Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Cloak

NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG

Issue #2Uneven contribution of At-Large to a coordinated ICANN strategy for ‘Outreach and Engagement’. Missed opportunities for coordination with other constituencies and ICANN staff. (JC: is this the correct issue statement?)

Final Proposal as approved by the Board

Lead: Bastiaan Goslings

At-Large is increasingly focusing on individuals (both unaffiliated At-Large Members as well as members within
each ALS) instead of just ALS voting representatives. Four of the five (RALOs) allow individual members and the fifth, LACRALO, has already approved the concept and is developing the detailed rules. We will also use the ALSes to communicate with those within an ALS who may have an interest in ICANN.

RALOs have also started to identify experts on ICANN topics within their ALSes and among individual members and to increasingly engage them in ALAC’s policy work. Thus, a bi-directional flow of ICANN information continues to be strengthened.

These activities will require the production of information that is truly understandable (as identified in a recent ALAC-GAC Joint Statement) and available in multiple languages. As some of this will need to be created by At-Large staff, additional resources may be needed. We would suggest that At-Large Staff continue to work together with At-Large Leadership in looking for effective methodologies to coach and onboard new policy volunteers and leaders to facilitate the development of their skills and encourage them to stay and deepen their knowledge and expertise. Regarding the perception of unchanging leadership, statistics reporting involvement will be published

Prioritization3.3.1. (High resource needs; High risk; #1 priority)
ARIWG comments

(MH) Do we need to review our application forms for ALSes and Individual members to ensure that we have active participants in our At-Large activities? Otherwise we are planning to put an inordinate amount of work in to reach whom we assume are potential participants who aren't actually there. In APRALO we have 20 names of which only about 3 or 4 are active. I never see others at our meetings etc, so why do they join? are they participating in ICANN Learn?

(JC) I think there are several aspects to be considered. 1/ Membership application – we need to do better in asking why orgs and people join a RALO – would this then become a criteria in assessing applications? 2/ Identification of experts and willing & able contributors from within ALSes and individual membership – has the adopted method(s) been successful in each RALOs, why? why not? 3/ Establish clear, member-friendly mechanisms for continued engagement, mechanisms which everybody knows apply – who does what with whom? how is it done? 4/ Then, yes to looking for effective methodologies to coach and onboard new policy volunteers and leaders. All with the understanding that everybody has limited time and energy to devote to At-Large activities.

(NA for Nadira) I could see two fold of the “Outreach an Engagement”, Outreach is one and Engagement is two.  Handling the Outreach, RALOs with its community of active ALSes to take part of the outreach within their ALSes members and to their wider community. 

(NA) Awareness programs of at-large and ALAC work comes before any community members to start in policy engagements.

(NA) Create a system of shadow mentor to those who wanted to get directly into policy work.  

Status of improvement effort / staff lead
Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation(JC) Baseline standardization of RALO membership criteria and application process (including assessment), subject to the remits of ICANN Bylaws applicable to ALAC.
Who will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other?(JC) ALAC, RALO LT, AT-Large Staff
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools)
Expected budget implications

Proposed implementation steps:

(JC) I sort of alluded to proposed steps in ARIWG comments box.

(JC) I think there are several aspects to be considered.

1/ Membership application – we need to do better in asking why orgs and people join a RALO – would this then become a criteria in assessing applications?

2/ Identification of experts and willing & able contributors from within ALSes and individual membership – has the adopted method(s) been successful in each RALOs, why? why not?

3/ Establish clear, member-friendly mechanisms for continued engagement, mechanisms which everybody knows apply – who does what with whom? how is it done?

4/ Then, yes to looking for effective methodologies to coach and onboard new policy volunteers and leaders. All with the understanding that everybody has limited time and energy to devote to At-Large activities.

Continuous Improvement(s)
Metrics
How long will it take to implement this plan?

...

Cloak

NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG

Issue #12

Lead: Cheryl Langdon Orr


ALAC input to a coordinated ICANN Outreach sub-optimal.
Final Proposal as approved by the Board

As noted in Issue 5, the ALAC supports such external activity to the extent that funding is available and it coincides with ICANN’s mission. Increases in such funding would be appreciated, but in light of the FY19 draft budget, we are now in a mode of trying to minimize impact of the proposed cuts to such activities.

Prioritization3.3.1. (High resource needs; High risk; #1 priority)
ARIWG comments

(MH) Collaboration and coordination with Issue Teams #5, #13,and #15 which are also to do with Outreach, will be required

(MH) before we go further with our current O&E and capacity building programmes, have we really assessed the effectiveness of our current approaches to ensure that our programmes are actually achieving the proposed objectives and impacting the target groups that we want them to reach? What metrics are we using to ensure this.. therefore this item has to be linked to the Metrics item #16 as well

(AC) At-Large on the Road approach...


(NA) Rethinking of the outreach programs and in how to conduct them in order to increase its effectiveness.


(NA) Trying different approach to reduce the cost and at the same time engage at-large community members. Preparing a toolkit to ALSes in how to conduct an outreach and readymade templates. Allocate travel support to outstanding members of the ALSes to conduct the outreach regional or national events activities on behalf of the ALAC/RALOs LT, such approach will be a bottom-up and produce more engagements.

Status of improvement effort / staff lead
Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation


Who will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other?
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools)
Expected budget implications

Proposed implementation steps:


Continuous Improvement(s)
Metrics
How long will it take to implement this plan?

...

Cloak

NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG

Issue #13

Lead: Glenn McKnight


Need more systematic RALO participation in regional events
Final Proposal as approved by the Board

At-Large Staff working with relevant departments to develop a single location which will point to travel funding opportunities and documentation of what resources were ultimately distributed, to the extent supported by those ICANN entities providing funding and reports.

Prioritization

2.2.1 (Medium needs; medium risk; #1 priority group)

CROP and Non Discretionary funds to leverage on regional event participation

ARIWG comments

(MH) Collaboration and coordination with Issue Teams #5, #12,and #15 which are also to do with Outreach, will be required

(MH) before we go further with our current O&E and capacity building programmes, have we really assessed the effectiveness of our current approaches to ensure that our programmes are actually achieving the proposed objectives and impacting the target groups that we want them to reach? What metrics are we using to ensure this.. therefore this item has to be linked to the Metrics item #16 as well


(NA) as per my point for issue #12, the more ALSes are engaged in the outreach activities on the local level the more closer At-large gets to its objectives.

Status of improvement effort / staff lead
Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation
  • The priorities of the CROP funding initiative has direct impact on the number and types of events we are underwritten to participate. Need assurances on the quantity of sponsored trips to properly plan the year events
  • Approval of RALO strategic plans and the subsequent waiting period for staff approval directly impacts some trips that could occur shortly after approval
  • Clear and open communication on the GSE activities so that RALO's can participate

(AC) Documentation to distribute must be available in diverse formats for audience. (hard-copy, digital, QR codes, etc.)


  • A full disclosure of all the ICANN  gobal and ICANN regional events formatted in  an easy to access monthly calendar 
  • Use of RALO templates for completion of regional plans and mentoring to accelerate the completion and endorsement of regional outreach plans
  • Document and share any valuable lessons learnt from Outreach  and Engagement efforts
  • Access to a pool of multilingual e-flyers and print materials for events
  • Comprehensive list of non ICANN funding opportunities to share with the ATLARGE community
  • Followup strategy of all leads


Who will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other?Joint implementation - At-Large O&E S/C needs support from GSE especially when it comes to Community Outreach
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools)
  • Secure and adequate ICANN funding for Outreach and Engagement
  • An integrated calendar of ICANN events and meetings to coincide with RALO activities
  • Consistent ICANN funding for CROP
  • Flexibility and nimble response from staff on approvals
  • Up to date Wiki page of funders, requirements and deadlines
  • Up to date marketing materials
  • Promotion on Social Media of ATLARGE participation
  • Ownership of Grant software Grant Station

Expected budget implications

Proposed implementation steps:


  • A full disclosure of all the ICANN  gobal and ICANN regional events formatted in  an easy to access monthly calendar 
  • Use of RALO templates for completion of regional plans and mentoring to accelerate the completion and endorsement of regional outreach plans
  • Document and share any valuable lessons learnt from Outreach  and Engagement efforts
  • Access to a pool of multilingual e-flyers and print materials for events
  • Comprehensive list of non ICANN funding opportunities to share with the ATLARGE community
  • Followup strategy of all leads
Continuous Improvement(s)
Metrics
How long will it take to implement this plan?

...

Cloak

NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG

Issue #14

Lead: Alan Greenberg


Need for an innovative approach to funding a revitalized At-Large.
Final Proposal as approved by the Board

It is the understanding of the ALAC that At-Large may only be funded from ICANN operational funds.

Prioritization3.3.1. (High resource needs; High risk; #1 priority)
ARIWG comments

(NA) Study and evaluate at-large earlier budgets to analyze how to conduct the same activities more efficiently with less cost.

Status of improvement effort / staff lead
Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation
Who will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other?
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools)
Expected budget implications

Proposed implementation steps:


Continuous Improvement(s)
Metrics
How long will it take to implement this plan?

...