Please describe your proposed solution.

As a solution provider the Atala Prism ecosystem is providing support for identity and credential solutions. These solutions are adopted and used by practitioners all over the world, yet the community has loosely adopted standards that provide guardrails for work being completed. It is hard for those new to the space, or for those seeking commercial support to know the conditions under which the solution is applied and who is operating under generally agreed upon Good Practice principles of Governance.

Recently in the US a large-scale effort to provide interoperability standards across utilization protocols (CHAPI/DIDComm/etc.) resulted in seminal co-opted adoption of technical standards that can now increase interoperability across issuing and validating systems. Completed by Jobs for the Future through their Plugfests (<https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-ed/plugfest-1-2022/> & <https://w3c-ccg.github.io/vc-ed/plugfest-2-2022/>), the resulting work highlighted a strong need for basic governance standards among operators. At least three foundational identity companies who complete strong work in the Catalyst community participated in these interoperability opportunities.

In parallel to this, the Trusted Learner Network (<https://tln.asu.edu/>) an affiliation of credential tuned industries started work on a governance framework that will support participation in the TLN. I was given the opportunity to serve on that Advisory Board, and can attest that the need for basic governance principles cannot be understated and stand in support of current interoperability work. While some governments and local authorities have provided governance frameworks, largely speaking the community is only self-regulating against W3C-VC working models and other similar technical standards with little in the way of adopted best practices.

These practices include conditions that recognize:

1. Adopted definitions
2. Statements of utilization (or roadmap)
3. Mission Statement
4. Purpose built protocol solutions
5. Declared responsibilities for DID/VC holders
6. Declared responsibilities for DID/VC issuers
7. Declared responsibilities for validators
8. Declared rights for DID/VC holders
9. Declared rights for DID/VC issuers
10. Declared rights for validators
11. Due Process
12. Stated rules for use

I have been blessed to know many who have helped to build this ecosystem and have done tremendous work in the VC space. It is my proposition that I be provided resources and be allowed to bring together many of these influential and knowledgeable practitioners in the VC/DID/SSI space and guide work that results in a set of basic well informed governance framework principles that will stand as best practice standards. That, when/if adopted by the Atala Prism community, can stand as an institutional standard for operations.

Those who want to ascribe to these Governance Framework principles can seek endorsement that will come to them as a VC of Good Practice that they can use in all publications and solutions. Thus indicating to the world that they ascribe to the published Good Practice Governance Framework principles.

How does your proposed solution address the challenge and what benefits will this bring to the Cardano ecosystem?

The challenge of adopting standards is quite difficult. They need to be responsive to reflect application and utilization needs, and as well, at points standards themselves stand in contrary opposition to the basic tenets of open work. While it would not be advisable to impose standards on operators in this space, it would be useful to provide standards of utilization that represent Good Practice in the field.

Gathering this information into one document, and providing opportunity to review, incorporate, and then to prove adoption gives users a voluntary stance in the Atala Prism ecosystem. This approach also serves much more as a carrot towards best practices for new users and practitioners rather than as a set of rules designed to keep new products and solutions out.

This Good Practice Governance Framework, of necessity, needs to be created by high level users and those who have deep historical knowledge in the field. But this needs to be tempered against new knowledge and innovation. As such, a strong bench of practitioners needs to be gathered to work on these principles and provide public endorsement of the proposition and work.

How do you intend to measure the success of your project?

The success of this work will be in the successful completion of a Good Practice Governance Framework proposed document that addresses (at a minimum):

1. Adopted definitions
2. Statements of utilization (or roadmap)
3. Mission Statement
4. Purpose built protocol solutions
5. Declared responsibilities for DID/VC holders
6. Declared responsibilities for DID/VC issuers
7. Declared responsibilities for validators
8. Declared rights for DID/VC holders
9. Declared rights for DID/VC issuers
10. Declared rights for validators
11. Due Process
12. Stated rules for use

While adoption is not a prerequisite for declaring success, I am hopeful that endorsement and support will follow after the creation of the proposed document.

Please describe your plans to share the outputs and results of your project?

After creation, the Good Practice Governance Framework document will be presented to the Catalyst Community for review and comment, and then to the Atala Prism community as well for review and public comment through media presentations as well as document flagging. Comments will be reviewed and incorporated and the result will be a generally recognizable statement of Good Practice that can be adopted by practitioners.

It is suggested that if/when adopted, that a reference website be established (<https://www.credentialgateway.org/good-practice-governance-framework> as an example) and the governance council who agrees to review the document annually and then produce a public report on how widespread adoption of the Good Practice Governance Framework is found.

What is your capability to deliver your project with high levels of trust and accountability?

As a long-time professional in the field I have the requisite acquaintances and friendships that will build trust in the creation process. As well, I served on a national advisory board tasked with a similar requirement to establish governance principles for VC application in higher education. I serve as a senior administrator in higher education and also have had success building credential based solutions in higher education as well as in the private sector. I have extensive grant management experience, with a combined grant allocation management range across my career in the tens of millions of USD. All combined, I believe that I will be able to complete this work with distinction and with integrity, and would be very pleased to be given the opportunity to coordinate this work.

What are the main goals for the project and how will you validate if your approach is feasible?

The main goals for this project center around three areas: 1) creation 2) consensus 3) public comment/peer review.

Creation:

The work that is needed in this space is to provide solid guidance to issuing companies and a solid theoretical foundation for credential based work. Experienced practitioners have already identified success points and areas of potential conflict around which others may be guided with adoption of best practices. The initial creation phase will be completed from a literature review starting point, and then a straw-man built based on existing knowledge within the field. With that straw-man the working governance group will provide testing opportunities and discuss relevant aspects that are intricately related to the topic. In this creation phase, there will be great latitude for conversation and debate. The result will be a rough draft dissection of the straw-man document.

Consensus:

In the consensus phase the group will work within a 90% paradigm, where all statements that we feel should be adopted fit within at least 90% of known scenarios. Then that marker will stand as a general consensus marker. The work completed in this phase will hone the Good Practice Governance Framework to a reasonably finished product with general application. Knowing that there will be additions and subtractions and further work through the public comment/peer review process.

Public Comment/Peer Review:

The document will be provided to the Catalyst community (through one of the weekly meetings) and opportunity for comment and review will be provided through comment platforms and flag editing opportunities. The same opportunity will be provided in a general interest call to the larger Atala Prism community following much the same format. Upon a reasonable time for review (what will likely be 2 weeks) the governance committee will gather again and review the comments.

Final changes will then be made and a report generated and disseminated.

Please provide a detailed breakdown of your project’s milestones and each of the main tasks or activities to reach the milestone plus the expected timeline for the delivery.

1. Receive support from the Catalyst community and endorsement to move forward (Zero Week)
2. Provide a call for participation (Weeks 1-2)
3. Secure roster (Weeks 3)
4. Produce Straw-man (Weeks 4-5)
5. Weekly meetings: Creation (Weeks 6-10)
6. Weekly meetings: Consensus (Weeks 11-17)
7. Weekly meetings: Public Comment/Peer Review (Weeks 18-22)
8. Final Report and participant dispersal (Week 24)
9. Close funding (Week 26)

Please describe the deliverables, outputs and intended outcomes of each milestone.

Receive support from the Catalyst community and endorsement to move forward (Zero Week)

Provide a call for participation (Weeks 1-2)

Provide a general call via email, Discord communication, Slack, and other media outlets for participation. This will be completed through a simple Google Form. it is anticipated that there will be 5 reserved spots and 5 general open spots.

Secure roster (Weeks 3)

Consider recruited spots and gain confirmation of roster. Publish online

Produce Straw-man (Weeks 4-5)

Publish straw-man online for public accountability and provide to governance council group.

Weekly meetings: Creation (Weeks 6-10)

Called via zoom/Google-meet

Weekly meetings: Consensus (Weeks 11-17)

Notes kept and published on public website

Weekly meetings: Public Comment/Peer Review (Weeks 18-22)

All comments posted on public website for review

Final Report and participant dispersal (Week 24)

Completed and edited document for integration and use.

Close funding (Week 26)

Return and report to Catalyst Funding Group

Please provide a detailed budget breakdown of the proposed work and resources.

Having some measure of experience and also knowing the costs associated with relevant work, it is reasonable to assume the following:

Director (x1)

$4200 stipend

Governance Members (x10)

16 hours of meetings @ $75 an hour = $1,200 per member totaling: $12,000

Development of documents and resources

$350

Final Document

$200

Incidental costs related to web integration, development of resources, videos, etc.

$525

Total project cost: $17,275USD or 57,583ADA

While this may seem like a lot for the work, based on experience and industry knowledge, this represents a true and honest portrayal of the cost of this sort of document that would involve those whose voices need to be included.

Who is in the project team and what are their roles?

Director-

The Director will organize the work and holds primary responsibility for the delivery of the Good Practice Governance Framework solution. I will serve in this capacity and the allocated dollar amount represents approximately $25 per hour working approximately 6 hours per week.

Governance Members

Governance Members will need to be paid a requisite solution amount that is tied to their level of expertise. Asking those who may be associated with this work, $1200 over the course of 16 hours of meetings is a reasonable exchange. Their work will be tied to review of straw-man, consensus among the principles and then a final review of the public comment/peer review process.

How does the cost of the project represent value for money for the Cardano ecosystem?

Many new and upcoming companies may not recognize the value of a strong foundation of governance principles right out of the gate. Speaking from experience, I was probably 3-5 projects deep before I finally decided that governance and structure should be one of the first steps in creating a solution for an ecosystem need. These principles of Good Practice will save practitioners hours and thousands in development costs. As well, adoption will signal good will within the community, will be a marker of ascription to Atala Prism solutions, and will help build stronger product solutions in the ecosystem.