At-Large Improvements WT C (on ALAC/At-Large's planning processes) is responsible for implementing Recommendations 5 and 6 to come out of the Final Report of the ALAC Review WG on ALAC Improvements:

...

C.S - STRENGTHS

C.S.1 - Membership diversity can bring talent
C.S.2 - In-house knowledge of budgetary requirements within At-Large
C.S.3 - Improved consultation among the RALOs and their representatives on ALAC
C.S.4 - Cost-effective actions
C.S.5 - Experience sharing among RALOs
C.S.6 - A bottom-up budget structure for At-Large

ADD ALS CONTRIBUTIONS HERE

C.W - WEAKNESSES

C.W.1 - Lack of established feedback loop from ICANN
C.W.2 - Communication problems ICANN finance
C.W.3 - No possibility of ROI figure - "investing in At Large is like investing in R&D"
C.W.4 - ICANN currently only source of funds for At Large
C.W.5 - Lack of clear funding schedule/calendar with regards to face to face general assemblies introduces uncertainty
C.W.6 - We need to improve our interaction with the staff during the budget planning process.

ADD ALS CONTRIBUTIONS HERE

C.O - OPPORTUNITIES

C.O.1 - ALAC/At-Large could provide information regarding At-Large budgetary needs in a more timely manner and in the required format

ADD ALS CONTRIBUTIONS HERE

C.T - THREATS

C.T.1 - Limiting ALAC's budget could:
    1.  Directly and severely affect outreach capability
    2. Allow for fewer or no face-to-face meetings (including but not limited to GAs, ICANN meetings, Summits, RALO meetings, other "inreach" efforts, etc.)
         a. Possible consequences could include ALSes' abandoning At-Large, reducing At-Large's usefulness and legitimacy

ADD ALS CONTRIBUTIONS HERE

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Content

Space Tools

Versions Compared

Old Version 25

New Version 26

Key

Background