PROPOSE
Standards, model bills & proposals
Step 2 of three. Specific enough to adopt, public enough to criticise, versioned so a change is visible.
Documenting a failure and stopping there is the characteristic failure of accountability research. Step 2 is writing the fix in language somebody could actually adopt — a resolution a board could pass, a standard a body could hold itself to, or statutory text a member could introduce without redrafting it.
Adoptable now
The Governance Disclosure Pledge
Seven commitments any governed body can adopt by resolution at its next meeting, each mapped to a published review practice so the public can check them. Free, no registration, model resolution included.
Read and adopt → Model billsTen drafted bills
Statutory language drafted against documented gaps, with citations verified and the stage each bill has actually reached — which today is “drafted” for all ten.
See the tracker → Review practicesSeven published practices
Every review point TASFGA would apply, published in advance so an entity can see what it would be asked, and a member can run the review without us.
See the practices → ConductCode of Conduct
The conduct standard TASFGA holds itself to, and the one any future credential would carry as an addendum.
Read the code →Published standards
- Focus 1 Governance Rubric (v1.0) — Residential Community Governance
The scoring rubric TASFGA applies to residential community associations: the dimensions scored, the inputs behind each, the letter bands, and the bias controls. Published in full except the calibration constants, and the reason for that exception is stated.
- Model Financial Disclosure Standard for Community Associations (v0.1)
TASFGA's proposed (draft) financial reporting requirements for condominium, cooperative, and HOA boards.
What else is being written
- Disclosure templates — reusable forms for reporting compensation, conflicts, campaign contributions, and vendor relationships. Not yet drafted.
- Sector adaptations — each area of focus carries its own adaptation of the review practices and the Pledge. Only the residential adaptation exists today.
Standards are written from documented gaps, never from first principles — where the gap came from an entity’s own financial statements, the review points that surfaced it are published at Review Practices, and the classification of gap types is at Identify.
Everything above is published for criticism rather than as a settled position, and a standard nobody argued with is a standard nobody read. Drafts would be opened for formal public comment once the Accountability Council is convened; until then, comment goes straight to contact@tasfga.com and material changes are recorded in the version number.