Governance, Standards, and Safeguards

Directing the Commons responsibly

Governance, Standards, and Safeguards explains how the Commons is directed, administered, reviewed, protected, and held accountable.

The Commons exists to support rigorous, ethical, accessible, durable, and public-interest knowledge activity.

To fulfil that purpose responsibly, it requires clear authority, defined responsibilities, proportionate decision-making, transparent standards, appropriate records, independent oversight, and effective safeguards.

Governance is not only about formal structures or senior decision-making.

It also concerns how the Commons protects people, knowledge, evidence, research, editorial independence, Community activity, privacy, accessibility, funding integrity, public trust, and the rights of those who participate.

Governance, Standards, and Safeguards applies across the Commons, including:

• Public access
• Account registration
• Individual Membership
• Institutional Membership
• Community Groups
• Working Spaces
• Critical Issues
• Events and Learning
• Volunteer and Contributor Opportunities
• Calls and Opportunities
• Commissioned Research
• Journal Publication
• Repository activity
• Partnerships and External Collaboration
• Funding, Sponsorship, and Support
• Contact and Support
• Privacy, data, consent, confidentiality, and information security
• Safeguarding and participant protection
• Financial management
• Operational administration
• Public communication
• Other approved Commons activity

The Commons should operate in a way that is proportionate to its scale, purpose, resources, risks, legal obligations, and responsibilities to users, Members, contributors, communities, institutions, partners, funders, and the public.

Purpose of Governance

Governance exists to ensure that the Commons:

• Remains faithful to its purpose, Principles, and Values
• Uses its resources responsibly
• Makes decisions through clear and appropriate authority
• Protects research integrity and editorial independence
• Supports fair, inclusive, accessible, and respectful participation
• Manages conflicts of interest
• Protects privacy, confidentiality, data, and information
• Safeguards children, vulnerable people, participants, contributors, and communities
• Manages financial support, sponsorship, funding, Partnerships, providers, and external relationships responsibly
• Maintains appropriate records
• Responds fairly to concerns, complaints, incidents, reviews, and appeals
• Learns from activity, feedback, concerns, and changing circumstances
• Protects public trust
• Supports the long-term sustainability of Commons knowledge, systems, records, and infrastructure

Governance should not create unnecessary bureaucracy or barriers to meaningful participation.

It should provide enough structure to support responsibility, fairness, safety, quality, transparency, and accountability.

The level of governance, review, documentation, and approval should be proportionate to the significance, duration, value, sensitivity, risk, and impact of the activity concerned.

Governance Principles

The Commons should be governed according to the following principles.

Purpose

Every significant decision, activity, relationship, policy, process, and use of resources should be connected to the purpose of the Commons.

The Commons should not undertake activity that is inconsistent with its Principles and Values merely because an opportunity, funder, partner, contributor, institution, or resource is available.

Integrity

The Commons should act honestly, responsibly, and consistently.

It should protect the quality of knowledge, the fairness of processes, the credibility of evidence, the independence of research and publication, and the trust of participants and the public.

Independence

The Commons should protect its ability to make responsible decisions free from improper political, commercial, financial, institutional, personal, editorial, research, professional, or other influence.

No Member, institution, partner, funder, sponsor, donor, provider, contributor, editor, reviewer, researcher, adviser, or other party should exercise authority beyond that which has been formally granted.

Fairness

The Commons should make decisions fairly, proportionately, consistently, and without unjustified discrimination.

People should understand relevant routes, eligibility criteria, conditions, access arrangements, selection processes, rights, responsibilities, review routes, and possible outcomes.

Transparency

The Commons should communicate its purpose, structures, policies, processes, material relationships, support arrangements, decisions, and limitations appropriately.

Transparency should be balanced with privacy, confidentiality, safeguarding, data protection, legal obligations, security, editorial independence, research integrity, and the rights of others.

Inclusion and accessibility

The Commons should seek to reduce unnecessary barriers to participation.

It should consider accessibility, disability, language, geography, time zones, digital access, financial barriers, culture, professional status, community needs, caring responsibilities, lived experience, and other relevant factors.

Respect and dignity

The Commons should treat people with dignity and respect.

It should not permit harassment, discrimination, intimidation, coercion, exploitation, collective blame, identity-based hostility, or other conduct inconsistent with its Principles and Values.

Accountability

People and bodies with responsibility for Commons decisions, systems, finances, research, publication, data, safeguarding, Partnerships, support, or other activity should understand the scope and limits of their authority.

They should be able to explain relevant decisions, maintain appropriate records, manage conflicts of interest, and be subject to proportionate review.

Participation

The Commons should support meaningful participation by Members, contributors, communities, people with lived experience, institutions, researchers, practitioners, public-interest organizations, and other relevant participants.

Participation should not be symbolic, extractive, or used merely to validate decisions that have already been made.

Proportionality

The Commons should use requirements that are appropriate to the scale and risk of an activity.

A modest public event, limited volunteer contribution, or low-risk resource-sharing activity may need simple arrangements.

A funded research programme, formal Partnership, restricted Working Space, controlled data project, safeguarding-sensitive activity, major publication, or significant financial commitment may require more formal approval, documentation, governance, review, and safeguards.

Sustainability

The Commons should manage its financial, technical, institutional, human, information, and knowledge resources responsibly.

It should consider whether activity can be maintained, reviewed, preserved, concluded, or transferred responsibly over time.

Governance Roles and Responsibilities

The Commons should define its governance roles clearly.

The exact names, people, committees, offices, or bodies may change over time. The underlying responsibilities should remain clear.

Commons Governance Authority

The Commons Governance Authority is the person, body, board, committee, officer, or combination of authorized bodies with ultimate responsibility for the governance, strategic direction, accountability, sustainability, integrity, and public-interest purpose of the Commons.

The Commons Governance Authority should:

• Protect the purpose, Principles, and Values of the Commons
• Approve or oversee significant strategy, policies, structures, and standards
• Ensure that appropriate authority, delegation, accountability, and review arrangements exist
• Oversee significant financial, legal, ethical, safeguarding, data, research, editorial, Partnership, reputational, and operational risks
• Protect independence, integrity, public trust, and responsible use of resources
• Ensure that material concerns, incidents, complaints, conflicts of interest, and risks can be escalated appropriately
• Ensure that appropriate review, appeal, accountability, and record-management arrangements exist
• Appoint, authorize, delegate to, review, or remove responsible role holders where appropriate
• Receive proportionate reports on activity, risks, performance, learning, and significant matters

Commons Administration

The Commons Administration is responsible for the practical administration, coordination, communication, records, systems, implementation, support, and day-to-day operation of the Commons.

The Commons Administration may:

• Maintain pages, forms, records, systems, communications, listings, and operational processes
• Receive enquiries, applications, submissions, requests, support enquiries, concerns, and complaints
• Route matters to the appropriate person, process, Group, Working Space, reviewer, editor, project lead, safeguarding contact, data contact, financial authority, or governance authority
• Support Membership, events, Groups, Working Spaces, Calls, research, publication, Repository, Partnerships, funding, and other Commons activity
• Maintain appropriate administrative records
• Coordinate approvals and reviews
• Provide information and guidance
• Monitor deadlines, conditions, permissions, access, and implementation
• Escalate material concerns and risks
• Maintain appropriate policy, procedure, agreement, template, and operational-document registers
• Support review, evaluation, learning, and improvement

Commons Administration should not make commitments, approve expenditure, enter contracts, disclose protected information, appoint role holders, approve high-risk activity, or bind the Commons legally unless it holds explicit delegated authority to do so.

Designated Authorities

The Commons should designate appropriate authorities for particular areas of responsibility.

These may include:

• Membership Authority
• Community and Working Space Authority
• Events and Learning Authority
• Research Authority
• Editorial Authority
• Repository and Preservation Authority
• Partnership and External Collaboration Authority
• Funding, Sponsorship, and Support Authority
• Financial Authority
• Safeguarding Authority
• Privacy, Data, Consent, and Confidentiality Authority
• Complaints, Review, and Appeal Authority
• Accessibility and Inclusion Authority
• Technical and Information-Security Authority
• Other necessary operational, professional, or governance authorities

One person or body may hold more than one authority where this is appropriate, properly documented, and consistent with good governance.

The Commons should avoid concentrating incompatible responsibilities in one person or body where this could create a material conflict of interest, undermine independence, or weaken review.

For example, the same person should not be the sole decision maker on a complaint made about their own conduct, a funding decision from which they may benefit, a publication in which they are an author, or a provider-selection process in which they have a competing interest.

Community Groups and Working Spaces

Community Groups and Working Spaces may have coordinators, moderators, facilitators, leads, editors, advisers, project contacts, or other role holders.

These roles may support participation, activity, discussion, access, moderation, scheduling, resource sharing, event development, proposal development, and other approved work.

A Community Group or Working Space role holder should not assume authority beyond that explicitly granted to them.

They should not represent the Commons, make financial commitments, approve restricted access, determine research findings, control Journal editorial decisions, enter Partnerships, disclose protected information, or make governance decisions unless formally authorized.

Research, Editorial, and Repository Roles

Research roles may include research leads, project leads, providers, investigators, advisers, reviewers, data stewards, community contributors, or other approved participants.

Editorial roles may include editors, associate editors, reviewers, editorial advisers, authors, contributors, and publication administrators.

Repository roles may include depositors, metadata contributors, curators, preservation advisers, librarians, archivists, data stewards, access reviewers, and Repository administrators.

Research, editorial, and Repository roles should have clear conditions, authority limits, independence safeguards, conflict-of-interest arrangements, privacy and confidentiality requirements, attribution arrangements, and review processes.

Partners, Funders, Sponsors, Providers, and External Contributors

Partners, funders, sponsors, donors, providers, institutions, and other external contributors may support or participate in Commons activity.

They should not gain authority over governance, research conclusions, editorial decisions, peer review, Community Group direction, Working Space access, provider selection, restricted information, or public representation unless this has been expressly authorized through an appropriate process or agreement.

The Commons should manage such relationships through the Partnerships and External Collaboration and Funding, Sponsorship, and Support frameworks.

Decision-Making and Delegation

The Commons should make decisions through clear, proportionate, documented, and appropriately authorized processes.

Decision-making should distinguish between:

• Strategic decisions
• Governance decisions
• Operational decisions
• Financial decisions
• Membership decisions
• Access decisions
• Community Group and Working Space decisions
• Research decisions
• Editorial and publication decisions
• Repository and preservation decisions
• Partnership and External Collaboration decisions
• Funding, sponsorship, and support decisions
• Safeguarding decisions
• Privacy, data, confidentiality, and information-security decisions
• Complaints, review, appeal, and conduct decisions
• Other decisions requiring specific authority

The Commons should maintain a Delegation and Authority Schedule that identifies:

• Which decisions may be made by Commons Administration
• Which decisions require a designated authority
• Which decisions require review by more than one person or body
• Which decisions require financial, legal, ethical, research, editorial, safeguarding, data, governance, or other specialist input
• Which decisions require formal approval or agreement
• Which decisions may be delegated
• Which decisions must be recorded
• Which decisions may be reviewed, appealed, varied, suspended, or terminated
• What happens when a decision maker has a conflict of interest or is unavailable

A person should not make a decision outside the authority granted to them.

A person who does not hold the necessary authority should refer the matter to the appropriate Commons route.

Material Decisions

A material decision is a decision that may create significant financial, legal, ethical, research, editorial, safeguarding, privacy, data, operational, reputational, strategic, institutional, community, or public-interest consequences.

Material decisions may include:

• Approval of significant strategy or policy
• Entry into a formal Partnership
• Acceptance of significant funding, sponsorship, donation, grant, or in-kind support
• Approval of substantial expenditure
• Appointment or removal of senior governance, research, editorial, financial, safeguarding, data, or operational role holders
• Approval of significant research, project, publication, Repository, event, Working Space, or Community activity
• Approval of activity involving children, vulnerable people, research participants, controlled data, restricted information, cultural knowledge, significant risk, or major public communication
• Decisions to publish, correct, retract, preserve, restrict, withdraw, or remove significant material
• Decisions relating to serious conduct, safeguarding, privacy, data, research-integrity, editorial-integrity, financial, conflict-of-interest, legal, or reputational concerns
• Decisions to suspend, terminate, vary, or close a material Membership, role, project, Partnership, funding arrangement, event, Working Space, or other activity

Material decisions should receive appropriate review, record keeping, conflict-of-interest management, and approval.

Records, Transperancy, and Accountability

The Commons should maintain records appropriate to its activity.

Records may include:

• Policies, procedures, standards, and guidance
• Governance structures and delegation arrangements
• Meeting records and decision records
• Membership decisions
• Group and Working Space access decisions
• Event, learning, and participation records
• Calls and Opportunities
• Role appointments and agreements
• Research records
• Editorial and peer-review records
• Repository deposit, access, preservation, restriction, withdrawal, and metadata records
• Partnership and External Collaboration records
• Funding, sponsorship, donation, provider, contract, and financial records
• Privacy, data, consent, confidentiality, access, and information-security records
• Safeguarding records
• Complaints, review, appeal, concern, and incident records
• Risk assessments
• Conflict-of-interest declarations
• Evaluation, monitoring, review, and learning records

Records should be accurate, proportionate, secure, accessible to authorized people, retained appropriately, and managed in accordance with relevant privacy, confidentiality, legal, ethical, financial, contractual, research, editorial, safeguarding, preservation, and institutional requirements.

The Commons should communicate material decisions, policies, relationships, funding, support, limitations, and changes appropriately.

Not every record or decision can be made public.

The Commons should balance transparency with privacy, confidentiality, safeguarding, data protection, research integrity, editorial independence, legal obligations, security, cultural rights, and the rights of others.

Independence and Conflicts of Interest

The Commons should protect independence across its activity.

No Member, institution, funder, sponsor, donor, partner, provider, editor, reviewer, author, researcher, Community Group participant, Working Space participant, contributor, role holder, or other person should use their position, resources, information, relationship, influence, or access to obtain improper advantage or control.

A conflict of interest may arise where a person’s personal, professional, financial, institutional, political, commercial, research, editorial, family, community, or other interest could affect, or appear to affect, their judgment, decision, contribution, recommendation, review, appointment, or role.

Relevant interests may include:

• Employment or consultancy relationships
• Financial interests
• Institutional affiliations
• Research funding
• Sponsorship arrangements
• Partnership relationships
• Provider relationships
• Intellectual-property interests
• Personal or family relationships
• Competing proposals, contracts, funding applications, research projects, manuscripts, or appointments
• Prior involvement in the matter under discussion
• Political, policy, advocacy, regulatory, professional, or public-position commitments
• Relationships with participants, communities, funders, sponsors, providers, authors, editors, reviewers, researchers, or other relevant parties
• Any other interest that may reasonably affect, or appear to affect, impartiality or public trust

A conflict of interest does not automatically prevent participation.

It may require disclosure, recusal, independent review, separation of functions, restricted access, independent moderation, altered governance, alternative decision-making arrangements, or another appropriate safeguard.

The Commons should maintain a Conflict-of-Interest Policy, declaration process, register, and review procedure.

Research Integrity and Responsible Research

The Commons should support rigorous, ethical, transparent, and responsible research.

Research activity should be designed, commissioned, conducted, reviewed, reported, disseminated, preserved, and used in ways that protect methodological quality, participant welfare, privacy, consent, data, independence, accurate reporting, acknowledgment of limitations, and public trust.

Research should not be shaped by a predetermined conclusion.

A commissioning body, funder, sponsor, donor, partner, provider, Member, institution, researcher, or other participant should not improperly influence research findings, interpretation, methodology, reporting, publication, or dissemination.

The Commons should maintain a Research Integrity and Responsible Research framework that addresses:

• Research design
• Research questions
• Methodology
• Ethics
• Consent
• Participant information
• Safeguarding
• Data management
• Privacy and confidentiality
• Conflicts of interest
• Research independence
• Provider selection
• Quality assurance
• Accurate reporting
• Treatment of limitations and uncertainty
• Authorship and attribution
• Publication and dissemination
• Repository deposit and preservation
• Concerns, investigation, correction, and review

Editorial Independence and Publication Ethics

The Commons should protect editorial independence and publication integrity.

Journal editorial, peer-review, authorship, correction, retraction, publication, and preservation decisions should be made according to published standards, evidence, quality, integrity, fairness, and applicable ethical requirements.

They should not be determined by Membership, institutional status, funding, sponsorship, donor relationship, Partnership, political influence, commercial interest, personal connection, or another improper factor.

The Commons should maintain an Editorial Independence and Publication Ethics framework that addresses:

• Journal scope and standards
• Author guidance
• Reviewer guidance
• Editorial roles and responsibilities
• Peer review
• Confidentiality
• Conflicts of interest
• Authorship and contributor recognition
• Copyright and licensing
• Publication decisions
• Corrections
• Retractions
• Expressions of concern
• Publication ethics
• Complaints and appeals
• Repository deposit and preservation
• Independence from funders, sponsors, partners, institutions, providers, and other external influence

Safeguarding and Participant Protection

The Commons should protect the welfare, dignity, safety, rights, and interests of people who participate in its activity.

Safeguarding may be relevant to events, learning, Community Groups, Working Spaces, research, volunteering, contributions, Calls, Partnerships, public engagement, digital activity, recordings, communications, and other Commons work.

The Commons should maintain a Safeguarding and Participant Protection framework that addresses:

• Safeguarding roles and responsibilities
• Children and vulnerable people
• Participant welfare
• Reporting concerns
• Urgent concerns
• Confidentiality and information sharing
• Appropriate boundaries
• Online and in-person activity
• Volunteer and contributor roles
• Research participation
• Event participation
• Partner, provider, and external-contributor responsibilities
• Escalation and referral
• Incident recording
• Review and learning

The Commons is not an emergency-response service.

Where there is an immediate risk to life, safety, or wellbeing, people should contact the relevant emergency services, urgent health service, local safeguarding authority, or other appropriate emergency support before or in addition to contacting the Commons.

Accessibility, Inclusion and Equal Participation

The Commons should seek to ensure that its activity is accessible, inclusive, respectful, and open to diverse forms of knowledge, expertise, experience, and participation.

Accessibility and inclusion should be considered in the design of pages, systems, Membership, Community Groups, Working Spaces, events, learning, Calls, research, publication, Repository activity, Partnerships, funding, support, and governance.

The Commons should maintain an Accessibility, Inclusion, and Equal Participation framework that addresses:

• Accessible information and digital design
• Alternative formats
• Accessible forms and systems
• Communication support
• Captioning, transcription, interpretation, translation, and sign-language support where available and appropriate
• Accessible events and venues
• Online, hybrid, asynchronous, and low-visibility participation options where appropriate
• Disability, health, communication, mobility, sensory, cognitive, neurodiversity, caring, financial, language, geographic, time-zone, digital-access, cultural, and other participation needs
• Community participation
• Lived-experience contribution
• Fair eligibility and selection
• Non-discrimination
• Reasonable adjustments
• Support routes
• Feedback and review

Complaints, Review, and Appeal

The Commons should provide proportionate routes through which people may raise concerns, make complaints, request review, seek clarification, or appeal an eligible decision.

The Commons should distinguish between:

• General feedback
• An enquiry
• A request for support
• A concern
• A complaint
• A safeguarding concern
• A privacy or data concern
• A research-integrity concern
• An editorial or publication-ethics concern
• A conflict-of-interest concern
• A financial or funding concern
• A Partnership or external-collaboration concern
• A review request
• An appeal
• A legal or contractual dispute
• Inappropriate, abusive, discriminatory, malicious, retaliatory, or vexatious use of a complaint route

The Commons should maintain a Complaints, Review, and Appeal framework that explains:

• Which matters are covered
• How to raise a matter
• What information is needed
• How confidentiality, privacy, fairness, safety, and conflicts of interest are managed
• Who will assess, investigate, review, or decide the matter
• How decisions are recorded
• How outcomes are communicated
• When review or appeal is available
• How urgent matters are escalated
• How learning from concerns improves Commons activity

Privacy, Data, Consent, and Confidentiality

Privacy, Data, Consent, and Confidentiality is a central Commons safeguard.

The Commons should collect, use, share, store, retain, preserve, restrict, correct, delete, and dispose of information responsibly.

It should protect personal information, confidential information, sensitive information, research data, event records, Membership records, Community Group material, Working Space information, publication records, Repository records, Partnership information, funding records, safeguarding information, and other protected material.

The Commons should maintain:

• A legal Privacy Policy
• A Cookie Notice
• Privacy, Data, Consent, and Confidentiality guidance
• Consent notices and records
• Data-sharing arrangements
• Confidentiality agreements
• Research Data-Management Plans
• Repository Deposit and Access Conditions
• Data access, correction, restriction, and deletion procedures
• Information-security and data-breach procedures
• Privacy, data, and confidentiality enquiry routes

Terms, Policies, Procedures, and Agreements

The Commons should maintain a clear hierarchy of governance documents.

Public framework pages explain the Commons’ purpose, principles, participation routes, safeguards, rights, responsibilities, and general standards.

Policies set formal expectations and requirements.

Procedures explain how the Commons administers, approves, records, reviews, investigates, escalates, and closes relevant activity.

Guidance helps people understand how to apply policies and procedures in practice.

Templates and forms support consistent information collection, decision making, agreements, records, and communication.

Agreements define responsibilities, rights, permissions, restrictions, financial arrangements, confidentiality, intellectual property, data, safeguarding, access, publication, review, and closure for a specific role, project, Partnership, funding arrangement, provider relationship, or other activity.

The Commons should ensure that public pages, policies, procedures, agreements, forms, and systems do not contradict one another.

Where a policy, agreement, legal requirement, research protocol, funding condition, safeguarding requirement, data arrangement, or other formal document provides more specific conditions, those conditions apply

Governance Documents and Operational Tools

The Commons should maintain and review the following documents and tools as appropriate.

Governance and Decision-Making Framework

This should define governance authority, strategic direction, delegation, decision-making, review, accountability, records, and significant approval routes.

Delegation and Authority Schedule

This should identify who may make, approve, vary, review, suspend, or terminate specific types of decision.

Conflict-of-Interest Policy and Declaration Form

This should define conflicts of interest, declaration, management, recusal, registers, review, and escalation.

Research Integrity and Responsible Research Framework

This should establish standards for ethical, rigorous, independent, transparent, and responsible research.

Editorial Independence and Publication Ethics Framework

This should establish standards for Journal editorial activity, peer review, authorship, publication, correction, retraction, and independence.

Safeguarding and Participant Protection Policy

This should establish safeguarding roles, concerns, reporting, escalation, participant welfare, boundaries, and incident management.

Accessibility, Inclusion, and Equal Participation Framework

This should establish standards for accessible participation, reasonable adjustments, digital access, events, forms, communication, inclusion, and support.

Privacy, Data, Consent, and Confidentiality Framework

This should establish the Commons-wide information-governance framework.

Privacy Policy and Cookie Notice

These should provide the required legal and regulatory information for personal data and website technologies.

Complaint, Review, and Appeal Procedure

This should establish routes for concerns, complaints, review, appeal, investigation, outcomes, and learning.

Risk-Management Framework and Risk Register

This should identify strategic, financial, legal, ethical, safeguarding, data, research, editorial, operational, Partnership, reputational, and other risks.

Financial Management and Delegated Financial Authority Framework

This should establish financial controls, approval limits, expenditure, funding, sponsorship, donations, reporting, audit, and record-management arrangements.

Partnership, Funding, Provider, and Agreement Templates

These should support consistent management of External Collaboration, formal Partnerships, funding, sponsorship, donation, provider engagement, procurement, service arrangements, data sharing, confidentiality, intellectual property, and closure.

Policy Review and Document-Control Register

This should identify the owner, approval date, version, review date, status, related documents, and amendment history of each Commons policy, procedure, template, and framework.

Governance Enquiries and Support

Use Contact and Support if you need guidance about the governance, standards, safeguards, authority, decision-making, policies, procedures, review routes, or accountability arrangements of the Commons.

You may use this route to:

• Ask about a Commons policy, framework, process, or standard
• Seek clarification about authority, responsibility, or delegation
• Ask how a decision is made or reviewed
• Identify the appropriate route for a governance, research, editorial, financial, safeguarding, privacy, data, accessibility, Partnership, funding, conduct, or other concern
• Request information about an applicable policy, procedure, agreement, or document
• Raise a concern about governance, independence, conflicts of interest, fairness, transparency, conduct, safety, privacy, data, research, editorial activity, funding, or another Commons matter
• Provide feedback on a Commons policy, support route, system, or governance arrangement

To certify that proper governance, standards and safeguards are in place, we ensure that:

• The Commons has a clear purpose, principles, values, authority structure, and decision-making model
• People understand who is responsible for strategic, operational, financial, research, editorial, data, safeguarding, accessibility, Partnership, funding, and other decisions
• Authority is delegated clearly and used responsibly
• Material decisions receive appropriate approval, review, conflict-of-interest management, documentation, and oversight
• Community Groups and Working Spaces have clear purposes, roles, access arrangements, moderation, support, and limits of authority
• Research integrity, editorial independence, peer-review independence, fair provider selection, and honest reporting are protected
• Funders, sponsors, donors, partners, providers, Members, institutions, and other contributors do not gain improper influence or access
• Privacy, confidentiality, consent, data protection, information security, access restrictions, Repository preservation, and information rights are managed responsibly
• Safeguarding and participant welfare are taken seriously
• Accessibility, inclusion, community participation, lived-experience contribution, and equal participation are considered throughout Commons activity
• Concerns, complaints, review requests, appeals, incidents, and risks can be raised safely and managed fairly
• Policies, procedures, agreements, templates, and public pages are coherent, current, proportionate, and accessible
• Decisions and activity are documented appropriately
• The Commons learns from feedback, review, concerns, incidents, and changing circumstances
• The Commons remains accountable, independent, fair, safe, inclusive, credible, and worthy of public trust

Governance and Decision-Making explain how the Commons is directed, how authority is assigned and delegated, how significant decisions are approved, how records and review are maintained, and how strategic, operational, financial, research, editorial, safeguarding, privacy, Partnership, funding, and other responsibilities are managed.