Removed Delegation stage and moved it to Assessment
This commit is contained in:
Nathan Schneider
@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
|
||||
- id: delegation_options
|
||||
title: "Where can the dispute be delegated if this process is inadequate?"
|
||||
description: "Alternative processes for disputes that cannot be handled by this process"
|
||||
stageId: delegation
|
||||
order: 1
|
||||
stageId: assessment
|
||||
order: 6
|
||||
fields:
|
||||
- id: delegationOptionsText
|
||||
type: text
|
||||
|
||||
@ -26,9 +26,4 @@
|
||||
- id: appeal
|
||||
title: "Appeal"
|
||||
description: "Process for reconsidering dispute decisions"
|
||||
order: 6
|
||||
|
||||
- id: delegation
|
||||
title: "Delegation"
|
||||
description: "Alternative processes when this one is inadequate"
|
||||
order: 7
|
||||
order: 6
|
||||
@ -64,6 +64,9 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
},
|
||||
jurisdiction: {
|
||||
jurisdictionText: "Our restorative justice process is appropriate for most interpersonal harms and conflicts within our community. For situations involving ongoing safety risks, legal violations that require reporting, or when participants are unwilling to acknowledge basic responsibility for harm, the process may be adapted or alternative resources recommended."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_options: {
|
||||
delegationOptionsText: "The restorative process may be inappropriate when: 1) There are immediate safety concerns that need addressing first, 2) One or more key participants are unwilling to engage, 3) The harm involves legal violations requiring formal intervention, 4) The situation involves complex systems beyond interpersonal harm, or 5) Previous restorative attempts have not led to meaningful change. When this happens, the circle keeper works with participants to identify more appropriate resources. They provide warm referrals to other services like mediation, therapy, organizational change processes, or when necessary, formal authorities. Our community maintains relationships with professional mediators, conflict coaches, mental health providers, social workers, and when needed, legal professionals."
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
deliberation: {
|
||||
@ -110,17 +113,6 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
appeal_resolution: {
|
||||
appealResolutionText: "The follow-up circle develops revised or additional agreements addressing the newly identified needs. These amendments are added to the original agreement with clear timelines for implementation and additional follow-up as needed."
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation: {
|
||||
criteria: {
|
||||
criteriaText: "The restorative process may be inappropriate when: 1) There are immediate safety concerns that need addressing first, 2) One or more key participants are unwilling to engage, 3) The harm involves legal violations requiring formal intervention, 4) The situation involves complex systems beyond interpersonal harm, or 5) Previous restorative attempts have not led to meaningful change."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_process: {
|
||||
delegationProcessText: "If restorative justice isn't the right fit, the circle keeper works with participants to identify more appropriate resources. They provide warm referrals to other services like mediation, therapy, organizational change processes, or when necessary, formal authorities. The transition includes clear communication about why delegation is recommended."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_authority: {
|
||||
delegationAuthorityText: "Our community maintains relationships with professional mediators, conflict coaches, mental health providers, social workers, and when needed, legal professionals. We have established referral protocols with each of these resources and provide financial assistance when cost would be a barrier to accessing needed support."
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
@ -197,6 +189,9 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
},
|
||||
jurisdiction: {
|
||||
jurisdictionText: "Transformative justice processes are most appropriate for situations where: 1) The harm is connected to broader social patterns, 2) Community-based intervention is possible and desired, 3) There is willingness to address both immediate harm and root causes, and 4) Public systems (legal, etc.) would likely cause additional harm. The process may be adapted based on safety needs and legal requirements."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_options: {
|
||||
delegationOptionsText: "Delegation to other resources may be appropriate when: 1) Immediate safety requires formal intervention, 2) The situation involves legal requirements beyond community capacity, 3) Specialized expertise is needed, 4) The community lacks resources to address the scale of harm, or 5) The transformative justice approach has been attempted without success. When delegation is needed, the facilitation team: 1) Clearly explains why additional resources are recommended, 2) Helps participants understand options and potential impacts, 3) Supports access to appropriate services, 4) Continues to provide community support even when formal systems are involved. Our community maintains relationships with a network of resources including specialized transformative justice practitioners, mental health providers with trauma expertise, legal advocates, cultural workers, and organizations working on systemic change."
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
deliberation: {
|
||||
@ -243,17 +238,6 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
appeal_resolution: {
|
||||
appealResolutionText: "The renewed process produces an updated action plan that builds on previous work while addressing newly identified needs. This updated plan includes specific metrics for success and may assign new roles or resources to overcome previous implementation barriers."
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation: {
|
||||
criteria: {
|
||||
criteriaText: "Delegation to other resources may be appropriate when: 1) Immediate safety requires formal intervention, 2) The situation involves legal requirements beyond community capacity, 3) Specialized expertise is needed, 4) The community lacks resources to address the scale of harm, or 5) The transformative justice approach has been attempted without success."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_process: {
|
||||
delegationProcessText: "When delegation is needed, the facilitation team: 1) Clearly explains why additional resources are recommended, 2) Helps participants understand options and potential impacts, 3) Supports access to appropriate services, 4) Continues to provide community support even when formal systems are involved, and 5) Documents learnings to strengthen future community capacity."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_authority: {
|
||||
delegationAuthorityText: "Our community maintains relationships with a network of resources including: 1) Specialized transformative justice practitioners for complex cases, 2) Mental health providers with trauma expertise, 3) Legal advocates who understand transformative approaches, 4) Cultural workers who can support healing processes, and 5) Organizations working on systemic change in relevant areas."
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
@ -330,6 +314,12 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
},
|
||||
jurisdiction: {
|
||||
jurisdictionText: "The community jury has jurisdiction over: 1) Disputes between community members regarding shared resources or spaces, 2) Alleged violations of community agreements or standards, 3) Conflicts affecting community function or wellbeing, 4) Requests for clarification of policies or practices, and 5) Appeals of decisions made by community committees. The jury does not have jurisdiction over legal matters requiring formal court proceedings, situations presenting immediate safety risks, or disputes that have been explicitly excluded in the community charter."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_options: {
|
||||
delegationOptionsText: "Cases may be delegated from the jury process when: 1) The matter involves legal issues beyond community governance, 2) Specialized expertise is required for proper resolution, 3) Immediate intervention is needed for safety concerns, 4) The case complexity exceeds what volunteer jurors can reasonably handle, 5) Multiple previous attempts through the jury process have failed to resolve the issue, or 6) The case would create significant conflicts of interest within the available jury pool. When delegation is appropriate, the Jury Administrator documents the reason, notifies parties with rationale, and provides information about alternative processes. Our community maintains relationships with professional mediators, legal advisors, subject matter experts, restorative justice practitioners, mental health professionals, and external facilitation teams for these situations."
|
||||
},
|
||||
selection: {
|
||||
selectionText: "Jurors are selected through a structured random process:\n\n1. A pool of 15-20 community members is randomly selected from the membership roster\n2. Potential jurors complete a screening questionnaire to identify conflicts of interest\n3. Both parties in the dispute may exclude up to 3 potential jurors without stating a reason\n4. A final panel of 5-7 jurors is confirmed from the remaining pool\n5. Selected jurors receive orientation materials and basic conflict resolution training\n6. The process ensures diversity of perspectives while maintaining impartiality"
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
deliberation: {
|
||||
@ -379,20 +369,6 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
appeal_resolution: {
|
||||
appealResolutionText: "The appeal jury has three possible resolution options: 1) Confirm the original decision if the appeal grounds are not substantiated, 2) Modify specific aspects of the decision while maintaining the core findings, or 3) Overturn the decision completely and issue a new determination. The appeal resolution includes specific reasoning addressing each appeal ground raised. Appeal decisions are final and not subject to further community appeal, though legal rights remain unaffected."
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation: {
|
||||
criteria: {
|
||||
criteriaText: "Cases may be delegated from the jury process when: 1) The matter involves legal issues beyond community governance, 2) Specialized expertise is required for proper resolution, 3) Immediate intervention is needed for safety concerns, 4) The case complexity exceeds what volunteer jurors can reasonably handle, 5) Multiple previous attempts through the jury process have failed to resolve the issue, or 6) The case would create significant conflicts of interest within the available jury pool. Delegation decisions are made by the Jury Administrator in consultation with community leadership."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_process: {
|
||||
delegationProcessText: "When delegation is appropriate, the process includes: 1) The Jury Administrator documents the reason for delegation, 2) Parties are notified of the delegation decision and rationale, 3) They are provided with information about the alternative process and next steps, 4) Relevant case information is transferred to the appropriate body (with party consent), 5) The Jury Administrator remains available as a resource during the transition, and 6) The community record notes the delegation and eventual outcome for future reference and learning."
|
||||
},
|
||||
selection: {
|
||||
selectionText: "Jurors are selected through a structured random process:\n\n1. A pool of 15-20 community members is randomly selected from the membership roster\n2. Potential jurors complete a screening questionnaire to identify conflicts of interest\n3. Both parties in the dispute may exclude up to 3 potential jurors without stating a reason\n4. A final panel of 5-7 jurors is confirmed from the remaining pool\n5. Selected jurors receive orientation materials and basic conflict resolution training\n6. The process ensures diversity of perspectives while maintaining impartiality"
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_authority: {
|
||||
delegationAuthorityText: "Our community maintains relationships with several delegation authorities: 1) A panel of professional mediators for complex relationship conflicts, 2) Legal advisors for matters with potential legal implications, 3) Subject matter experts in areas like construction, finance, and technology, 4) Restorative justice practitioners for cases involving harm repair, 5) Mental health professionals for situations involving psychological wellbeing, and 6) External facilitation teams for conflicts involving governance leadership. These resources receive training on our community values and approaches."
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
@ -469,6 +445,12 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
},
|
||||
jurisdiction: {
|
||||
jurisdictionText: "The referee process has jurisdiction over: 1) Interpretation and application of community agreements and policies, 2) Allocation of shared resources and spaces, 3) Interpersonal conflicts affecting community functioning, 4) Minor property disputes between community members, and 5) Compliance with previous community decisions. The process does not have jurisdiction over legal matters outside community governance, criminal activities, or disputes explicitly excluded in the community charter. Complex cases may be referred to specialized authorities when appropriate."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_options: {
|
||||
delegationOptionsText: "Cases may be delegated from the referee process when: 1) Legal issues beyond community governance are central to the dispute, 2) The complexity requires specialized expertise beyond the referees' training, 3) Safety concerns require immediate professional intervention, 4) The scope affects multiple community systems or external entities, 5) Significant conflicts of interest exist with all available referees, or 6) The case involves policy creation rather than policy application. The delegation process includes documentation of why the referee process is not appropriate, consultation with parties about alternatives, and formal referral to appropriate resources. Our community maintains relationships with professional mediators, legal services, subject matter experts, conflict coaches, therapeutic resources, and regulatory agencies when needed."
|
||||
},
|
||||
selection: {
|
||||
selectionText: "The referee is selected through a structured process:\n\n1. The community maintains a roster of 5-7 trained referees with diverse expertise\n2. For each dispute, 3 available referees are presented to the parties\n3. Parties rank their preferences, with the highest mutual ranking selected\n4. If parties cannot agree, a random selection from the three options is made\n5. Selected referees must disclose any potential conflicts of interest\n6. Parties may challenge the selection based on demonstrated bias or conflict\n7. Referees receive ongoing training and peer review to maintain quality"
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
deliberation: {
|
||||
@ -515,20 +497,6 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
appeal_resolution: {
|
||||
appealResolutionText: "The appeal resolution is documented in a written determination that: 1) Addresses each appeal ground specifically, 2) Explains the rationale for upholding or modifying the original determination, 3) Provides any revised directives or timelines, 4) Clarifies implementation requirements, 5) Notes that this decision is final within the community process, and 6) Is delivered to all parties within 48 hours of the decision. The Appeals Committee records the outcome for tracking and quality improvement purposes."
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation: {
|
||||
criteria: {
|
||||
criteriaText: "Cases may be delegated from the referee process when: 1) Legal issues beyond community governance are central to the dispute, 2) The complexity requires specialized expertise beyond the referees' training, 3) Safety concerns require immediate professional intervention, 4) The scope affects multiple community systems or external entities, 5) Significant conflicts of interest exist with all available referees, or 6) The case involves policy creation rather than policy application. The Dispute Coordinator makes initial delegation recommendations, which are reviewed by the Referee Oversight Committee."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_process: {
|
||||
delegationProcessText: "The delegation process includes: 1) Documentation of why the referee process is not appropriate, 2) Consultation with parties about alternative options, 3) Formal referral to the appropriate resource with relevant background information, 4) Assistance with transition to ensure parties understand the new process, 5) The Dispute Coordinator remains available as a resource during the transition, and 6) The outcome is recorded for community learning and process improvement. This approach ensures no dispute falls through the cracks due to jurisdictional limitations."
|
||||
},
|
||||
selection: {
|
||||
selectionText: "The referee is selected through a structured process:\n\n1. The community maintains a roster of 5-7 trained referees with diverse expertise\n2. For each dispute, 3 available referees are presented to the parties\n3. Parties rank their preferences, with the highest mutual ranking selected\n4. If parties cannot agree, a random selection from the three options is made\n5. Selected referees must disclose any potential conflicts of interest\n6. Parties may challenge the selection based on demonstrated bias or conflict\n7. Referees receive ongoing training and peer review to maintain quality"
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_authority: {
|
||||
delegationAuthorityText: "Our community maintains relationships with several authorities for delegation: 1) A network of professional mediators with various specializations, 2) Legal services for matters requiring formal legal intervention, 3) Subject matter experts in areas like construction, finance, technology, and health, 4) Conflict coaching services for high-emotion situations, 5) Therapeutic resources for conflicts with significant relational components, and 6) Regulatory agencies when disputes involve compliance with external requirements. The community budget includes funds to support access to these resources when needed."
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
@ -594,6 +562,9 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
},
|
||||
jurisdiction: {
|
||||
jurisdictionText: "The peer-to-peer process is appropriate for most interpersonal conflicts and minor disagreements. If the dispute involves illegal activity, poses safety risks, or requires specialized expertise, participants should refer to the delegation process."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_options: {
|
||||
delegationOptionsText: "Delegation to a different process is appropriate if: 1) The peer-to-peer process has been attempted without resolution, 2) The dispute involves serious safety concerns, 3) There is a significant power imbalance between participants, 4) The issue affects the broader community, or 5) Specialized expertise is needed. If delegation is needed, participants document what has been tried and what issues remain unresolved. They then request assistance from the community mediator pool, a group of trained volunteer mediators who can facilitate a more structured process. These mediators also maintain referral relationships with professional mediators, counselors, and legal services as needed."
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
deliberation: {
|
||||
@ -640,17 +611,6 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
appeal_resolution: {
|
||||
appealResolutionText: "The participants revise their written agreement based on the follow-up conversation, with both signing the updated document."
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation: {
|
||||
criteria: {
|
||||
criteriaText: "Delegation to a different process is appropriate if: 1) The peer-to-peer process has been attempted without resolution, 2) The dispute involves serious safety concerns, 3) There is a significant power imbalance between participants, 4) The issue affects the broader community, or 5) Specialized expertise is needed."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_process: {
|
||||
delegationProcessText: "If delegation is needed, participants document what has been tried and what issues remain unresolved. They then request assistance from the community mediator pool, a group of trained volunteer mediators."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_authority: {
|
||||
delegationAuthorityText: "The community mediator pool maintains a roster of trained mediators who can facilitate a more structured process. They also maintain referral relationships with professional mediators, counselors, and legal services as needed."
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
@ -716,6 +676,9 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
},
|
||||
jurisdiction: {
|
||||
jurisdictionText: "The facilitator helps determine if the chosen facilitator process is appropriate for the dispute. If the issue involves serious safety concerns, legal violations, or requires specialized expertise, the facilitator will recommend delegation to a more appropriate resource."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_options: {
|
||||
delegationOptionsText: "Delegation to a different process is appropriate when: 1) The facilitated process has been attempted without success, 2) The issue requires specialized expertise (legal, financial, therapeutic, etc.), 3) There are significant power imbalances that can't be addressed by a peer facilitator, 4) Safety concerns exist, or 5) The dispute has community-wide implications. The facilitator or Community Relations Committee may recommend delegation at any point. They document the reason for delegation and connect participants with appropriate resources. The Community Relations Committee maintains relationships with professional mediators, counselors, restorative justice practitioners, and legal resources."
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
deliberation: {
|
||||
@ -762,17 +725,6 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
appeal_resolution: {
|
||||
appealResolutionText: "The appeal process results in either a confirmation of the original agreement, modifications to address specific concerns, or in some cases, a completely new agreement. The new or modified agreement is documented and signed by all participants."
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation: {
|
||||
criteria: {
|
||||
criteriaText: "Delegation to a different process is appropriate when: 1) The facilitated process has been attempted without success, 2) The issue requires specialized expertise (legal, financial, therapeutic, etc.), 3) There are significant power imbalances that can't be addressed by a peer facilitator, 4) Safety concerns exist, or 5) The dispute has community-wide implications."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_process: {
|
||||
delegationProcessText: "The facilitator or Community Relations Committee may recommend delegation at any point in the process. They document the reason for delegation and what has been attempted so far. They then connect participants with appropriate resources, which may be within or outside the community."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_authority: {
|
||||
delegationAuthorityText: "The Community Relations Committee maintains a resource list of professional mediators, counselors, restorative justice practitioners, and legal resources. They have established relationships with these providers and can make direct referrals when needed. The community has a small fund to assist with costs if financial barriers exist."
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
@ -838,6 +790,9 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
},
|
||||
jurisdiction: {
|
||||
jurisdictionText: "The council follows a jurisdictional assessment checklist to determine if the case is appropriate for their process. Cases involving serious legal violations, safety threats, or requiring specialized expertise beyond the council's capacity are referred to appropriate authorities. For complex cases, the council may establish jurisdiction over certain aspects while referring others. The assessment considers legal requirements, community capacity, and the nature of the dispute."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_options: {
|
||||
delegationOptionsText: "Cases are delegated when: 1) They involve legal issues beyond the council's authority, 2) Specialized expertise is required (legal, psychological, financial, etc.), 3) Safety concerns exceed the council's capacity to address, 4) Conflicts of interest make impartial council deliberation impossible, 5) The case has implications beyond the immediate community requiring broader involvement, or 6) Multiple attempts at resolution through the council process have failed. The delegation process involves council deliberation on the recommendation, documentation of reasons, consultation with parties about external resources, formal referral with documentation transfer, and assignment of a council liaison to support the transition. The council maintains relationships with professional mediators, legal resources, mental health professionals, restorative justice practitioners, subject matter experts, and regional conflict resolution centers."
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
deliberation: {
|
||||
@ -884,17 +839,6 @@ const rawProtocolTemplates = [
|
||||
appeal_resolution: {
|
||||
appealResolutionText: "Appeal resolutions are documented in a formal decision that includes: 1) Summary of the original case and resolution, 2) Grounds for appeal and additional evidence considered, 3) Analysis of how the appeal criteria were or were not met, 4) Specific modifications to the original agreement if applicable, 5) Implementation plan for any changes, 6) Statement of finality indicating whether further appeals are possible, and 7) Signatures of appeal panel members. All parties receive this document and acknowledge receipt."
|
||||
}
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation: {
|
||||
criteria: {
|
||||
criteriaText: "Cases are delegated when: 1) They involve legal issues beyond the council's authority, 2) Specialized expertise is required (legal, psychological, financial, etc.), 3) Safety concerns exceed the council's capacity to address, 4) Conflicts of interest make impartial council deliberation impossible, 5) The case has implications beyond the immediate community requiring broader involvement, or 6) Multiple attempts at resolution through the council process have failed."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_process: {
|
||||
delegationProcessText: "The delegation process involves: 1) Identification of delegation need either at intake or during the process, 2) Council deliberation and formal vote on delegation recommendation, 3) Documentation of reasons for delegation and process to date, 4) Consultation with parties about appropriate external resources, 5) Formal referral including transfer of relevant documentation (with permission), 6) Assignment of a council liaison to support transition and maintain communication, 7) Closure of the council process with clear communication about next steps."
|
||||
},
|
||||
delegation_authority: {
|
||||
delegationAuthorityText: "The council maintains formal relationships with: 1) A panel of professional mediators with different specializations, 2) Legal resources including community legal aid, 3) Mental health professionals for cases involving trauma or psychological concerns, 4) Restorative justice practitioners for cases involving harm, 5) Subject matter experts in relevant fields, and 6) Regional conflict resolution centers. Annual budget is allocated for professional services when needed, and financial assistance is available to ensure access regardless of ability to pay."
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user