Track 1. Review and develop recommendations to improve SO and AC processes for accountability, transparency, and participation that are helpful to prevent capture. [yet to be drafted, since we are awaiting SOAC responses to our questionnaire]
Track 2. Evaluate the proposed “Mutual Accountability Roundtable” to assess its viability and, if viable, undertake the necessary actions to implement it. The preliminary conclusion in the attached doc is on page 4:
We conclude that the Mutual Accountability Roundtable as originally described is more of a transparency exercise where best practices may be shared. While this exercise is viable, we do not recommend it for formal implementation.
SO and AC chairs have a standing email list and may convene calls and meetings at any time. That creates an appropriate and adequate forum for sharing of experiences and best practices on accountability to their respective stakeholders.
Track 3. Assess whether the Independent Review Process (IRP) should be applied to SO & AC activities.The preliminary conclusion in the attached doc is on page 5:
The IRP would not be applicable to SO & AC activities, as the IRP is currently described in Bylaws.While the IRP could be made applicable by amending bylaws significantly, the IRP should not be made applicable to SO & AC activities, because it is complex and expensive, and there are easier alternative ways to challenge an AC or SO action or inaction