pharmaceutical systems, or service improvement; use water-sanitation when WASH is the primary outcome.
metadata	{"portable":true,"compatible_with":["claude-code","codex"]}

Health and Pharmaceutical Systems

Acknowledgement: Shared by Peter Bamuhigire, techguypeter.com, [phone].

Use When

• Use this skill when the assignment is clearly in health systems, health programmes, or pharmaceutical and service-delivery work.
• Load it when proposal sections need sector-specific framing, terminology, stakeholders, risks, or methodology cues.

Do Not Use When

• Another sector is the closer fit and this one adds no material value.
• The task only needs procurement-form instructions without domain context.

Required Inputs

Artefact	Source/provider	Required?	Missing-input behaviour
The assignment brief or ToR.	Buyer solicitation, ToR, or approved brief	Required	Stop the affected claim, request or verify the input, and label the resulting gap.
The geography and institutional context, especially if Uganda-specific evidence is relevant.	Buyer, verified sector source, or discovery	Required	Stop the affected claim, request or verify the input, and label the resulting gap.

Workflow

1. Confirm the sector fit from the brief.
2. Read the sector reference file for evidence, terminology, and current signals.
3. Translate the sector context into problem framing, methodology choices, stakeholder logic, and risks.
4. Use the sector framing inside the relevant numbered proposal section skills.

Stop condition: Stop when proposer identity, controlling framework, mandatory form, sector fit, current rule, or load-bearing evidence remains unresolved.

Recovery: Record the gap and owner, seek clarification or current evidence, and return only the separable proposal content that remains supportable.

Quality Standards

• Prefer sector detail that improves credibility and delivery realism.
• Use reference data to sharpen the proposal story, not to overwhelm it.

Anti-Patterns

• Do not paste statistics without explaining their relevance.
• Do not use sector jargon as a substitute for a clear methodology.
• Treating a neighbouring sector or framework as interchangeable. Fix: identify the controlling rule and primary outcome.
• Adding terminology without changing a delivery choice. Fix: link each term to method, risk, output, or evaluation criterion.
• Presenting an unverified current rule or statistic as settled. Fix: cite and date the source or mark it not assessed.
• Ignoring a missing mandatory input. Fix: stop the affected claim and assign an evidence owner.
• Letting sector or identity framing contradict methodology, staffing, schedule, or price. Fix: reconcile all affected sections before release.

Outputs

Artefact	Consumer	Acceptance condition
Sector-specific framing and methodology cues for health-sector assignments.	Proposal lead, section writer, and evaluator-readiness reviewer	Applied consistently, traceable to the selected source, and free of unsupported identity, framework, or sector claims.

Evidence Produced

Evidence	Consumer	Acceptance condition
Routing and source record	Proposal lead and reviewer	Selected identity, framework, sector, source, date, and material gaps are recorded.
Decision record	Section writer and delivery lead	Each material choice has rationale, owner, evidence, and a review or stop condition.
Conformance check	Release reviewer	Mandatory forms, identity rules, sector logic, and unresolved checks are explicitly assessed.

Capability Contract

This skill may read supplied profiles, solicitations, ToRs, approved references, and proposal drafts and may prepare routing guidance or draft content within the authorised workspace. Review is read-only by default. It must not invent credentials, certify compliance, submit a bid, accept terms, publish, disclose confidential information, or change source records without explicit authority.

Degraded Mode

If the solicitation, profile, current procurement source, sector evidence, network, or reviewer is unavailable, provide the narrowest useful qualified routing or draft. Mark the missing check not assessed, omit unsupported credentials, thresholds, dates, or compliance claims, and identify the evidence owner. An unassessed requirement is never a pass.

Decision Rules

Decision	Action	Failure/risk avoided
Care or programme pathway	Identify users, facility or programme level, referral and data flows, safeguards, and outcome measure.	Intervention that ignores patient safety or delivery constraints
Conflicting solicitation and background guidance	Follow the solicitation while recording the conflict for formal clarification.	Non-responsive interpretation
Missing mandatory evidence	Stop the affected claim or form, record the owner and deadline, and continue only with independent supported content.	Fabricated evidence or silent omission
Submission, certification, or contractual commitment	Obtain explicit authority and preserve approval evidence before acting.	Unauthorised external commitment

Worked Example

A solicitation requires care or programme pathway, but one controlling input is missing. The proposal team applies this rule: Identify users, facility or programme level, referral and data flows, safeguards, and outcome measure. It records the gap and owner, withholds the affected assurance, and proceeds only with content that can be verified. This avoids intervention that ignores patient safety or delivery constraints.

References

• Proposal skill router — orchestration, profile, reasoning, and release gates.

• references/uganda-health-sector.md for local sector context.
• ../SKILL.md to combine this sector with procurement context.