Template Charters
I. Template Charter for a National Working Group (NWG)
(With a Special Emphasis on Disaster Risk Reduction)
1. Preamble and Purpose
Preamble
This Charter establishes the overarching framework by which the NameofNWGName of NWGNameofNWG operates under the Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI) Nexus Governance model. It outlines how the NWG collaborates with higher-level bodies—Board of Trustees (BoT), Stewardship Committee (SC), Central Bureau (CB), and Regional Stewardship Boards (RSBs)—to pursue risk reduction, sustainable development, and just transition using HPC-based analytics, philanthropic sponsor resources, and an inclusive, community-driven approach.
Purpose
Adapt GCRI’s Strategic Objectives to Local DRR Needs
The NWG shapes GCRI’s global DRR and resilience strategies to address local hazards (e.g., floods, storms, drought, environmental degradation), ensuring HPC-driven solutions and philanthropic sponsor involvement fit well with local realities.
Bridge HPC/AI Tools and Philanthropic Support
By leveraging HPC expansions (through NEXCORE or related NE components) and philanthropic sponsor funding, the NWG develops robust data-driven actions—like advanced early warning systems (EWS), hazard mapping, or climate-livelihood synergy measures.
Safeguard Community Autonomy and RRI
The NWG guarantees local voices remain central, upholding free, prior, and informed consent for any HPC-based pilot or philanthropic sponsor collaboration, with particular attention to culturally sensitive areas, indigenous knowledge, and RRI.
2. Scope and Objectives
Geographical and Thematic Coverage
The NWG covers Location/RegionLocation/RegionLocation/Region, addressing disaster risk reduction, water management, climate adaptation, biodiversity protection, energy transitions, supply chain resilience, or other local priorities identified by the RSB.
The NWG can broaden or refine these scopes based on new hazards, philanthropic sponsor interests, or HPC scenario outputs, pending RSB approval.
Key Objectives
Local Disaster Risk Management: Deploy HPC-based solutions (e.g., EWS expansions, NEXQ data orchestration, OP-based forecasting) and philanthropic sponsor micro-financing to improve early warning, hazard mapping, and emergency preparedness.
Data Governance & Ethics: Implement robust data-protection measures, ensuring HPC usage respects privacy, indigenous rights, philanthropic sponsor disclaimers, and GCRI’s RRI principles.
Community Empowerment: Strengthen local leadership in DRR-focused project design, HPC pilot implementation, and outcome evaluation.
Capacity Building: Provide members with HPC/AI training, philanthropic sponsor finance basics, project management, and conflict resolution—tailored for DRR contexts (storm surge modeling, climate-livelihood synergy, cross-border hazard cooperation).
Stakeholder Engagement: Collaborate with municipal or national authorities, philanthropic sponsors, civil society, academic bodies, HPC domain experts, or SC leadership to unify risk reduction efforts.
3. Membership and Roles
Composition
The NWG comprises local government representatives, community associations, NGOs, philanthropic sponsor delegates, HPC/AI specialists, women’s and youth organizations, and indigenous or minority groups (if relevant).
Membership criteria focus on inclusivity, DRR knowledge, HPC literacy, philanthropic sponsor readiness, and cross-community representation.
Membership Terms
Each member typically serves XyearsX yearsXyears, with staggered renewal for continuity.
New members may join if HPC expansions or philanthropic sponsor programs require specialized skill sets, or if more communities request involvement.
Key Positions
Chair/Co-Chairs:
Oversees NWG meetings, sets agendas, ensures HPC or philanthropic sponsor updates, and upholds RSB directives.
Often leads on DRR policy alignment, HPC capacity building, philanthropic sponsor negotiations, or conflict mediation.
Secretary:
Manages documentation: HPC usage logs, philanthropic sponsor financial reports, data disclaimers, and meeting minutes.
Keeps thorough DRR records, ensuring data continuity for EWS thresholds or hazard mapping.
Subcommittee Leads (optional):
HPC & Data Lead: Oversees HPC scenario integration for local DRR or climate-livelihood synergy.
Finance & Philanthropic Liaison: Tracks philanthropic grants, ensures DRR funding, coordinates budget with HPC expansions.
Community Outreach Coordinator: Fosters broad engagement, organizes readiness workshops, ensures HPC-based or philanthropic solutions suit local norms.
4. Roles and Responsibilities
Strategic Planning
Adapt GCRI’s global DRR frameworks and HPC tools (NEXCORE, NEXQ, OP, etc.) to local realities.
Set annual or multi-year DRR objectives—like installing HPC-driven EWS or philanthropic-backed flood barriers—aligned with RSB and philanthropic sponsor guidelines.
Participate in RSB or HPC domain committees to leverage synergy across multiple NWGs or philanthropic sponsor programs.
Project Implementation
Propose, plan, and execute DRR pilots (HPC-based EWS expansions, philanthropic sponsor-funded reforestation, supply chain improvements).
Train local staff, ensure HPC data usage meets RRI standards, keep philanthropic budgets transparent, and maintain conflict-resolution channels.
Reporting and Compliance
Regularly update the RSB or philanthropic donors on pilot status, HPC data outputs, finances, and any ethical or operational problems.
Guarantee HPC logs remain accurate, philanthropic sponsor funds are traced, and local communities can access relevant documentation.
Capacity and Education
Conduct or coordinate HPC or philanthropic sponsor training for local farmers, fishers, cooperatives, or municipal leaders, focusing on DRR readiness, hazard identification, HPC scenario interpretation, and philanthropic synergy.
Promote inclusive participation, ensuring that women, youth, indigenous, or vulnerable groups can shape HPC code-of-practice or philanthropic sponsor decisions.
5. Decision-Making and Meeting Protocols
Meeting Frequency
The NWG meets at least monthly to discuss HPC pilot updates, philanthropic finances, conflict resolution steps, or new DRR proposals.
Emergency meetings can be called if HPC hazard forecasts detect a looming disaster or philanthropic sponsor conditions shift unexpectedly.
Quorum and Voting
A quorum of XX%X of NWG members is needed for major resolutions (like HPC expansions or philanthropic sponsor contract approvals).
The NWG aims for consensus first. If consensus fails, a simple or two-thirds majority can finalize decisions.
Conflict Resolution
Disputes among members or with philanthropic sponsors start with an NWG mediation process: an internal panel reviews HPC logs or sponsor disclaimers, hears both parties.
If unresolved, the conflict escalates to the RSB conflict subcommittee for final arbitration, referencing GCRI’s code-of-conduct and RRI norms.
6. Data & Ethical Use
Data Governance
NWG members must follow GCRI’s data privacy standards and HPC usage protocols. HPC-based data collection must respect local customs, philanthropic disclaimers, and RRI.
Sensitive or personal info is anonymized or aggregated before HPC modeling or philanthropic sponsor reporting.
Informed Consent
Any HPC sensor placement or data-driven pilot mandates free, prior, and informed consent from relevant communities, particularly indigenous or minority groups. NWG ensures user-friendly disclaimers and opt-out processes exist.
HPC outputs (e.g., flood maps or EWS alerts) must be explained in accessible language or local dialect, never forcibly imposing HPC “solutions.”
Transparency and Access
NWG data is shared with the RSB, philanthropic partners, and local communities unless privacy or cultural sensitivities forbid. HPC dashboards or philanthropic cost logs should remain accessible for accountability.
7. Financial and Philanthropic Sponsor Engagement
Budgeting and Spending
NWGs propose budgets for DRR pilots, HPC expansions, or capacity building. The RSB or philanthropic sponsors review large expenditures or HPC hardware requests.
All philanthropic sponsor funds are tracked using HPC logs, monthly or quarterly statements, and receipts. NWGs follow RSB financial rules to avoid mismanagement.
Philanthropic Sponsor Relations
The NWG designates a liaison for philanthropic contact, sharing HPC performance metrics, DRR results, or major pilot achievements.
If philanthropic sponsor demands conflict with local norms or HPC ethics, the NWG raises the issue with the RSB or SC for mediation.
Revenue-Generating Pilots
If any pilot yields local revenue (eco-tourism fees, HPC-based supply chain profits, carbon credits), the NWG keeps transparent records and reinvests surpluses into community DRR or HPC improvements.
NWGs ensure fair distribution so no group is exploited or overshadowed.
8. Accountability and Reporting
Monthly or Quarterly Updates
NWG leadership compiles HPC progress reports—covering pilot activities, philanthropic sponsor resource usage, data ethics checks, DRR outcomes, and community feedback—and sends them to the RSB committees and philanthropic sponsor contacts.
HPC logs or philanthropic budgets remain open to members, building trust and transparency.
Annual Public Reports
NWGs publish an annual summary of HPC initiatives, philanthropic financial flows, membership changes, DRR challenges, and future priorities.
This fosters local community awareness, philanthropic sponsor confidence, and alignment with GCRI’s core mission.
Audits and Evaluations
The NWG cooperates with external or internal audits from the RSB, philanthropic foundations, or GCRI’s Board of Trustees. HPC data or philanthropic logs remain accessible for verification.
Findings guide capacity improvements, HPC code modifications, or philanthropic sponsor renegotiations for DRR expansions.
9. Dissolution or Amendment
Amendments
Charter amendments need a two-thirds majority among NWG members, plus RSB confirmation. This ensures democratic updates remain in sync with GCRI.
Changes might reflect HPC expansions, philanthropic sponsor deals, or local reconfigurations (e.g., NWG splitting or merging).
Dissolution
The NWG may dissolve if it no longer meets local DRR needs or GCRI’s guidelines. Any philanthropic sponsor funds or HPC equipment revert to the RSB or GCRI for reallocation.
Dissolution requires a formal review by the SC or Board of Trustees, ensuring no essential local functions are abruptly halted.
II. Template Charter for a Regional Stewardship Board (RSB)
(With a Special Emphasis on DRR)
1. Preamble and Purpose
Preamble
This Charter establishes a Regional Stewardship Board (RSB) under GCRI’s Nexus Governance model, linking multiple NWGs, HPC domain panels, philanthropic sponsors, local governments, and civil society to coordinate DRR, capacity-building, HPC expansions, philanthropic synergy, conflict resolution, and synergy across local communities.
Purpose
Adapt GCRI’s Global Frameworks to Regional DRR
The RSB shapes GCRI’s HPC-based solutions, philanthropic sponsor strategies, and data ethics standards to reflect the region’s culture, ecology, and socio-economic context.
Unify NWGs, HPC, and Philanthropic Partners
By convening NWGs, philanthropic sponsors, HPC experts, and relevant NGO or government agencies, the RSB identifies regional DRR priorities, ensures ethical HPC data usage, and guides local capacity building.
2. Scope and Objectives
Regional Coverage
The RSB covers definedgeographicregiondefined geographic regiondefinedgeographicregion, possibly a country, multi-district area, cross-border ecosystem, or thematic region (e.g., coastal fisheries, mountain biodiversity).
Boundaries can shift if HPC expansions or philanthropic collaborations dictate new sub-regions or specialized divisions.
Core Objectives
DRR Policy Adaptation: Ensure GCRI-level HPC policies (data governance, philanthropic sponsor finance, hazard modeling) align with local laws, culture, and urgent challenges.
Pilot Coordination: Approve NWG proposals, track HPC performance, manage philanthropic sponsor funds, unify local interventions for DRR, climate-livelihood synergy, and biodiversity.
Capacity Building: Provide HPC, philanthropic sponsor resources, and best practice toolkits to NWGs, especially for DRR-critical tasks (EWS design, coastal resilience, cross-border hazard planning).
Conflict Mediation: Offer a neutral forum for NWG disputes, philanthropic sponsor differences, or HPC data controversies.
3. Membership and Structure
Representation
The RSB typically includes delegates from NWGs, philanthropic sponsors active in the region, HPC domain specialists, local government, civil society, academic bodies, and possibly private sector partners.
Each seat upholds GCRI’s inclusivity principle—balancing gender, youth, indigenous communities, philanthropic sponsor donors, HPC experts, and relevant voices.
Key Roles
RSB Chair/Vice-Chair: Elected by members for XyearsX yearsXyears. Organizes RSB meetings, sets agendas, ensures HPC synergy, philanthropic sponsor alignment, and communicates major updates to the Board of Trustees.
Executive Secretariat: Handles daily administration (distributing HPC data to NWGs, philanthropic finance), records minutes, shares HPC or philanthropic sponsor announcements, etc.
Subcommittee Leads: Head specialized areas (Finance & Partnerships, HPC Data & Tech, Education & Training, Conflict Resolution).
Committees and Subcommittees
Finance & Partnerships Committee: Manages philanthropic sponsor grants, membership fees, HPC budgets for NWGs, and cost audits.
Pilot Oversight Committee: Evaluates NWG proposals, HPC usage forms, philanthropic sponsor logs, ensuring RRI checks.
Ethics & Data: Upholds HPC data governance, philanthropic sponsor disclaimers, local privacy norms, and free, prior, informed consent.
4. Roles and Responsibilities
Regional Strategy Development
Adapt GCRI’s HPC-based DRR and development objectives to the region’s environment, laws, culture, philanthropic sponsor opportunities, or NWG-livelihood synergy.
Formulate annual or multi-year action plans for HPC expansions, philanthropic sponsor support, and DRR pilot expansions across NWGs.
NWG Coordination and Support
Provide HPC training, philanthropic matching, or conflict mediation to NWGs. Approve pilot proposals, track HPC results, manage philanthropic budgets, and scale successes region-wide.
Subcommittees offer specialized support on HPC data usage, scenario interpretation, philanthropic sponsor compliance, or advanced AI modeling for DRR.
Monitoring and Evaluation
Aggregate HPC logs from NWGs or philanthropic sponsors monthly or quarterly, generating region-wide DRR progress updates.
Identify high-performing or underperforming pilots, recommend HPC improvements, philanthropic sponsor expansions, or capacity-building.
Community and Stakeholder Engagement
Hold regional forums where NWGs, philanthropic donors, HPC experts, and local communities share experiences or co-create solutions for risk reduction.
Maintain open channels for HPC data queries, philanthropic sponsor funding requests, or policy suggestions from the grassroots.
5. Decision-Making and Meeting Protocols
Frequency of Meetings
The RSB meets quarterlyorbimonthlyquarterly or bimonthlyquarterlyorbimonthly, with emergencies triggered by HPC hazard alerts, philanthropic sponsor changes, or NWG issues.
Subcommittees gather more often for HPC-based pilot reviews or philanthropic deadlines.
Quorum and Voting
A minimum XX%X of RSB members must attend for major decisions (e.g., HPC expansions, philanthropic sponsor contract signings, NWG pilot approvals).
The RSB seeks consensus but can resort to a simple or two-thirds majority as needed. HPC domain experts advise, while local autonomy is respected.
Dispute Resolution
NWGs or philanthropic sponsors escalate conflicts to relevant RSB subcommittees, referencing HPC logs or philanthropic disclaimers. If unresolved, the SC or Board arbitrates.
The RSB ensures local voices, HPC evidence, philanthropic sponsor constraints, and RRI remain in balance.
6. Data & Ethical Guidelines
Region-Wide Data Policy
The RSB enforces data usage rules defined by the Nexus Standards Foundation (NSF), covering HPC privacy, philanthropic sponsor disclaimers, open data thresholds, and local sensitivities.
NWGs or philanthropic sponsors must register HPC- or sensor-based DRR projects with the RSB, preventing unethical data exploitation.
Community Consent
HPC expansions or philanthropic sponsor deployments (sensors, drone surveys, etc.) require free, prior, and informed consent from impacted communities.
If controversies arise, the RSB holds a special hearing on HPC usage, philanthropic sponsor conditions, clarifying potential benefits and risks.
Transparency and Access
RSB subcommittees hold HPC logs or philanthropic finance records, providing them to NWGs or sponsors upon request. HPC-aggregated data remains accessible for local capacity building or research, respecting personal privacy.
7. Financial Management and Philanthropic Sponsor Relations
Budgets and Allocations
The RSB drafts an annual or multi-year budget, correlating HPC expansions, philanthropic sponsor grants, membership fees, and NWG pilot proposals.
NWGs request HPC or philanthropic funds; the Finance & Partnerships subcommittee reviews them for compliance with HPC code-of-conduct, philanthropic disclaimers, and local capacity.
Engaging Philanthropic Sponsors
The RSB maintains open dialogue with donors, clarifying HPC metrics, local cultural norms, or data usage boundaries.
A philanthropic liaison in the RSB addresses sponsor concerns about HPC performance, DRR outcomes, or brand alignment.
Revenue and Sustainability
If HPC or philanthropic sponsor pilots produce revenue (carbon credits, eco-tourism, supply chain improvements), the RSB ensures equitable distribution and invests surpluses into local NWGs for DRR or HPC expansions.
Reserve funds or HPC endowments can buffer emergencies, bridging philanthropic gaps.
8. Accountability, Reporting, and Audits
Regular Reporting
Every quarterquarterquarter, subcommittees compile HPC-based or philanthropic sponsor updates: NWG pilot status, DRR achievements, data compliance, expansions.
The Central Bureau and sponsors receive these for multi-level transparency.
Annual Regional Summaries
The RSB compiles an annual recap: HPC-based successes, philanthropic sponsorship alliances, NWG achievements, budgetary spend, data audits, future targets.
The SC or Board uses these to gauge alignment with GCRI’s global vision.
Audits and Evaluations
The RSB cooperates with GCRI’s internal/external auditors or philanthropic sponsor compliance teams. HPC logs, philanthropic finances, or pilot performance details are fully open for scrutiny.
Findings guide HPC code improvements, philanthropic contract adjustments, or NWG capacity building.
9. Amendments and Dissolution
Charter Amendments
RSB members can propose amendments when HPC expansions, philanthropic sponsor conditions, or local contexts change. A supermajority vote, plus Board ratification, enacts changes.
The SC may also recommend updates based on emerging HPC knowledge or philanthropic sponsor best practices.
Dissolution
If the RSB is untenable (repeated conflict, philanthropic withdrawal, or governance collapse), dissolution may occur. HPC or philanthropic resources revert to GCRI or NWGs, as determined by the Board and SC.
A structured transition ensures ongoing DRR or HPC projects are not abruptly derailed.
Conclusion
These NWG and RSB charters, expanded with DRR-specific language, illustrate how governance remains inclusive, transparent, ethically grounded, and anchored in GCRI’s mission and the Nexus Ecosystem (NE). Key features include:
Clear Membership Criteria: HPC experts, philanthropic partners, local leaders, civil society, and government officials all have a seat at the table—ensuring DRR solutions reflect diverse perspectives.
Decision-Making Processes: NWGs and RSBs balance consensus, HPC scenario evidence, philanthropic sponsor input, and local autonomy to make timely, fair decisions.
Ethical Data Handling: HPC-based solutions must uphold RRI standards, philanthropic disclaimers, free prior informed consent, and robust privacy measures.
Financial Management: philanthropic sponsor resources, HPC expansions, membership fees, or revenue streams remain transparent and dedicated to community-driven DRR.
Accountability: NWGs and RSBs provide regular HPC performance updates, philanthropic financial logs, pilot evaluations, and are open to audits or conflict-resolution processes.
Each NWG or RSB can expand sections to reflect local laws, philanthropic sponsor deals, HPC usage guidelines, or subcommittee roles. By weaving HPC analytics, philanthropic sponsor synergy, local empowerment, and DRR awareness into the fabric of daily governance, GCRI ensures its solutions reduce vulnerabilities, respect cultural values, and align with global best practices.
Last updated
Was this helpful?