THE HSWAGATA BUDDHA TOOTH RELIC PRESERVATION MUSEUM
FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY
Template No.: T218
Template Title: Partner Reputation & Conflict-of-Interest Check Form
Related Research Case IDs / Cluster: Cluster E (Science, Testing, Misinformation), Cases 46–65 (also link C for partnerships/MoUs; F for conflict risk; H for ethics model)
Linked Templates / Policies: T157 (Partnership Proposal Evaluation), T156 / T24 (MoU templates), T214 (Risk Assessment for Testing Proposal), T216 (Ethics & Consent Review), T213 (Media Interview Prep), T190 (Media Approval), T163 (Risk Register Entry), T173 (Records Classification)
Date of form: ____ / ____ / ______
Prepared by / Role: _______________________
Office / Unit: ____________________________
Country / Location: _______________________
Confidentiality Level:
Internal only [ ] Restricted [ ] Sacred-Restricted / Sensitive [ ]
Use of this form (tick):
New case / action [ ] Follow-up [ ] Annual review [ ] Archive only [ ]
1) Purpose (why we use this form)
This form checks a partner’s reputation and conflict of interest (COI) before cooperation.
It helps protect faith, heritage, public trust, and peace.
2) Partner identity (partner details)
Partner organisation name: ________________________________________
Type (tick): Lab [ ] University [ ] Museum [ ] NGO [ ] Company [ ] Temple [ ] Government office [ ] Other: ______
Country/city: _________________________________________________
Website (optional): _____________________________________________
Main contact person
Name/title: _________________________________________________
Email/phone: _________________________________________________
HSWAGATA link
Proposed project / reason for partnership: __________________________
Related dossier/proposal ID (if any): _______________________________
Related templates (tick): T157 [ ] T214 [ ] T215 [ ] T216 [ ] Other: ____
3) Quick screening (stop/hold triggers)
Tick if any apply. If “Yes”, consider Hold and escalate.
Partner refuses to share basic legal identity/registration. Yes [ ] No [ ]
Partner demands secrecy that breaks museum policy. Yes [ ] No [ ]
Partner asks for special access to restricted relic areas. Yes [ ] No [ ]
Partner promises “guaranteed proof” or “miracle verification.” Yes [ ] No [ ]
Partner wants media publicity before ethics approval. Yes [ ] No [ ]
Partner has active legal case that may affect trust. Yes [ ] No [ ]
Notes: ____________________________________________________________
4) Reputation check (known controversies)
A) Known controversies (write facts only)
Controversy 1 (what is known): ______________________________________
Source type (tick): News [ ] Official report [ ] Court record [ ] Community report [ ] Online claim [ ] Other: ____
Year/date (if known): ___________________________________________
Status (tick): Confirmed [ ] Not confirmed [ ] Mixed/unclear [ ]
Risk to HSWAGATA (tick): Low [ ] Medium [ ] High [ ]
Notes: ____________________________________________________________
Controversy 2: _________________________________________________
Status: Confirmed [ ] Unclear [ ]
Risk level: Low [ ] Medium [ ] High [ ]
Notes: ____________________________________________________________
B) Public trust signals (positive/negative)
Tick and note evidence.
Good reputation in heritage/science community [ ] Notes: _____________
Strong ethics policy published [ ] Notes: ___________________________
Past partnerships with credible institutions [ ] Notes: _______________
Complaints from communities about disrespect [ ] Notes: _____________
Accusations of “fake relic testing” or scams [ ] Notes: _______________
Other signal: __________________________ [ ] Notes: ________________
5) Funding sources and independence (funding sources)
List what is known. If unknown, mark “unknown” and request info.
Main funding sources (tick): Government [ ] University [ ] Private donors [ ] Corporate [ ] Service fees [ ] Grants [ ] Unknown [ ]
Details: __________________________________________________________Any funding linked to political parties or conflict groups? Yes [ ] No [ ] Not sure [ ]
If Yes/Not sure, explain carefully: __________________________________Any funding linked to heritage trade / collectors market? Yes [ ] No [ ] Not sure [ ]
Notes: ____________________________________________________________
6) Conflict-of-interest (COI) check (links to conflicts)
COI means: a personal or organisational interest that may bias decisions.
A) Organisational COI
Partner sells paid “authentication certificates” to the public. Yes [ ] No [ ] Not sure [ ]
Partner earns money based on a “positive result.” Yes [ ] No [ ] Not sure [ ]
Partner wants exclusive rights to publish first. Yes [ ] No [ ] Not sure [ ]
Partner requests ownership/control of data. Yes [ ] No [ ] Not sure [ ]
Partner has a commercial product linked to this project. Yes [ ] No [ ] Not sure [ ]
Notes: ____________________________________________________________
B) Individual COI (key persons)
For each key person, record declared interests.
Person 1 name/title: _______________________________________________
Declared COI? Yes [ ] No [ ] Not asked [ ]
COI details (short): ______________________________________________
Person 2 name/title: _______________________________________________
Declared COI? Yes [ ] No [ ] Not asked [ ]
COI details (short): ______________________________________________
COI declaration form attached? Yes [ ] No [ ]
7) Links to conflicts or sensitive disputes (peace risk)
Tick if any link exists.
Partner linked to past heritage disputes (ownership/return cases). Yes [ ] No [ ] Not sure [ ]
Partner linked to theft, illicit trade, or handling unproven objects. Yes [ ] No [ ] Not sure [ ]
Partner linked to community tensions (religious/ethnic/political). Yes [ ] No [ ] Not sure [ ]
Partner linked to misinformation campaigns. Yes [ ] No [ ] Not sure [ ]
Notes (facts only, no rumours): ______________________________________
If peace risk seems medium/high, consider: T214 [ ] T163 [ ] and senior review.
8) Due diligence documents requested (what we asked for)
Tick and record what is received.
Legal registration documents [ ] Received [ ] Date: //____
Ethics policy / code of conduct [ ] Received [ ] Date: //____
List of board/owners (if relevant) [ ] Received [ ] Date: //____
Lab accreditation / credentials [ ] Received [ ] Date: //____
Past project references (2–3) [ ] Received [ ] Date: //____
Data security policy [ ] Received [ ] Date: //____
COI declarations (key staff) [ ] Received [ ] Date: //____
Insurance / liability coverage (if needed) [ ] Received [ ] Date: //____
Other: __________________________ [ ] Received [ ] Date: //____
Missing items (list): _______________________________________________
9) Risk rating and mitigation (decision support)
A) Risk ratings (tick)
Reputation risk: Low [ ] Medium [ ] High [ ]
COI risk: Low [ ] Medium [ ] High [ ]
Peace/conflict risk: Low [ ] Medium [ ] High [ ]
Data/security risk: Low [ ] Medium [ ] High [ ]
Overall risk (tick): Low [ ] Medium [ ] High [ ] Critical [ ]
B) Mitigation options (tick and note)
Require written COI declarations and publish limits [ ] Notes: _________
Use independent second lab review [ ] Notes: _______________________
Use strong MoU clauses (data, publication, confidentiality) [ ] Notes: __
Limit access to files/objects (need-to-know) [ ] Notes: ______________
Use neutral language in all public text [ ] Notes: ___________________
Hold/stop partnership until missing docs arrive [ ] Notes: ____________
Other mitigation: __________________________ [ ] Notes: ____________
10) Decision and approvals
Decision (tick one):
Approve partner (low risk) [ ]
Approve with conditions/mitigation [ ]
Hold for more checks / documents [ ]
Do not approve partner [ ]
Reasons (short, factual):
If approved with conditions, list conditions:
Risk register entry needed (T163)? Yes [ ] No [ ] Risk ID: _____________
11) Signatures and filing
Prepared by (name/role): _______________________ Signature: __________ Date: //____
Reviewed by (Science/Verification lead): ________ Signature: __________ Date: //____
Reviewed by (Doctrinal/Ethics): ________________ Signature: __________ Date: //____
Reviewed by (Security/Data): ___________________ Signature: __________ Date: //____
Approved by (Director/Authority/Board): _________ Signature: __________ Date: //____
File code / reference ID: ____________________
Classification recommended (T173): Internal [ ] Restricted [ ] Sacred-Restricted [ ]
File location (cabinet/folder + digital path): __________________________
Retention period: 3 years [ ] 5 years [ ] 10 years [ ] Permanent [ ] Other: ____
