PARTNERSHIP CRITERIA   

The following five criteria were adopted by the Board of Trustees' Executive Committee in June 1999, as guidelines for judging the appropriateness of potential Foundation partners.

Scientific Integrity. The Foundation's research program is strongly grounded in the principles of scientific integrity, that is, peer review, quality assurance, and open, competitive project selection and procurement processes. Partners must have in place or be willing to accept an unbiased peer-review process for research identification, contractor selection, and project oversight. This could be either the Foundation process or another acceptable process for assuring the scientific integrity of the research.

Potential partners must agree to full disclosure (publication) of research results. Organizations seeking partnerships must have demonstrated scientific credibility such that partnering with the organization will not damage the Foundation's reputation or integrity.

Mutual Benefit. The partnership must provide net benefit to the Foundation's stakeholders (subscribers and the water supply community) and demonstrate appropriate commitment of resources by both partners. Foundation provision of services (e.g., research management) to partners – even if reimbursed for such services by the partner – without identifiable benefit to Foundation stakeholders is not acceptable. The Foundation is also not well served by seeking one-sided partnerships where no potential benefit accrues to the other partner. We must avoid becoming both a research-for-hire organization and an organization that benefits unilaterally from partnerships. Similarly, partners must have an excellent reputation so that there is no potential for damage to the Foundation's credibility.

Compatible Motivation. The Foundation's mission is "to advance the science of water to improve the quality of life." Potential partners must have similar motivation in terms of advancing science. The Foundation will not enter into partnerships with partners that are motivated to collaborate for other reasons, such as refuting regulations, developing marketable devices, or increasing market share. For these reasons, nonprofit and government agencies make the most likely candidates for partnership.

Reliability. The Foundation has a firm financial base, sound fiscal policies, and a dependable track record. Partners must have compatible characteristics. The risk of partners being unable (or unwilling) to meet financial and/or other resource commitments must be minimized. Otherwise, the risk of the partnership outweighs the potential benefits to the Foundation.

Confidentiality. The Foundation has adopted formal policies regarding confidentiality of researcher intellectual property and of security-sensitive information. Partners must agree to abide by the provisions of these policies

PARTNER APPROVAL

The approval process is exclusively for the review and approval of organizations proposed for partnerships, not for review/approval of specific research projects and/or topics. Proposed research projects and other research initiatives will be reviewed and approved through the traditional Foundation technical review processes (e.g., the Research Advisory Council and Board of Trustees).

The Foundation's scientific integrity tenets include two-tiered review as a key component of making sound, unbiased decisions. Two-tiered review entails approval by at least two levels of the Foundation's organization.  This tenet extends to the approval of partner organizations; potential partners must be reviewed and approved by both senior Foundation staff and by the Board.

PARTNER REVIEW PROCESS

Foundation staff identifies potential partner organizations. Such organizations may be identified independently or as part of the review of a proposed research project involving potential partners.

Staff develops descriptive material identifying whether, and how, prospective partners comply with the partnership criteria.  Material related to compliance with criteria is presented to the staff management team for review and approval. If the staff member who identified a potential partner and prepared a criteria compliance document is a member of the management team, that staff member shall be recused from the decision process at this point (first-tier review).

If approved by the staff management team, proposed partners and criteria compliance materials are submitted to the Board's Executive Committee for final approval (second-tier review).

If approved by the Executive Committee, the partner organization is added to the list of eligible partners for collaboration whether or not the particular project proposed by the potential partner is approved. Thereafter, these partners are pre-approved if future opportunities materialize.  Specific projects are, of course, still subject to Board review and approval.

The approved partnership list is reviewed periodically by the Executive Committee to assure the continued appropriateness of each partner.

For more information on collaborative partnerships, including partner criteria and the selection process contact Rick Karlin by e-mail or call 303.347.6104.