This policy was approved by the STARS Steering Committee on April 29, 2010 and amended January 17, 2014 and June 16, 2017. The policy outlines how AASHE manages the STARS technical development process, including:
- The schedule for making changes to the STARS Technical Manual
- Decision-making and engagement of different stakeholder groups
- How changes will be recorded and communicated
- Implications for participation
The technical development process for STARS is broken into three distinct stages:
- 1. Administrative Updates
Types of Changes / Issues Covered
Administrative Updates involve two types of changes: Minor Corrections and Minor Modifications. Minor Corrections involve fixing minor issues with a fairly obvious resolution. Examples include:
- Correcting typos
- Resolving inconsistencies (including inconsistencies between STARS and external standards referenced in a credit)
- Clarifying issues that are not clear to participants but are covered within the existing rules and criteria
Minor Modifications are typically initiated in response to questions not addressed by the existing Technical Manual. Resolving these issues may involve consultation with Technical Advisors. Minor Modifications may also respond to a desire for additional supporting information from participants. Examples include (but are not limited to):
- Offering alternate approaches to measurement
- Improving definitions
- Adding optional reporting fields
During periods of basic system maintenance, credits are not added or deleted; mandatory reporting fields aren’t added or deleted; and point allocation, credit-level scoring formulas, and overall scoring calculations do not change.
Decision-Making and Stakeholder Engagement
The Steering Committee has ultimate decision-making authority regarding the content of STARS, including the details of the credits and content of the Technical Manual. Before announcing administrative updates publicly, staff will share all changes with the Steering Committee in writing as part of the consent agenda. Such changes will be discussed by the Steering Committee if a member raises concerns with a proposed change. Staff will use discretion to determine which issues warrant feedback and input from Technical Advisors. In general, Technical Advisors may have a role in recommending minor modifications, but will not be engaged for minor corrections.A public comment period is not required, however the Steering Committee may direct the staff to solicit public feedback on any administrative updates deemed to have substantive scoring impacts.
Recording and Communicating Changes
An updated edition of the Technical Manual is released. Changes are recorded as addenda to the Technical Manual (both as a stand-alone PDF document that users can print and insert in their previously printed versions of the Technical Manual, and in an online record of changes). Changes are announced in the AASHE Bulletin newsletter and on the website and active STARS participants are notified directly.
Versioning
The version of STARS does not change (i.e., STARS 1.0 is still STARS 1.0 following an administrative update). New editions of the Technical Manual include an indication that the content has been updated, such as “Administrative Update One: April 2010”.
Timeline
Participant requests for clarifications will be fielded as they are received and the resulting changes will be integrated into the Technical Manual as necessary, but no more frequently than quarterly.
Reporting and Participation Implications
The types of changes made during periods of Basic System Maintenance involve no interruptions for participants within the Reporting Tool.
interruptions for participants within the Reporting Tool. - 2. Substantive Changes
Types of Changes / Issues Covered
Substantive Changes include:
- Changing criteria or reporting fields associated with a credit
- Modifying how points are calculated for individual credits (including adding or modifying contextual variability in scoring)
- Changing credit applicability
- Adding or deleting a small number of credits
- Substantive Changes do not include changes to overall point allocation and scoring calculations.
Decision-Making and Stakeholder Engagement
Staff works with Technical Advisors (and others, as necessary) to develop proposed credit changes. The Steering Committee deliberates on proposed changes and is responsible for approving the final version. Some process for soliciting public feedback on substantive changes (either focused on particular changes or on the slate of revisions broadly) is expected, but a formal public comment period is not required.
Recording and Communicating Changes
A new issue of the Technical Manual is released. Summary of changes between previous version and recent edition is released as a separate document. Changes are also recorded in the online record of changes. Changes are announced in the AASHE Bulletin newsletter, website, and other avenues.
Versioning
Minor updates involve increasing the first decimal by one (e.g., 1.0 to 1.1). This applies to the version of the Technical Manual and within the Reporting Tool (the Reporting Tool would need a new “credit set”).
Timeline
As necessary, but no more frequently than once per year. This step may not be necessary and the changes could be included along with a major revision. (In other words, the version of STARS could, for example, go from 1.0 to 2.0, rather than 1.0 to 1.1 to 1.2 to 2.0.).
Reporting and Participation Implications
Substantive Changes lead to a new version within the Reporting Tool (1.0 and 1.1 are different within the Reporting Tool). Participants register and participate under a specific version (e.g., STARS 1.0 or STARS 1.1). AASHE will clearly communicate that registration for STARS 1.0 will be ending on a particular date and all subsequent registrations will be for STARS 1.1. However, for users that haven’t completed their entire STARS submission and wish to report under STARS 1.1 instead of STARS 1.0, AASHE can migrate their data to the new credit set (in the event that reporting fields change, some additional data may be necessary).
- 3. Major Revisions
Types of Changes / Issues Covered
Anything is possible in a Major Revision. Examples of changes that could be considered during Major Revisions:
- Adding or deleting many credits
- Changing the criteria for many credits
- Changing point allocation
- Changing how overall scores are calculated, rating levels, etc.
- Adding incentives or requirements for third-party verification
Decision-Making and Stakeholder Engagement
Based on feedback from users and the community, staff works with Technical Advisors extensively to develop proposed changes to the credits. The Steering Committee deliberates and approves final changes. Formal public feedback or comment period(s) are held.
Recording and Communicating Changes
A new issue of the Technical Manual is released. Summary of changes between previous version and new one is released as a separate document. Changes are also recorded in the online record of changes. The new version is publicized widely (e.g., press release, AASHE Bulletin newsletter, conference sessions and/or webinars highlighting changes).
Versioning
Major Revisions involve increasing the whole number by one (e.g., 1.0 to 2.0). This applies to the Technical Manual and the “credit set” within the Reporting Tool.
Timeline
As necessary, but no more frequently than once every two years.
Reporting and Participation Implications
Major Revisions entail a new version within the Reporting Tool. Participants register and participate under a specific version (e.g., STARS 1.2 or STARS 2.0). AASHE will clearly communicate that registration for the current version will be ending on a particular date and all subsequent registrations will be for the new version. If a participant wishes to switch to reporting under a new version following a “Major Revision,” AASHE can migrate as much of their data to the new credit set as possible. However, as many reporting fields will have changed, additional data may be necessary.
Development Cycle
