Active responseColombia earthquakeVerified updates, safety resources, and six open build priorities.Help Colombia →
← AI Humane Society
Disaster response · Venezuela + Colombia

Venezuela + Colombia Earthquake Response

This open-source initiative began with Venezuela's earthquake recovery and expanded after the August 10 earthquake in Colombia. The published 2026 schedule listed a build sprint for August 11–16 and Demo Day for August 17. Registration and submissions for that event are closed.

Format
Online · Global
Kickoff
Wed, Jul 8
Build
Aug 11 – Aug 16
Demo day
Mon, Aug 17

It began in Venezuela. Following the August 10 earthquake, it expanded for Colombia.

On June 24, the earthquakes in Venezuela exposed urgent gaps in damage assessment, communication, family tracing, and aid coordination. We built this initiative to turn that response into reusable, open foundations. The August 10 earthquake in Colombia makes the reason clear: communities need solutions that can move quickly without losing local context.

June 24, 2026

Where the initiative began

Venezuela revealed the response gaps

After the M7.2 and M7.5 earthquakes in north-central Venezuela, the initiative focused builders on recovery coordination, family tracing, damage assessment, health, connectivity, and transparent aid delivery, while inviting responder and local-knowledge review.

That first response became the foundation: open starters, shared guardrails, and workflows designed to be adapted—not copied blindly.
Read the Venezuela situation brief →

Scenario 02 · Colombia

August 10, 2026 · Active response

Why the initiative expanded

Colombia puts those foundations to work

The August 10 M7.4 earthquake near San José del Palmar, Chocó, brings new local realities: distributed building damage, rural access, low connectivity, landslide and liquefaction risk, and an urgent need for verified information.

This is why the initiative was built to travel: reuse what works, replace what does not fit, and validate every decision with Colombian expertise.
Open the Colombia scenario brief →

Venezuela started the work. Colombia carries it forward.

This is not a second, disconnected hackathon. Teams share open-source starters, lessons, and safety guardrails, then seek validation of language, data sources, authorities, hazards, and workflows from people who know each place. Every result remains open to inspect and adapt; operational use requires local governance, safeguarding, security review, and field validation.

The June 24 earthquakes in north-central Venezuela have moved from emergency response into a difficult early-recovery phase.

A powerful M7.2 and M7.5 sequence struck north-central Venezuela on June 24. PAHO and other UN agencies documented extensive health, shelter, protection, access, and essential-service needs as the emergency developed.

By August 11, Associated Press reported more than 6,300 deaths. PAHO described the health response as entering early recovery, focused on restoring essential services, referral networks, and prevention of secondary public-health emergencies.

The World Bank estimated US$19.6 billion in direct physical damage. These reported figures are timestamped snapshots, not permanent final totals. Recovery tools must keep observed evidence separate from models and protect personal data.

M7.2 → M7.5
Two quakes ~40 seconds apart · June 24, 2026 (USGS)
>6,300
deaths reported by Associated Press · 11 August 2026
$19.6B
estimated direct physical damage (World Bank GRADE)

Sources: USGS · PAHO/WHO early recovery update · Associated Press · World Bank GRADE assessment. Figures reflect early reporting and may change as the response develops.

One toolkit, reusable across both scenarios

Pick a response gap below, then choose the scenario where you can contribute the strongest local knowledge. Cross-scenario teams can extract reusable components while country-focused teams validate what works on the ground.

You don't have to start from an empty repo. Every track below has an open-source starter template — a working app, not a skeleton — plus a reference build showing roughly where it could go. Fork one and you're editing real code in a few minutes.

Rapid Damage Mapping

Turn satellite, drone, and social-media imagery into live maps of collapsed buildings, blocked roads, and the hardest-hit zones — so responders know where to go first.

Search, Rescue & Missing Persons

Help families and agencies register, find, and reconnect missing people, and coordinate search-and-rescue across organizations without duplicating effort.

Needs & Resources Matching

Match urgent needs — medical care, water, shelter, food — to the nearest available supplies, shelters, and volunteers in real time.

Aftershock & Structural Safety

Aftershock-aware risk guidance and fast structural triage to flag which buildings are unsafe to re-enter and keep people out of danger.

Connectivity & Information

Offline-first, low-bandwidth, and multilingual (Spanish and Indigenous languages) tools that get trustworthy information to affected people and responders.

Epidemic & WASH Surveillance

Prototype privacy-preserving, aggregate reporting of symptoms, water conditions, and service availability so qualified public-health teams can investigate possible clusters and unsafe water points.

Aid & Cash Distribution Integrity

Make sure help reaches the right people: de-duplicate beneficiary lists across agencies, catch double-counting and exclusion, and flag fraudulent sign-ups and fake donation drives.

Rumor & Misinformation Verification

Cut through the noise: detect and verify viral claims — recycled footage, false casualty or looting rumors, scam links — and surface what’s confirmed to responders and the public.

Child Protection & Family Tracing

Safely reconnect unaccompanied and separated children with their families, with safeguarding, consent, and anti-trafficking controls built in from the start — privacy-by-design and synthetic data only, never a public board.

Open / Bring your own idea

Have a different idea that helps people in this disaster? Bring it. The best ideas often come from the people closest to the problem.

Expertise described in the published 2026 plan

The published plan described non-coding roles alongside technical tracks; this is an archive of that plan.

Track-specific expertise

GIS & remote-sensing analysts

The same discipline the Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team is using right now on its own live Venezuela earthquake mapping project (not affiliated with this hackathon). Coordinate systems, damage-zone geometry, and the cartographic mistakes that look fine in a demo and mislead a responder in the field.

Search-and-rescue personnel

Ground the sector-assignment and matching logic in how multi-agency search actually works under real field conditions, not how it looks on a whiteboard.

Logisticians & supply-chain specialists

The matching and dispatch logic mirrors real last-mile relief distribution. Unrealistic assumptions show up fast to someone who’s done this.

Structural & civil engineers

ATC-20-informed structural triage is a proposed contribution, not a capability in the current starter. Structural engineers can define safe scope, warnings, escalation, and the boundary between software guidance and an authorized evaluation.

Telecom & network engineers

Including amateur radio operators. The offline-first, low-bandwidth design needs someone who’s actually run communications on a degraded network.

Epidemiologists & public-health specialists

The outbreak-alerting logic borrows from real syndromic-surveillance practice. A public-health background catches false alerts before they reach a clinic, or a missed real one.

Fraud examiners & forensic accountants

Real beneficiary-fraud patterns look different from what a synthetic dataset assumes. This is exactly your domain.

Digital-verification & OSINT specialists

Pressure-test the claim-triage and scam-link heuristics against real disinformation patterns, not textbook ones.

Social & case workers with safeguarding experience

Matching and consent logic needs real case-management practice behind it — not assumptions about how family tracing “should” work.

Whatever your idea needs

The published open track did not prescribe one discipline; relevant expertise depended on the proposed idea.

Cross-cutting roles

Data engineers

Build adaptable data pipelines and document their interfaces so organizations can evaluate and integrate components without starting over.

Translators

The published plan identified translation and review of safety language, technical terms, and low-connectivity flows as important work across its supported languages.

Designers

These are operational tools, not marketing sites: usability under stress, low bandwidth, and accessibility matter more than polish.

Humanitarian-data specialists

Help a track’s data model speak the standards real humanitarian information systems already use, instead of reinventing conventions that exist.

Legal, data-governance & cybersecurity specialists

Review licenses, privacy boundaries, threat models, and implementation guidance so organizations can adopt the open tools responsibly.

People with local knowledge of Venezuela or Colombia

Place names, institutions, languages, access constraints, and community priorities must be reviewed locally before a prototype can be considered for real use.

The published plan called for open-source, inspectable, adaptable tools.

The published rules required proposed submissions to use Apache 2.0 or another OSI-approved license. Any operational use would still require local validation, governance, safeguarding, security review, and accountable ownership.

Open code, never people’s data

The published rules required synthetic or sample data and barred real personal information or precise locations of affected people. The proposed judging criteria included privacy and dignity.

Published open-source follow-up plan

The published plan proposed open-source follow-up and possible recognition; this archive does not verify delivery, judging, or awards.

Public-data tools — open to evaluate

The published plan proposed public-data tools for local evaluation. Any field use would require validation of sources, authorities, language, hazards, and workflows.

Sensitive-data tools — open code, governed use

The published plan proposed open code for sensitive-data tools. Real personal data would require the adopting organization’s lawful agreements, access controls, safeguarding, and security review.

Adoption remains collaborative

Organizations can evaluate the tools independently, ask the community for help, and contribute improvements upstream. Local responders, data engineers, security specialists, translators, and legal and ethics reviewers are essential before responsible adoption.

  1. Wed, Jul 8, 11:15 UTC

    Scheduled kickoff

    The published schedule listed a July 8 kickoff and registration. This archive does not verify that the kickoff occurred.

  2. Aug 11 – Aug 16

    Venezuela + Colombia build sprint

    Six focused days to create, adapt, test, and document open-source prototypes for organizations to inspect and validate locally.

  3. Sun, Aug 16

    Published submission deadline — closed

    The published plan set an August 16 submission deadline. Submissions are now closed.

    Explore public projects →
  4. Mon, Aug 17

    Scheduled Demo Day and judging

    The published schedule listed Demo Day and judging for August 17, 15:00–17:00 UTC. This archive does not verify that they occurred.

Humanitarian impact

Does it address a real, current need in this response?

Deployability

Could responders or affected people actually use it soon — not someday?

Technical merit

The craft, ingenuity, and soundness of what you built.

Responsible & humane design

Privacy, dignity, accessibility, and works in low-resource, low-connectivity settings.

Openness

Required: open-source (Apache 2.0 or similar) and built to be reused well beyond this event — the most reusable projects stand out.

The published plan proposed open-source follow-up and possible recognition; this archive does not verify delivery, judging, or awards.

Who could register under the published plan?+

The published plan invited contributors from many disciplines and locations. Registration for this 2026 event is closed.

How much does it cost?+

The published plan described a free online event. Registration is closed.

What did the published plan say about teams?+

The published plan allowed solo registration or teams of up to five. Registration is closed.

Do I need to be in Venezuela?+

The published plan allowed remote participation from any location. Registration is closed.

What should I build on?+

The published plan allowed any technology stack and required open-source work. Registration and submissions are closed.

What were the published submission requirements?+

The published plan required a public open-source repository and short demo video by August 16, 2026. Submissions are closed.

What about data and privacy?+

The published rules called for synthetic or sample data and barred real personal data or precise locations. The proposed judging criteria included privacy and dignity.

What follow-up did the published plan propose?+

The published plan proposed open-source follow-up and possible recognition; this archive does not verify delivery, judging, or awards.

How do I get help if I'm stuck?+

For current questions, use the contact link on the site. Registration and submissions for this event are closed.

2026 registration and submissions are closed

This archive preserves the published 2026 schedule and starter materials. It does not confirm that the build sprint or Demo Day took place.