KERALA RISING · FROM EXPORTING PEOPLE TO EXPORTING IDEAS 5. Responsibilities and coordination Each civic outcome has a lead authority that owns the outcome and supplies its subject expertise; the institution supplies the shared capability and the audited record. For every programme, the lead authority’s head chairs the activation committee, so that the body which might otherwise fear displacement is instead the visible beneficiary of the programme’s success, a deliberate design choice to convert the most likely internal opponent into the programme’s champion. Field operations rely on existing local-body and community structures rather than a new field force. Coordination at the apex is single-line; coordination at the ground is through the bodies that already reach citizens. 6. Legal, data-protection, and audit scaffolding The institution would operate under the prevailing data-protection law, on an opt-in, recognition-only basis, never punitive, with consent and citizen rights built into the design rather than bolted on; Chapter 22 maps the design against each principle of that law. The audit scaffolding is unusually heavy by intent: continuous quarterly publication of the audited corpus as open data, an annual governance review, and standing CAG jurisdiction. The reasoning is that a body which records civic behaviour at population scale must be more transparent than an ordinary department, not less, 28