Principles of Participation in the Standards Network (→ Self-Commitment to the Standards)

The Awareness Standards were a collective project from the beginning and will remain so. Only through regular consultation, reflection, and collaboration among as many participants as possible can it be ensured that the shared standards provide a reliable basis for awareness work.

It is therefore essential that all groups and individuals involved in the standards also actively participate in the overall process and the management of the standards.

To this end, a group of collectives and individuals initially assumed responsibility to kickstart the participation process. Over time, this group can and should be expanded. The first step is the application to use the standards and thus to join the Standards Network, which is accompanied by a self-commitment to participation. The self-commitment formally involves signing the agreement to the principles.

What are the principles of the Standards Network?

• Compliance with the Standards
• Conscientious assessment of whether other members are adhering to the standards.
• Handling membership/applications for use and, if necessary, vetos (in rotation with other groups).
• Addressing (reported) violations (in rotation with other groups).
• Regular reflection on and, if necessary, revision of the standards.
• Contributing to funding opportunities for managing the standards.
• Participation in administrative and organizational tasks as needed.
• Open and constructive communication, as well as a willingness to address conflicts.

Application for Membership in the Standards Network

Decision Communication: If the review is positive, the responsible groups inform the applicant(s) of their acceptance or rejection into the network.

Submitting an Application: Applications for joining the network are made via a form on the website. Applicants must provide personal or organizational information, state their motivation (“Why do we want to use the standards?”), and confirm their agreement to the GDPR and self-commitment principles.

Initial Review: Members already part of the network review new applications. At this stage, an in-depth investigation into the applicant’s suitability is not conducted. However, any substantiated concerns (e.g., protection of perpetrators, “awareness-washing”) must be reported.

Objection Period: If there are concerns about an applicant, members have a three-week period to file a veto against their admission to the network.

Assigned Groups: During this time, two groups (on a rotating basis) are responsible for:

• Reviewing the application.
• Conducting a preliminary background check.
• Communicating with the applicant(s).

Preliminary Background Check: This includes, for example, reviewing the applicant’s website, social media presence, and external reports to ensure basic suitability in line with §4, Abs. 1 of the statutes. It also seeks to identify any publicly known accusations that could disqualify the applicant.

---

Procedures for Vetos Against Admission

• Review of the Veto:
  If a veto is submitted by network members against admitting a structure, the veto can undergo further review unless it unequivocally and clearly precludes admission.
• Responsible Parties:
  The two groups or individuals initially assigned to process the application are generally responsible for following up on the veto. If there is a personal connection to the structure or person involved in the veto, the task can be delegated to other members of the network.
• Research and Documentation:
  A review of the criticisms or accusations raised against the structure or individual in question is conducted. The methodology is at the discretion of the responsible parties. The findings are shared with the rest of the network for a collective decision on admission or rejection.

---

Addressing (Reported) Violations

• Assignment of Cases:
  In cases of reported violations involving individuals or structures already committed to the standards and part of the network, two uninvolved individuals are assigned to investigate. As with vetos, this responsibility can be reassigned with valid reasons.
• Investigation and Dialogue:
  An exchange with the involved individuals or groups should take place to determine whether their work aligns with the standards or can be brought back into alignment. The assigned parties can propose measures for handling the situation.
• Sharing Outcomes:
  Findings from the investigation are shared with all network members for further discussion.
• Follow-Up Process:
  If further questions arise, a procedure for processing and discussion is established collectively. The final decision on whether the individual or structure remains in the network is made collectively.

---

Reflection and Revision of the Standards

• Continuous Suggestions:
  Suggestions for revising the standards can be made at any time in a shared document with a designated suggestions function.
• Regular Meetings:
  At least two meetings per year are dedicated to discussing the standards.
• Annual Revisions:
  After a year, a comprehensive review of the standards takes place. Suggestions collected throughout the year are incorporated during scheduled meetings.
• Participation and Decision-Making:
  Individuals and groups publicly committed to the standards can participate in revision meetings. Changes are made through consensus during these sessions.
• Scheduling of Meetings:
  Dates are determined with at least two months’ notice, prioritizing times that allow the participation of the most diverse structures. Priority is given to diversity of participants rather than sheer numbers.

---

Funding Options

• Financial Needs:
  To manage and reflect on the standards effectively without relying solely on voluntary engagement, financial support is necessary.
• Funding Sources:
  Financial contributions may come from participant fees, donations, or additional grants.
• Community Involvement:
  Participants commit to assisting in securing financial resources by supporting grant applications, organizing solidarity events, or facilitating donation campaigns.

---

Administrative and Organizational Tasks

Participants are expected to contribute to administrative and organizational duties related to managing the standards. These include processing applications, coordinating meetings, and handling communications, ensuring the network’s efficient operation.

Administrative and Organizational Tasks include, but are not limited to:

• Processing membership applications
• Handling (regularly retrieving, forwarding, and responding to) emails
• Designing community events and other activities
• Organizing internal meetings within the revision process (as mentioned above)
• Organizing intervision, supervision, and mediation
• Updating and maintaining the website
• Managing the association’s account
• Writing grant applications

This list is not final. As the standards and the network evolve, additional tasks may arise. Depending on available funding, there may be opportunities to outsource some tasks or create paid positions to handle them.

---

Open and Receptive Communication as well as a Willingness to Address Conflicts

Network members commit to maintaining a respectful, open, and receptive way of communicating with one another. This means—especially in the case of (potential) conflicts within the network:

• Take criticism from others seriously!
• Do not tolerate dominance (abuse of power) within the structure.
• Agree on a process for addressing conflicts and adhere to this process! This may include: intervision and supervision, mediation, facilitated discussions.
• Participate in an internal support structure in line with the standards.
• Do not avoid conflicts and take perceived boundary violations from others and yourself seriously, meaning: be willing to communicate honestly about them, even if you did not perceive the issue as a conflict!

If economic interests arise from the management of the standards, it is important to ensure that:

• No single Awareness group profits alone.
• Resources are distributed and negotiated fairly.
• No specific actors (e.g., clubs) are favored.
• No specific actors (e.g., clubs) are financially harmed.

The focus is on the content and foundations of Awareness, not economic interests.

It is important that decisions regarding the use of financial resources are made collectively, not by individual persons or groups.

This also includes the allocation of resources and positions when job openings are advertised.

---

Dealing with Conflicts of Interest

In cases of conflicts of interest, it is important that no individual or group imposes their will and refuses further negotiation.

Possible ways to address this include:

• Appointing an external body to which parties can turn in such cases.
• Supervision or mediation processes.

Preventing the exclusion of individual persons or groups: If exclusion does occur, a supervision or mediation process must be initiated.

Supervision or mediation processes cannot be unilaterally ended. In such cases, an external body must propose the next steps.

If individuals or groups block this proposal from the external body, a large meeting must be scheduled over at least three sessions, where all stakeholders and external groups participate, and various approaches to resolution are collectively discussed.

If no agreement is reached after the three sessions, the process is returned to the external body, which will make a proposal that is binding for six months, to which all actors must adhere.

After six months, the agreement can be brought up again for collective review and revision.

---

Standards and Tasks of Awareness Work -> Click here