Organizational Structure and Policies

Transcription

1 Organizational Structure and Policies I. Introduction The purpose of this document is to describe the organizational structure and development process for the Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops. The Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops (SISC) aims to encourage participation from diverse stakeholders including growers, suppliers, buyers, environmental and public interest groups, agencies, and technical experts. SISC is committed to transparency and participation as a foundation for its processes. In an effort to maximize participation while enabling effective decision-making and timely completion, the project is organized as described in this document. Please refer to the SISC website for more information on the goals and context of the project (). II. Project Structure 1. Organizational Structure SISC is led by the Coordinating Council and supported by the Metrics Review Committee, as follows. Coordinating Council The Coordinating Council is the decision-making body of SISC. It is responsible for significant decisions to advance the project including approval of draft and final metrics, project direction and oversight, data utilization and protection, and other core decisions. The Coordinating Council is comprised of between representatives with relative balance in three stakeholder groups: NGOs, suppliers, and buyers. Page 1 of 1

2 Subcommittees The Coordinating Council is supported by several subcommittees made up of members or their appointees. Subcommittees may also decide to bring in ad hoc members to add expertise when necessary. Steering Committee The Steering Committee consists of six Coordinating Council members representing NGOs, buyers, suppliers, and experts which implements decisions of the Coordinating Council, but is not a decision-making body itself. It is responsible for ensuring administrative needs of the project are met, including convening and facilitating meetings, soliciting and retaining expert help in developing metrics, coordinating outreach to stakeholders, preparation for Coordinating Council meetings, and producing materials. Communications Committee The Communications Committee advises in the development of communications materials and outreach efforts. Pilot Committee The Pilot Committee advises in the design, implementation, analysis and other logistical considerations of the metric pilot tests. Finance Committee The Finance Committee is charged with securing funding through grants and contributions and designing long-term financing plans for the SISC. Metric Review Committee The Metric Review Committee (MRC) provides a forum for stakeholders to recommend metrics through the exchange of ideas and concerns, assessment of technical merit, and evaluation of overall feasibility. The MRC is open to all specialty crops stakeholders and experts who wish to advance the goals of the project. There is no application or approval process to join the MRC, only a simple online registration. MRC members receive updates on project implementation and access to draft documents; they are also invited to participate in smaller workgroups to develop specific metrics. Metric Workgroups Each metric category has a workgroup made up of MRC members. Workgroups develop proposed metrics to recommend to the Coordinating Council and may also advise on data requirements and data collection techniques. SISC aims to have work led by two coordinators representing different stakeholder groups (e.g. one industry, one NGO). Coordinators help move the process forward by creating discussion materials, capturing workgroup ideas into written proposals, and seeking research and/or expert advice when necessary. Coordinators should also ensure balanced representation by soliciting input when stakeholder groups are underrepresented. Subsets of the workgroup may work to bring proposals to the full workgroup. Workgroups are also aided by independent, third-party professional facilitators on webinars and calls. 2. Replacements In the case that Coordinating Council, Steering Committee, or Workgroup Coordinator participants leave the project, replacements will be found using the following processes: Page 2 of 2

3 Coordinating Council: Nominations will be requested from the Metric Review Committee during an established nomination period. The Steering Committee will vet and narrow nominees to a short list to bring to the Coordinating Council. Coordinating Council members will approve new members via normal decision-making procedures. At its discretion, the Coordinating Council may choose to remove a member for nonparticipation. Steering Committee: The Coordinating Council will appoint replacements for Steering Committee vacancies. Workgroup Coordinators: The Steering Committee will appoint replacements for Workgroup Coordinators. 3. Staffing and Funding SISC is currently funded through a few channels. Many participating organizations have donated significant amounts of staff time to the Coordinating Council and metric workgroups. In addition, the USDA and the David and Lucille Packard Foundation have made significant contributions to some of the founding organizations (SureHarvest, Western Growers Association, and Natural Resources Defense Council) to aid in staffing day-to-day needs of the project. III. Decision-Making The Coordinating Council seeks to operate by consensus. Where consensus is not reached, decisions may be advanced by a majority of support from each stakeholder group. IV. Metric Development Process 1. Metric structure established a. Metric Categories: The Coordinating Council established an initial list of metric categories. These can be viewed on the SISC website. b. Metric Workbooks: A template Metric Workbook was created to guide the metric workgroups in developing recommendations and passing critical information on to the Coordinating Council for decision-making. The metric workbook template includes sections for goals, critical elements, metrics, verification methods, research gaps, areas of disagreement, and other helpful evaluation information. 2. Metric development - Each metric workgroup develops proposed metrics operating with the following parameters: a. Workgroups meet via webinars conducted by a professional, independent, third party who focuses on ensuring maximum participation during the meeting. Webinar discussions are recorded through meeting notes and metric workbooks. b. Workgroups each have a webpage maintained by the workgroup coordinators. Metric workbooks, meeting notes, metric research, and other relevant materials are posted on these pages. Comments regarding the metrics may be posted by any workgroup member as well. c. Input from participants may be provided via webinar discussions or comments to the workgroup webpage. Workgroup coordinators may also send information or drafts out via the workgroup list and request input directly to them. Page 3 of 3

4 d. Metric coordinators may designate smaller groups to work through specific research or other metric details. The participants and results of such efforts shall be shared with the full group. e. When the metric coordinators are satisfied that a metric concept has considerable support by the metric workgroup, the metric concept is submitted to the Coordinating Council for approval to pilot or for final approval, as described below. Metrics are passed to the Coordinating Council with background information on the metrics themselves and the level of support within the workgroup. f. If appropriate, the workgroup may recommend that multiple metrics or variations of the same metric be piloted in order to use real-world data before deciding to recommend one over the other. 3. Advancement to pilot Each metric is reviewed by the Coordinating Council before moving forward to be piloted. The Coordinating Council will be informed of the logic behind the proposed metrics, the portion of the workgroup which supports them, areas of disagreement or dissent, and future research needs. If the Coordinating Council agrees the metric should be pilot tested, details may be added around data input and collection methodologies by the metric coordinators and workgroups, Pilot Committee, or those operating the pilot testing to enable piloting of the metric, so long as the intent is not changed. Significant changes to the metric will be circulated to the workgroup for comment. 4. Metric pilots Pilot participants from throughout the supply chain pilot test the metrics by using them in real world conditions and providing feedback about their feasibility and utility. Data is kept confidential but feedback on metric usability is shared with workgroup. In addition, where sample size allows for anonymity, data will be reviewed by Coordinating Council under a non-disclosure agreement and may be shared with workgroups where the Coordinating Council deems necessary. Refer to the Pilot Overview document found on the SISC website for more information on the pilot objectives, process, and design. Issues about specific metrics that are raised during the pilot testing may be brought back to the metric workgroup and lead to further refinement of the metric proposals. 5. Metric revision and approval The Coordinating Council reviews pilot results for each metric and proceeds in one of the following ways: a. Approves the metric, as piloted. b. Approves the metric, but recommends the workgroup refines data requirements or data collection instructions. In this case, the Coordinating Council instructs whether further approval at the Coordinating Council level is required. c. Reject the metric as piloted and recommend a course of action. This may include returning the metric to the workgroup for significant revision, requesting further piloting, seeking expert advice, excluding the metric category, or other action steps. In this case, the metric must go back to the Coordinating Council once actions steps are implemented. 6. Comment period Prior to finalizing a metric, the Steering Committee will facilitate comment period at least 30 days for each metric that is approved. Notification of the comment period and materials for comment is ed to the full MRC and posted on the SISC website. Hard copies of materials will be made available on request. The Coordinating Council may also request an expert or peer review at this point in development. Page 4 of 4

5 7. Incorporation of comments Comments received during the comment period are considered and either incorporated into a revision of the metric or justification given if not incorporated. A written synopsis is posted of all material issues raised during the comment period and their resolution. At the end of this step, metrics are either approved with revisions or sent back to the workgroup. If significant revisions take place, a second round of comment period may be added to the process. 8. Working Metrics Approval Approved metrics are added to the Stewardship Index for Specialty Crops working metric list. Metrics may be added to the list individually as they become approved. Further refinement of the metrics will occur following the Metric Refinement process described below. V. Metric Refinement Input from widespread metric usage and evolving scientific research will provide impetus for ongoing refinement of the SISC metrics. In addition, the SISC should be reviewed periodically for continued relevance and effectiveness. Therefore, the SISC will be formally reviewed at least every 3 years. A process to receive comments and requests for clarification will be established and maintained upon publication of SISC. These comments will be considered in the subsequent review. The process for undertaking any substantive or non-administrative revisions will be similar to that for initial metrics development, and will be defined once the SISC metrics are finalized. VI. Project Input Feedback on the process outlined in this document or other procedural issues should be submitted to the SISC website at. This is for procedural issues only as feedback related to the content of the metrics should be submitted through the metric development process. This feedback will be addressed by the Steering Committee and raised to the Coordinating Council where appropriate. All comments and their resolutions will be posted on the public part of the website. Page 5 of 5