| Staff and Community Members | Email Addresses |
|---|---|
| Chris Chaplow | chris@andalucia.com |
| Raimundo Beca | rbeca@imaginaccion.cl |
| Bret Fausett | bret@internet.pro |
| Aba Diakite | aba.diakite@icann.org |
| Janice Douma Lange | janice.lange@icann.org |
| Xavier Calvez | xavier.calvez@icann.org |
After great discussion with this Ad Hoc community group on what is currently the situation with our Budget Documents, Staff sat down and decided to take a look backward to see the progression of documents since 2008/2009. Then, looking at structure of current Framework and Budget, came up with a couple of proposals. Most information is below; draft Ops Plan and Budget is attached for comment that can be tracked on word document (paper clip)
BUDGET DOCUMENTS:
I. FRAMEWORK:
Looking Back in Time:
Started Framework in 2008 for FY2009 Budget when a budget framework in ppt was produced for the New Delhi Meeting
FY2010 the format was the same as the draft Budget and Operating Plan; community feedback...document was "half-baked"
FY2011 and 2012 the format returned to a power point
Going Forward →
FROM COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVE:
Questions to consider:
- What is the perceived rationale and value for the current framework document? How much time should the staff and community spend on this document if the current content is not “hitting the mark” of community expectations?
Answer "We have indicated that PPT format is OK. However if it was a doc in the same format as budget would this not reduce staff preparation time? Especially in areas like projects. Where the Framework and Budget should be the same structure. (Repeat importance of unique project title, number, staff lead, milestones, url ref to wiki or project document) Framework and Budget, if closer inline, then the community consensus comment on framework can be seen to be input (or not) into the Draft Budget." Chris Chaplow
What are suggestions for modification of current framework content, if consensus from Ad Hoc group was that the structure was OK as is?
Having reflected on this question since the first call.
Closer in format to Draft budget.
Notice how format has varied widely over last few years.
See comment below, guidance on what sort of comment is sought. This will need to be on section by section basis.
Looking at sections from FY13 framework | Looking at sections from FY12 framework |
Budget and Process and Milestones (5) Contingency Fund (1) | Mission and Vision (3 pages) |
In red are very different as they are very PPT advisory. Others are more the document. Should be in different style? FY13 was more detailed and generally better received.
Priorities seemed isolated and lacked rationale and I now undertand was link from Strat plan. Suggest revisit FY13 comment (and set up call on this section alone) before publish FY14
Core Operations is lion’s share but only 2 pages.
Strategic project overview (Repeat importance of unique project title, number, staff lead, milestones, url ref to wiki or document)
Framework and Main Assumptions not sure why Revenue pulled out as separate section. Difficult to tie assumptions back to chart, whereas revenue was easy to tie back.
Missing ‘Non Cash Expenses’, ‘Reserve Fund’
Chris Chaplow
FROM STAFF PERSPECTIVE:
In the current time frame that the Framework is scheduled to be posted for comment, it is staff’s challenge to provide meaningful financial and operations data for community to consider.
Framework should be high level document to drive initial discussion with community; not focused on the detailed $$ but see Framework is process to suggest a direction based on strategic objectives in order to formulate annual objectives of organization for coming fiscal year. with adequate rationale and justification so that this information can be reviewed and potentially challenged by org, taken into account by staff to feed into the formulation of the financial implications of these strategic objectives in t a final Operating Plan.. detailed budget would address objectives
Suggestion is that this kind of information noted above is provided to community in advance of pre-scheduled community work sessions, as well as opportunity to comment on wiki. As an initial consultation, this would no longer go through a formal public comment period, but we would always reach out through community leaders and ICANN staff to engage whoever in the community who would like to access the wiki to engage in comment and discussion.
"Agree as ‘initial’ this would no longer go through a formal public comment period but not to remove formal altogether, which become formal deposit of comments developed together."Chris Chaplow
"I am not sure I fully understand the orange above ie where the framework is intended to sit, and if I don’t understand it not much chance the rest of the community do. If so the community comments will be wide of the mark.
Take and example. Core Operations on p11 of FY13 framework. List without number of 14 Areas. Total was 63m$ FY13 (FY12 Budget 60m$) What are sort of comment is expected of community if no numbers, bearing in mind that many of these topics are in parallel being discussed in other groups? (eg SSR) Higher Lower? Points system?
Suggest the orange above should be written into the framework document or an appendix on guidance for comments." Chris Chaplow
1 Comment
Chris Chaplow
Can the transcripts from previous group calls be added to this wiki?