Skip to content
Aerial night view of a large multi-level highway interchange.
Engineering firm · Digital public infrastructure

We build the digital infrastructure public institutions depend on.

We design and build digital public infrastructure, distributed-ledger systems, and other complex software for governments, NGOs, and multilateral institutions.

  • Delaware, USA
  • Founded 2024
  • Governments · NGOs · Multilaterals
What we build

Six areas we go deep in.

We describe capability, not achievement. Each area below is work we design and engineer, with the failure modes handled, not just the happy path.
01

Digital public infrastructure

Registries, identity systems, payment rails, and the data-exchange layers that let separate agencies work from the same facts instead of duplicating records.

  • Designing registry schemas other agencies can consume without renegotiating the format each time.
02

Distributed ledger and verifiable records

Some records need to be shared by parties who don't trust each other's copy: a cooperative, a bank, and a regulator all need to see the same delivery event and agree it happened.

  • Modelling events as typed, signed records instead of generic blobs.
03

Identity and credentials

Verifiable credentials and selective disclosure let a person prove one fact about themselves, such as an age threshold or a licence, without handing over the whole underlying document.

  • Designing recovery paths for a lost device or a forgotten passphrase.
04

Payments and settlement

Money movement doesn't tolerate a rounding error, a duplicate transfer, or an ambiguous state after a crash.

  • Defining custody boundaries so it's always unambiguous who holds funds and when they moved.
05

Data platforms

Institutions that answer to an oversight body need more than a dashboard.

  • Designing ingestion that fails loudly instead of dropping malformed records quietly.
06

Field systems for low-connectivity environments

A field officer with an intermittent signal, a low-end Android device, and an unreliable power supply is a normal condition to design for, not an edge case.

  • Designing local-first storage with conflict resolution for devices that sync out of order.
See all capabilities
Selected work

Systems we designed and built.

Afrikabal built each of these. Rovify and GetJustly are independently owned. We describe what we engineered, not who runs it.
Overhead aerial view of stacked shipping containers and gantry cranes at a busy port terminal.
Commodity trade

AXK Network

Challenge

A single shipment of a physical commodity touches a cooperative, a buyer, a bank financing the trade, and often a regulator, and each of them keeps its own record of what happened.

What we built

Afrikabal designed the protocol model and built the platform on top of it: a verified-state system that records the real-world events of a trade, delivery, custody transfer, settlement, as structured, auditable entries that every party can read from the same source.

Read the case study
Aerial view of the sweeping tensile roof structure of a large civic stadium.
Youth sports institutions

Rovify

Challenge

A youth athlete's history, which club they played for, which season, what position, what standing, usually exists as a patchwork of team sheets, league spreadsheets, and institutional memory.

What we built

Afrikabal designed and built Rovify as an operating system for the institutions that run youth sports: verified athlete records, league and season management, a tournament engine, and governance for how a transfer between institutions happens.

Read the case study
A large white neoclassical building with tall columns, evoking civic and judicial institutions.
Access to justice

GetJustly

Challenge

Most people facing a civil legal problem, a wrongful eviction, an unpaid wage claim, a custody dispute, never get in front of a lawyer.

What we built

Afrikabal designed and built GetJustly as a set of connected surfaces: AI legal guidance calibrated to local statute, an encrypted evidence vault with chain of custody, a verified counsel network, and case management tying the three together.

Read the case study
View all work
How we work

A durable system, then a clean handover.

We build with boring, durable technology, ship in short cycles, and hand over code the institution owns outright. The measure of a good handover is whether their own team can change the system without calling us.
01

Discovery and scoping

Before any architecture decision, we spend time understanding the institution: its mandate, the policy it's required to enforce, and the constraints nobody wrote down that would sink a design if we missed them.

02

Architecture

We choose boring, durable technology on purpose.

03

Build

Delivery is iterative: working software in short cycles, reviewed against the actual scope rather than a fixed contract signed a year earlier.

04

Handover and knowledge transfer

An institution that depends on us indefinitely hasn't been well served.

Read our full approach
Who we work with

Institutions that run public systems.

We build for the kind of institution whose software a citizen depends on. We name the class of institution, never a client.

Governments and ministriesMultilateral and development-finance institutionsNGOs and civil-society organizationsPublic agencies and regulators

Governments and ministries

Registries, identity, payment rails, and the data-exchange layers that let separate agencies work from the same facts.

Multilateral and development-finance institutions

Systems with the audit trail and access model an oversight body will actually ask to see, built in from day one.

NGOs and civil-society organizations

Field-ready tools that work offline, on low-end devices, over the channels people already use.

Public agencies and regulators

Shared, tamper-evident records that parties who do not trust each other’s copy can still audit together.

Insights

Notes from the systems we build.

Short, technical notes on the engineering decisions behind digital public infrastructure, verifiable credentials, and settlement systems.

Symmetrical detail of concrete brutalist architecture rising against a bright sky.
Digital public infrastructure

Why a registry fails quietly before it fails loudly.

The outage that gets noticed is rarely the first one. A registry usually drifts out of sync with reality long before anyone reports a record that would not verify.

Close-up of lines of source code displayed on a computer screen.
Verifiable credentials

Revocation is the hard part, not the credential format.

A lost phone or an expired licence is the normal case, not the exception. The design question is whether a verifier can trust a credential without being online at the moment of the check.

Aerial night view of a tangled multi-lane urban highway interchange.
Payments and settlement

Reconciliation should be continuous, not a task run at month end.

Money movement does not tolerate an ambiguous state after a crash. We design settlement around explicit custody boundaries, so a discrepancy is visible right away, not caught later in an audit.

FAQ

Questions a procurement team asks.

Straight answers on ownership, data, formats, and how an engagement runs. If yours is not here, ask us directly.

Who owns the code and the data when you hand over?

You do, outright. At handover the source code, the schemas, the deployment configuration, and the documentation transfer to your institution. We do not keep a licence you have to pay to renew, and we do not hold a copy of your data. The bar we hold ourselves to is whether your own engineers can change the system after we are gone without calling us.

Do you use a distributed ledger by default?

No. A ledger is the right tool only when parties who do not trust each other’s copy of a record have to share one: a cooperative, a bank, and a regulator all needing to agree the same delivery event happened. When one party controls the data and the others only need to read it, a well-designed database with proper access control is faster to build, cheaper to run, and easier for your team to maintain. We tell you which situation you are in before we recommend either.

What does a scope note contain?

What the system is required to do, drawn from your mandate and the policy you have to enforce, not just the initial request. It names the failure modes we will design for, the data the system holds and who can see it, the boundaries with systems you already run, and the constraints that would sink the design if we missed them. It is a working document we build against, not a proposal deck.

What happens at handover?

We document the system as we build it rather than writing it up at the end, train the engineers who will maintain it, and transfer the code your institution owns. Where an institution wants ongoing support or incremental changes as policy shifts, we offer that as a choice you make, not a dependency we engineer in to keep ourselves necessary.

Will we be locked into proprietary formats?

No. Data lives in standard, documented schemas your own engineers can read without us. Exports use standard formats, not a format only our tooling understands. Migrating off our system is a supported path, not an afterthought. If leaving is hard, we built it wrong.

How does an engagement start?

With a fit assessment: what you are trying to enable, where we could plug in, and whether the shapes match. It is a conversation, not a sales script. If it is a fit, discovery and scoping come next, and that produces the scope note before any architecture decision is made.

Upward abstract view of a modern institutional building's facade, foreshortened against the sky.
Start a conversation

Tell us what your institution is trying to build.

The first conversation is a fit assessment: what you are trying to enable, where we could plug in, and whether the shapes match. No sales script.