GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES. 3.1 COLLABORATION STEERING COMMITTEE (CSC).
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES. 14 3.1 Collaboration Steering Committee (CSC)......................................14 3.2 Joint Development Committee (JDC)...........................................16 3.3 Joint Commercialization Committee (JCC).....................................17 4. DEVELOPMENT; GOVERNANCE; DILIGENCE.................................................19 4.1 Overview....................................................................19 4.2 Initial Development Plan....................................................19 4.3 Updates to Development Plan.................................................20
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES. In order to facilitate the smooth and effective management of the relationship, the parties will implement and adhere to the contract governance structures set out in Schedule 20 as amended from time to time.
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES. 13.1. In order to facilitate the smooth and effective management of the relationship, the Parties shall each appoint a suitably qualified and responsible person to act as their Account Manager in respect of the relationship between the Parties and the management of the provision by SEACOM of Services in terms of this Agreement. In respect of such Account Managers:-
13.1.1. they will have the power and authority to make decisions with respect to actions to be taken by them in the ordinary course of day-to-day management of this Agreement, but for the purposes of clarity it is recorded that the Account Managers shall not be entitled to vary the terms of this Agreement;
13.1.2. all invoices, communications, documentation and materials relating to this Agreement shall be sent by each Party to the appropriate Account Manager; and
13.1.3. either Party may, on 7 (seven) days written notice to the other, appoint an alternative Account Manager who is suitably qualified and responsible.
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES. In order to facilitate the smooth and effective management of the relationship, the Contracting Parties will implement and adhere to the contract governance structures set out in Schedule 11 (Contract Governance Structure).
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES. 13.1. In order to facilitate the smooth and effective management of the relationship, the Parties shall each appoint a suitably qualified and responsible person to act as their Account Manager in respect of the relationship between the Parties and the management of the provision by SEACOM MANAGED SERVICES (PTY) LTD of Services in terms of this Agreement. In respect of such Account Managers:-
13.1.1. they will have the power and authority to make decisions with respect to actions to be taken by them in the ordinary course of day-to-day management of this Agreement, but for the purposes of clarity it is recorded that the Account Managers shall not be entitled to vary the terms of this Agreement;
13.1.2. all invoices, communications, documentation and materials relating to this Agreement shall be sent by each Party to the appropriate Account Manager; and
13.1.3. either Party may, on 7 (seven) days written notice to the other, appoint an alternative Account Manager who is suitably qualified and responsible.
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES. 2.1 The Parties are committed to a governance model for delivering 16- 19 commissioning services which recognises sub-regional ‘travel to learn’ patterns amongst its 16-18 learners but nothing in this Memorandum or governance model shall amount to a delegation of functions between the Parties or the establishment of a joint committee pursuant to section 101 of the Local Government Xxx 0000.
2.2 In accordance with DCSF guidance each Party will be responsible for agreeing the 16-18 commissioning plan for its area and agreeing provision of necessary services with the further education and other colleges and providers in its geographical area. These arrangements will be complemented by a sub-regional governance structure as set out in Annex 1 of this Memorandum.
2.3 The sub-regional governance structures set out in Annex 1 will inform, manage and sanction the Black Country SRG commissioning plan to be proposed to the West Midlands Regional Planning Group. Further details of the membership and function of each of the sub-regional structures are set out in Annex 1. The Parties will convene meetings at these sub-regional levels as and when required during the commissioning cycle to ensure timely decisions are made in respect of contractual arrangements with service providers.
2.4 It is anticipated that the Commissioning Board and Executive Group will operate under clear delegated authority from each of the respective Parties and that their papers and decisions will be in the public domain and subject to each of the Parties’ existing scrutiny arrangements. Where necessary decisions will reported to the appropriate Party’s executive for ratification.
2.5 Although the Parties will liaise with providers at a sub-regional level in order to maintain separation between commissioners and providers the Stakeholder Groups shown in Annex 1 will not be invited to join the Commissioning Board.
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES. 6.1 The Parties hereby establish the Executive Committee, the Steering Committee and the Technical Committee, according to the terms of Article 6.0 of this MOU to develop the Consensus Recommendations.
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES. Different types of governance structures can be used to manage various functions. Data sharing among several entities will benefit from a governance structure of some type. This structure can range from an informal committee made up of those sharing the data that develops policies on what and how data can be shared to a more formal governance organization focused on the proper function and protection of the data. Governance committees and organizations can be categorized by the method used to create the organization and the authority that the organization has. Formal Authoritative A formal authoritative governance organization is created by statute, regulation, or contract and includes the authority to define and enforce the rules and procedures for data sharing.
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURES. In alignment with the inherent rights to self-government and self-determination held by First Nations, the governance structures in the Draft Agreement must be amended to ensure there is regional representation on all high-level governance tables, including the National Secretariat and the Reform Implementation Committee. The approach of having the AFN, COO and NAN as the designated First Nations representatives on the National Secretariate and Reform Implementation Committee, to represent the interests of all First Nations, does not respect the right of First Nations to be self-determining, nor does it ensure regional differences and distinctions are adequately represented in the implementation of the reformed FNCFS program. Such an approach is also not currently within the mandate of the AFN. It is imperative that the Draft Agreement is amended to ensure that appointments to the National Secretariat and the Reform Implementation are done in accordance with regional processes. Additionally, Regional Secretariats must be self-determined and led by First Nations in each respective region. Under the current structure, the establishment and role of Regional Secretariats is determined and dictated by the AFN. It is First Nations in each region that are best positioned to determine whether and how a Regional Secretariat should be established, including whether it should be established within an existing organization and if so, which one. Therefore, the Draft Agreement must be amended to provide that the establishment of Regional Secretariats will be self- determined by First Nations in each region, in accordance with regional processes, not as determined by the AFN.
