Local Stakeholders. The XL Participants also identified groups of local stakeholders as part of the Laboratory XL process. In a decentralized, publicly accessible organization such as an academic institution, a local stakeholder process constitutes a formidable task. Efforts to involve local stakeholders at each institution have included the following. • University Faculty and Staff have been involved in the development of the Laboratory Proposal. • The Laboratory XL Proposal has been reviewed at each XL Participant by the Safety Committee (or equivalent), relevant academic or administrative bodies, Chemistry Departments, legal counsel and relevant student environmental organizations. For example, at UVM, the Environmental Council, which is comprised of faculty, administrators, researchers, alumni and students, has reviewed the XL Proposal. • University students have been informed of, or had access to, the Laboratory XL process through the campus newspaper, campus Web Site and the Laboratory XL Home Page. Students, and other interested parties, have been invited to comment on the Laboratory XL Proposal or participate in the Laboratory XL process. • Each XL Participant has identified community environmental stakeholders, including neighborhood organizations, standing committees (e.g., solid waste) for the county or city, or other local environmental organizations. Each XL Participant has publicized and hosted local meetings or spoken at local neighborhood association meetings. • Regulators with jurisdiction over laboratories have been involved in reviewing the Laboratory XL Proposal. Agencies involved include the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Burlington, (VT) Local Emergency Planning Committee, Boston, (MA) Local Emergency Planning Committee, Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, Burlington (VT) Board of Health, and Boston, (MA) Fire Departments.
Local Stakeholders. In all four countries the most important local stakeholders are the healthcare professionals together with the patients and their loved ones, who will be the core users of BOUNCE tool and eventually benefit from the project results. User cases and requirements should be identified and defined from the perspectives of these three stakeholder categories. For the purpose of the Bounce project, the key stakeholders are the clinics and the professionals working in the clinics participating in the project (e.g. oncologists, nurses, and psychologists). For the dissemination of the BOUNCE results, the partners in these four countries identified also other hospitals and oncology clinics together with other stakeholders regarded as supporters or contributors in the course of improving patient’s resilience. However, these non-core stakeholders and their importance vary across countries. For example, in some countries there are many cancer-related charities whereas in Finland charities are uncommon.
Local Stakeholders. Xxxx Xxxxxx, NWAB; Xxxxxx Xxxxxx and Xxxx Xxxx, Xxxxxxxx XXX XXXX&PF: Xx Xxxx; Xxxxxx Xxxxxx; Xxxxx Xxxxxxxx; Xxxxxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxxx Xxxx Remote Solutions: Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx; Xxxx Xxxxx
Local Stakeholders. The involvement of local stakeholders (institutional and not institutional) has three main objectives: the sharing of poverty indicators (Delphi Metod); the development of the “Observation System to monitor poverty, vulnerability and social ex clusion”; the analysis of their information systems. With the collaboration of Health Societies and Caritas UROPS has selected 573 stakeholders using this method: Extraction from the Provincial Register of third sector organisations. The regional law of so cial policies previews that all third sector organisations have to be registered in a Provincial Register. In our Register there are 602 organisations. Selection (with the aid of the head of Provincial third sector) of the organisations that realise actions against poverty in a multidimensional concept or that have a particular point of view about living conditions of local population. Exclusion of the other organisations. Sharing of the list with Health Societies and Caritas. Selection of local associations or key persons (not included in Provincial Register) like self help associations, parish priests, medicals, etc.
Local Stakeholders. The XL Participants also identified groups of local stakeholders as part of the Laboratory XL process. In a decentralized, publicly accessible organization such as an academic institution, a local stakeholder process constitutes a formidable task. Efforts to involve local stakeholders at each institution have included the following. · University Faculty and Staff have been involved in the development of the Laboratory Proposal. · The Laboratory XL Proposal has been reviewed at each XL Participant by the Safety Committee (or equivalent), relevant academic or administrative bodies, Chemistry Departments, legal counsel and relevant student environmental organizations. For example, at UVM, the Environmental Council, which is comprised of faculty, administrators, researchers, alumni and students, has reviewed the XL Proposal. · University students have been informed of, or had access to, the Laboratory XL process through the campus newspaper, campus Web Site and the Laboratory XL Home Page. Students, and other interested parties, have been invited to comment on the Laboratory XL Proposal or participate in the Laboratory XL process. · Each XL Participant has identified community environmental stakeholders, including neighborhood organizations, standing committees (e.g., solid waste) for the county or city, or other local environmental organizations. Each XL Participant has publicized and hosted local meetings or spoken at local neighborhood association meetings.
