Session 2 answer key and debrief questions
Part A
Structured prompt should restrict to Annex S2, forbid invention, name internal MEAL audience, and specify bullets.
Manager route: Amber or red if no approved tool, no verification workflow, or donor-facing use without MEAL sign-off.
Technical route: Examples: approved for internal data? processing location? training use of inputs?
Part B
| Claim | Verdict |
|---|---|
| 78% | Contradicted / invented |
| District-wide | Unsupported (S2 states no district estimate) |
| Severe/urgent | Unsupported escalation |
Decision: Reject for donor use without full rewrite from S2.
Approver: MEAL lead or program director per org chart.
Debrief questions
- What is the difference between a better prompt and a verified output?
- When is rejection the correct professional response?
- How would uneven connectivity affect your verification workflow in the field?
Rubric (4 points)
| # | Evidence |
|---|---|
| 1 | Reject or amber with reason for donor use |
| 2 | Table references S2 correctly |
| 3 | Identifies invented statistic or harmful escalation |
| 4 | Names human approver |