Governance

The association is governed by a clear hierarchy of authority: a governing body sets strategy and approves material policies; executive leadership implements decisions within delegated limits; specialist committees advise on technical matters such as education awards. This structure reduces concentration of power and creates an audit trail from policy to practice.

• Strategic direction and annual budgets are approved at governing level before implementation.
• Conflicts of interest are declared, recorded, and managed according to policy.
• Records of meetings, resolutions, and delegations are kept and reviewed on a scheduled basis.
• External scrutiny (e.g. audit or donor assurance) is welcomed and acted upon.

• General Assembly – The supreme decision-making body.
• Sub-Committees – Oversee specific programmes such as education and welfare.

Leadership is elected democratically every three years.

The Executive Committee (or equivalent executive body) carries delegated responsibility for operational execution between full governing meetings. Its role is to act within the constitution and board mandates—not to substitute for them.

Typical responsibilities

• Oversee staffing, safeguarding, and day-to-day financial controls within approved budgets.
• Prepare recommendations for the governing body on risk, partnerships, and major commitments.
• Ensure programme delivery aligns with published criteria and committee recommendations.
• Escalate matters that exceed delegated authority or carry significant reputational or legal risk.

The Education Committee focuses on academic scholarships, TVET awards, and bursaries. It advises on eligibility frameworks, selection fairness, and outcomes reporting—without unilateral control over funds beyond its terms of reference.

How it supports credibility

• Uses published scoring criteria and declared conflicts rules for every intake cycle.
• Maintains minutes that connect recommendations to budget lines and governing approvals.
• Reviews anonymised or aggregated outcome data to improve future cycles.
• Engages subject-matter perspective where needed while preserving impartial processes.

The constitution is the association's foundational document. It defines objects, membership (if applicable), meeting rules, powers of the governing body, and how amendments are made. All officers and committees operate subject to it.

• Amendments follow the procedure set out in the constitution and are minuted.
• The current text, once adopted, is the reference for interpreting governance decisions.
• Stakeholders may request a summary of key provisions relevant to public accountability.

Written policies translate constitutional principles into day-to-day rules. They are approved by the appropriate authority, dated, and reviewed on a fixed cycle or when law or practice changes.

Examples of policy areas

• Financial management, procurement, and delegation of spending authority.
• Scholarship and bursary administration, including appeals where offered.
• Data protection, confidentiality, and retention for applicant records.
• Safeguarding, whistle-blowing, and code of conduct for staff and volunteers.

Transparency does not mean sharing private applicant data; it means being clear about how decisions are made, how money is spent in the round, and how the public and donors can ask questions. Accountability means answering those questions honestly and correcting course when needed.

Financial transparency and accountability

We uphold strong financial management practices:

• All funds are banked and traceable.
• Expenditures follow strict approval procedures.
• Regular financial reporting to members.
• Annual independent audits.

This ensures that all contributions, grants, and donations are used responsibly and effectively.

• High-level reporting on programme reach, spend categories, and governance activity.
• Published criteria and timelines for major funding windows.
• Designated contact for good-faith enquiries about governance or programme rules.
• Commitment to remediate identified weaknesses, including from audit or self-assessment.

Credibility is built slowly through consistent behaviour. We treat governance as a public promise—not an internal formality.