The proposed agreement
SU-D1 (Partner responsibilities) explores a later partner arrangement in the fictional cancellation case. The first proposed process-only trial covers the provider’s own courses, with partner courses and refunds referred for a separate decision. Finding a suitable partner course would expose the need to agree who can confirm it.
In this later proposal, the provider’s case owner would remain responsible for resolution. The partner would confirm availability and, after the required agreements, whether it had accepted a booking. These responsibilities have not been agreed or implemented.
| Item | Decision required |
|---|---|
| Service | Courses, places, timing and support contacts covered by the arrangement. |
| Authority | Who may offer, reserve, confirm, change or cancel a place. |
| Information | Necessary learner details, permitted uses, corrections and retention. |
| Failure | Unknown booking result, duplicate request, unavailable partner or disputed responsibility. |
| Change and exit | Notice, versions, open bookings, data return, access removal and receiving owner. |
In the separate software proposal, accepting H7 (Example transfer offer) changes ownership of C42 (Example cancellation case) within the case service. A partner’s booking confirmation is a different result. Define how the case owner establishes whether a booking was accepted when the partner’s response is missing.
A proposed exit exercise
SU-X1 (Partner exit exercise) proposes transferring one open cancellation from the later partner service to another arrangement. Can the receiving owner understand the learner’s agreement, partner commitments and outstanding actions? Can the previous partner’s access be removed without losing information needed for authorised review?
The exercise is unrun. Its expected result and actual result have separate fields in the supplier record. Security and finance retain the connected access and cost decisions.