Brandveiligheidstechniek

Loading
loading...

Gray Book

January 1, 2023
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.

Winter Week 1 | January 1 – 7

December 31, 2022
mike@standardsmichigan.com
, , ,
No Comments

«Зимний день» 1934 Konstantin Gorbatov


Monday |  January 2 | Colloquium 16:00 UTC

About


Tuesday | January 3 | Colloquium 16:00 UTC

Looking Ahead: 2024

 


Wednesday | January 4 | Colloquium 16:00 UTC

I-Codes


Thursday | January 5 | Colloquium 16:00 UTC

Student Accommodation

 


Friday |  January 6 | Colloquium 16:00 UTC

Style


Saturday | January 7


Sunday | January 8

 


Financial Services

December 29, 2022
mike@standardsmichigan.com

No Comments

Portrait of Luca Pacioli (1445–1517) | Father of Modern Accounting

We find few ANSI-accredited financial service standards developers that have direct, meaningful effect upon #TotalCostofOwnership of the real assets of the education industry; though (like the education industry) the finance sector is heavily regulated by national governments; ideally informed by the leading practice discoveries of several industry consortia*.

The financial sector runs upwards of 15-20 percent of many national economies; the United States among them.  This sector may beyond the capability of any one organization that provides transparency, balance and openness to its stakeholders (i.e. all 195 nations on earth).

We find that the existing suite of financial service standards coming from Geneva are too high level to have a direct and perceptible effect on money flow through a nearly $500 billion industry.   At the very least this sector, like any other, needs a shared understanding of its core vocabulary and terms of art; even as a common understanding often requires context.

For the moment, let us acknowledge Technical Committee 68 of the International Standardization Organization for which the American National Standards Institute is the Global Secretariat.   The prospectus of this standardization project is linked below:

ISO/TC 68 Financial services: Background, structure and information

 

There is not a lot that we can do in this domain but there are a few things we can do.

(1) We limit our interest to the arcane and rather dreary world of tax-free bonds that school districts, colleges and universities rely upon to fund capital improvements and “continuing operations”.

(2) The work of this committee may interest business school and/or international studies students.

(3) Finance staff on the business side of the education industry, who would like to keep pace with the rollout of smart contracts in grant and infrastructure enterprises,  are encouraged to communicate directly with Accredited Standards Committee X9, Inc. for more information about the US Technical Advisory Group.  Janet Busch is listed as the contact person (janet.busch@x9.org).  Our colleagues in other nations interested in participating should communicate directly with Stefan Marinkovic at the ISO Offices in Geneva (marinkovic@iso.org)

We keep all ISO standards on the standing agenda of our periodic Global and Fintech colloquia.   See our CALENDAR for the next online meeting; open to everyone.

Issue: [16-135]

Category: Finance, International, Blockchain

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Christine Fischer, Richard Robben

More

Financial Services: Sizing the Sector in the Global Economy

ANSI: Introduction to Standards

 

Sustainability Accounting Standards Board

December 29, 2022
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

Jessica Helfand | Smithsonian Institution

Time to break down best practice literature released by he Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) — one of the first names in organizations with a solid due process platform for leading practice discovery and promulgation of sustainability concepts for the private sector.   Like the sustainability zietgeist itself; its topical areas are hydra-like — reaching into every sector, industry, and industry subsector — largely because money flows through all of them.

We approach the SASB bibliography as an open-source, consortia standards suite that challenges niche verticals known to most education community asset managers.    Since the education industry has both a private and public revenue character, we follow SASB standards development and participate in proposal and commenting opportunities whenever possible.

Last year we selected six sector-specific SASB standards that, in our judgment, could lower #TotalCostofOwnership with improved management of sustainability advancement activity (See list below).   We downloaded these standards, looked them over for actionable-specifics, but we did not submit comments of our own because of organizational changes we explain in our ABOUT and also because we could not find an individual institution or education industry trade association interested in collaborating with us on meaningful specifics.  We will try again.

Until we find a collaborator you may be enlightened by the current status of the SASB suite; all of its products available to the public:

Download Current SASB Standards | Credentials required

At the moment two developments at the SASB are meaningful for sustainability professionals in education communities:

  1. The Conceptual Framework document details the principles, objectives, assumptions, and definitions that guide SASB’s thinking and approach to Standard-setting/revising. The Conceptual Framework project will clarify and strengthen these core principles and concepts that govern SASB’s Standards.
  2. The Rules of Procedure document ensures the clarity, robustness, and integrity of SASB’s operations and processes. The Rules of Procedure project will ensure that the operations and Standard-setting/revising processes detailed in the document reflect SASB’s procedures today.

CLICK HERE for access to a listing of active projects in several stages.  No titles have been released for consultation as of the date of this post.

We encourage technical and business subject matter experts in education communities to try not to re-invent the wheel in developing sustainability policy templates but rather to collaborate with organizations whose existing consensus products can be adapted for education communities.   Perhaps post-pandemic, some of the redundancies we have been reporting to the education facility industry will be sun-setted.

We maintain the SASB suite on the standing agenda of our Fintech teleconferences.  See our CALENDAR for the next online teleconference; open to everyone.

Issue: [Various]

Category: Finance, Informatics, Management

Colleagues: Mike Anthony, Jack Janveja, Richard Robben


More

Workspace / SASB

 

Readings / Elementary & Secondary Education Act of 1965

December 28, 2022
mike@standardsmichigan.com
No Comments

‘If you trust government,
you obviously failed history class.’
— Senator John Kennedy (R-LA)

“The Attributes of the Arts and the Rewards Which Are Accorded Them” | Jean-Baptiste-Siméon Chardin (1766)

From the Wikipedia:  Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965:

“…Title I (“Title One”), which is a provision of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act passed in 1965, is a program created by the U.S. Department of Education to distribute funding to schools and school districts with a high percentage of students from low-income families, with the intention to create programs that will better children who have special needs that without funding could not be properly supported.[5] Funding is distributed first to state educational agencies (SEAs) which then allocate funds to local educational agencies (LEA’s) which in turn dispense funds to public schools in need.[6] Title I also helps children from families that have migrated to the United States and youth from intervention programs who are neglected or at risk of abuse. The act allocates money for educational purposes for the next five fiscal years until it is reauthorized.[7] In addition, Title I appropriates money to the education system for the persecution of high retention rates of students and the improvement of schools; these appropriations are carried out for five fiscal years until reauthorization.[7][8]

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, to be an eligible Title I school, at least 40% of a school’s students must be from low-income families who qualify under the United States Census‘s definition of low-income, according to the U.S. Department of Education.[6][9]

Title I mandates services both to eligible public school students and eligible private school students.[6] This is outlined in section 1120 of Title I, Part A of the ESEA as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Title I states that it gives priority to schools that are in obvious need of funds, low-achieving schools, and schools that demonstrate a commitment to improving their education standards and test scores.

There are two types of assistance that can be provided by Title I funds.[6] The first is a “schoolwide program” in which schools can dispense resources in a flexible manner.[10] The second is a “targeted assistance program” which allows schools to identify students who are failing or at risk of failing.[6]

Assistance for school improvement includes government grants, allocations, and reallocations based on the school’s willingness to commit to improving their standing in the educational system. Each educational institution requesting these grants must submit an application that describes how these funds will be used in restructuring their school for academic improvement.[8]

Schools receiving Title I funding are regulated by federal legislation. Most recently, this legislation includes the No Child Left Behind Act, which was passed in 2001.[6] In the 2006–2007 school year, Title I provided assistance to over 17 million students who range from kindergarten through twelfth grade.[6] The majority of the funds (60%) were given to students between kindergarten through fifth grade.[6] The next highest group that received funding were students in sixth through eighth grade (21%).[6] Finally, 16% of the funds went to students in high school with 3% provided to students in preschool.[6]

Link to original legislation:

EIGHTY-NINTH CONGRESS / April 11, 1965


Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background
Skip to content