Dhamma · Reflection · Statements · Peaceful Communication
☸

Office Of Siridantamahapalaka

Personal website of Sao Dhammasami — Daily Dhamma, reflections, statements, articles and archival records.

Archive and publication page · Use Search, Topics, or the Month & Year archive to locate related materials.

Office Of Siridantamahapalaka: Template T97 – H96 Indicator Framework & Scorecard – Peace & Heritage Governance Metrics Dossier

Chronological Archive

Template T97 – H96 Indicator Framework & Scorecard – Peace & Heritage Governance Metrics Dossier

on

OFFICE OF SIRIDANTAMAHĀPĀLAKA / HSWAGATA BUDDHA TOOTH RELICS PRESERVATION MUSEUM – INTERNAL USE

ADMINISTRATIVE HEADER

Template No.: T97
Template Title: H96 Indicator Framework & Scorecard – Peace & Heritage Governance Metrics Dossier

Related Research Case IDs: H97 – Indicator Framework & Scorecard for Ethical Relic Governance
Linked Templates / Cases:

  • H96 (Normative Model)

  • Cluster A–G cases (1–95)

  • T70–T71 (donation / transfer)

  • T78 (15 Principles)

  • T81–T82 (documentation & audits)

  • T66–T75 (HGT conflict learning)

  • T86–T95 (MCU neglect & reform)

Cluster: H – Synthesis & Normative Models (Cases 96–100)

Date of form: ____ / ____ / ______
Indicator framework file code (office): ______________________________

Prepared by / Role: _________________________________________________
Office / Unit: _______________________________________________________
Country: _____________________________________________________________

Confidentiality Level:
[ ] Internal only
[ ] Restricted (leadership / ethics / audit committee)
[ ] Sacred-Restricted

Use of this form (tick):
[ ] Design new indicator set for relic custodianship
[ ] Apply H96 scorecard to one institution / site
[ ] Annual review & benchmarking
[ ] Pilot test with selected case(s): Case ID(s) ______________________

1. SCOPE, PURPOSE & UNIT OF ANALYSIS

1.1 Unit of analysis

What is being scored?

[ ] Single temple / monastery
[ ] Museum / NGO / trust
[ ] University / faculty / dormitory
[ ] National / regional relic network
[ ] Specific project / programme: ________________________________
[ ] Other: _______________________________________________________

Name / code of unit assessed: ______________________________________

Geographic location(s):

1.2 Scope of relic custodianship

Relic types covered (tick):

[ ] Buddha bodily relics (sarīra-dhātu / Tooth Relics, etc.)
[ ] Paribhoga-cetiya (objects used by Buddha / great teachers)
[ ] Uddesika-cetiya (images, stupas, symbolic objects)
[ ] Textual / documentary heritage
[ ] Mixed heritage (relics + art + archives)

Communities primarily served:

[ ] Local lay community
[ ] National pilgrims
[ ] International pilgrims / students
[ ] Monastic networks
[ ] Interfaith / secular visitors
[ ] Other: _____________________________

Short scope note (3–6 sentences):

1.3 Purpose of this indicator exercise

Tick all that apply:

[ ] Baseline assessment (first time).
[ ] Follow-up to earlier T97 assessment (year: ________).
[ ] Preparation for reform / new policy.
[ ] External reporting (donors, partners, SDG-related).
[ ] Training & internal learning.

Short purpose statement (5–8 sentences):

2. INDICATOR DOMAINS & STRUCTURE

2.1 Core domains (H96-based)

Tick domains included in this T97:

[ ] A. Buddhist Doctrine & Ethics (dhātu, dāna, Dhammadāyāda, sacca, appamāda, etc.)
[ ] B. Peace & Conflict Sensitivity (Galtung C–A–B, non-violence, mediation, complaint handling)
[ ] C. Heritage Protection & Technical Safeguards (storage, documentation, risk management)
[ ] D. Governance & SDGs (policies, roles, transparency, SDG 11.4 / 16 / 17 / 10)
[ ] E. Equity & Inclusion (international monastics, gender, class, lay/monastic)
[ ] F. Partnerships & Networks (MoUs, cooperation, joint custodianship)
[ ] G. Inner Qualities of Custodians (humility, honesty, courage, willingness to learn)

Short explanation of selected domains (3–8 sentences):

2.2 Indicator list (by domain)

(Add rows as needed.)

Domain A – Buddhist Doctrine & Ethics

Code Indicator (short name) Description (what it measures)
A1
A2
A3

Domain B – Peace & Conflict Sensitivity

Code Indicator Description
B1
B2
B3

Domain C – Heritage Protection & Technical Safeguards

Code Indicator Description
C1
C2
C3

(Add similar tables for D, E, F, G if used.)

3. SCORING SCALE & DATA SOURCES

3.1 Scoring scale

Choose / define a scale (tick):

[ ] 0–4 scale (0 = absent, 4 = very strong)
[ ] 1–5 scale (1 = very weak, 5 = very strong)
[ ] Traffic light (Red / Amber / Green + notes)
[ ] Mixed method (qualitative narrative + simple score)

Definition of each score level (example; adapt as needed):

Score scale used: ________

  • Lowest level = _________________________________________________

  • Middle level = _________________________________________________

  • Highest level = ________________________________________________

3.2 Data sources & methods

Tick sources used:

[ ] Policy documents / constitutions / MoUs.
[ ] Meeting minutes / decisions.
[ ] Incident reports (T66–T75, T86–T95, etc.).
[ ] Interviews with custodians / staff / monks / students.
[ ] Observation of relic rooms / ceremonies.
[ ] External audits / police / legal documents.
[ ] Feedback from donors / communities / pilgrims.

Short note on methodology (5–10 sentences):

4. SCORECARD – INDICATOR RATINGS

(Replicate this structure per domain.)

4.1 Domain A – Buddhist Doctrine & Ethics

Scale used: ________

Code Indicator name Score Evidence / notes (brief, with file codes)
A1
A2
A3

Domain A – short interpretation (3–6 sentences):

4.2 Domain B – Peace & Conflict Sensitivity

Code Indicator name Score Evidence / notes
B1
B2
B3

Domain B – short interpretation:

4.3 Domain C – Heritage Protection & Technical Safeguards

Code Indicator name Score Evidence / notes
C1
C2
C3

Domain C – short interpretation:

4.4 Domains D–G (if used)

(Repeat the same pattern for each selected domain.)

5. OVERALL RESULTS & PROFILES

5.1 Summary table

Domain Short title Average / composite score Interpretation (strong / mixed / weak)
A Buddhist Doctrine & Ethics
B Peace & Conflict Sensitivity
C Heritage Protection & Safeguards
D Governance & SDGs
E Equity & Inclusion
F Partnerships & Networks
G Inner Qualities of Custodians

5.2 Narrative summary of strengths & weaknesses

Top strengths (3–6 points):

Key weaknesses / risk areas (3–6 points):

Short integrated narrative (8–15 sentences):

6. INTERPRETATION THROUGH THE H96 LENSES

6.1 Buddhist doctrinal–ethical interpretation

How do the indicator results reflect:

  • dhātu / cetiya respect;

  • Dhammadāyāda vs prestige;

  • dāna & donor care;

  • sacca, sammā-vācā, appamāda, hiri–ottappa?

Short doctrinal reflection (8–12 sentences):

6.2 Peace & conflict interpretation

Using Galtung’s triangle (C–A–B):

  • What contradictions are visible in the scorecard?

  • What attitudes (fear, trust, nationalism, humility) does the pattern suggest?

  • What behaviours (e.g. blocking complaints, transparent decisions) are reflected?

Short peace analysis (8–12 sentences):

6.3 Governance & SDG interpretation

For each SDG, briefly interpret the scores:

SDG 11.4 – Heritage protection

SDG 16 – Peace, justice & strong institutions

SDG 10 – Reduced inequalities

SDG 17 – Partnerships

7. IMPROVEMENT PRIORITIES & ACTION PLAN

7.1 Priority domains & indicators

Tick:

[ ] Domain A needs urgent improvement.
[ ] Domain B needs urgent improvement.
[ ] Domain C needs urgent improvement.
[ ] Domain D needs urgent improvement.
[ ] Domain E / F / G needs urgent improvement.

Top 5 priority indicators to improve:

  1. Code ______ – _________________________________________________

  2. Code ______ – _________________________________________________

  3. Code ______ – _________________________________________________

  4. Code ______ – _________________________________________________

  5. Code ______ – _________________________________________________

7.2 Action plan (next 12–24 months)

(Add rows as needed.)

Priority indicator / issue Action to be taken Responsible role / office Deadline Resources / support needed

Short note on feasibility & risks:

8. RISK SNAPSHOT & SAFEGUARDS

8.1 Updated risk snapshot (after scoring)

A. Doctrinal / ethical risk:
[ ] LOW [ ] MEDIUM [ ] HIGH
Notes: _______________________________________________________________

B. Peace / conflict risk (local / institutional / cross-border):
[ ] LOW [ ] MEDIUM [ ] HIGH
Notes: _______________________________________________________________

C. Heritage / relic governance risk:
[ ] LOW [ ] MEDIUM [ ] HIGH
Notes: _______________________________________________________________

D. Reputational risk (temple / university / Saṅgha / partners):
[ ] LOW [ ] MEDIUM [ ] HIGH
Notes: _______________________________________________________________

8.2 Safeguards & monitoring

Tick and describe:

[ ] Integrate T97 indicators into annual audits (using T82).
[ ] Report key results to leadership / ethics / peace committee.
[ ] Share simplified scorecard (if appropriate) with community / donors.
[ ] Review indicators every ____ years to refine H96 model.

Safeguards note (5–8 sentences):

9. H96 REFLECTION

9.1 H96 central question revisited

Given these scores and actions:

“If a peace-oriented H96 custodian reviewed this indicator framework and our results, would they see humble, honest trusteeship of relics and people – or denial, fear, and attachment to prestige?”

Short reflection (8–15 sentences):

10. SIGN-OFF & ARCHIVE

10.1 Sign-off

Prepared by:

Name: _______________________________ Role: _________________________
Signature: __________________________ Date: ____ / ____ / ______

Reviewed / Approved by (abbot / chief custodian / ethics / peace / audit committee):

Name: _______________________________ Role: _________________________
Signature: __________________________ Date: ____ / ____ / ______

10.2 Archive details

T97 / indicator file code: ________________________________________

Physical location (cabinet / box / folder): _________________________

Digital location (drive / folder path): _____________________________

Access level:
[ ] General internal [ ] Restricted [ ] Sacred-Restricted

Notes for future custodians:
(What should future leaders remember about this H96 indicator exercise and how we tried to measure and improve ethical, peaceful, SDG-aligned relic governance?)