AT-LARGE GATEWAY
At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)
At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development
Page History
Introduction to this workspace:
Welcome to the At-Large Review Implementation Prioritisation Prioritization and Dependencies Workspace. The Board approved sixteen proposals suggested by the ALAC to resolve as a result
During the process of the At-Large Review.
The Organisational Effectiveness Committee has provided templates that are expected for each individual item, detailing the steps that At-Large will undertake to address each of these issues.
, the ALAC committed to eight review implementation activities (1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 13 and 16) which the Board agreed to in their Resolution dated 23 June 2018.
There were an additional five issues (5, 6,, 8, 10, 11) raised in the At-Large Review which the ALAC considers important but are continuously being addressed as part of At-Large's ongoing activities.
Three issues (12, 14 and 15) will be focused upon as applicable but there is no immediate ongoing activity.
The Organizational Effectiveness Committee has provided templates that are expected for each individual item, detailing the steps that At-Large will undertake to address each of these issues.
An Issues Team led by At-Large leaders will detail these steps as discussed by their work teams, and will bring these to the Implementation Working Group for comment and finalizationAn Issues Team led by At-Large leaders will detail these steps as discussed by their work teams, and will bring these to the Implementation Working Group for comment and finalisation.
This task is expected to be completed by 18 December 2018.
...
Key related workspace: ARIWG Plan Development
Issues #1 - #16:
To access the Issue you would like to view, click Edit (above)
Issues #1 - #16:
Please note issues committed to by the ALAC and approved by the Board are highlighted in green.
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#1
Toggle Cloak |
---|
Cloak | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for demonstration purposes and discussion within by the AIRWG ARIWG
| |||||||
Status of improvement effort / staff lead | Already underway, continuous improvement to continue / HU; EE | ||||||
Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation | None noted as at end Sept 2018 | ||||||
Who will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other? | ICANN Staff in conjunction with ALAC/At-Large Leadership |
(MH) This activity could relate to Activity Item #7 with regards to working groups. (AC) re 4. c. Using the newly formed policy working group (CPWG) as an initial filter and in turn to make make recommendations to the community on prioritization (NOT SURE I Understand the idea) Thanks for the question Alfredo! What I'm proposing is that instead of every call for public comment simply announced to the community by staff, prompting individuals to take up things of personal interest, we bring each public comment before the CPWG and discuss it's relevance to end users and, only if deemed relevant to our particular perspective, do we make a call for drafters. Make sense? (AC) Agree. | |
Status of improvement effort / staff lead | Already underway, continuous improvement to continue / HU; EE |
---|---|
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? | ICANN Staff in conjunction with ALAC/At-Large Leadership |
Anticipated |
resource requirements (FTEs, tools) | Staff up to 0.2 FTEs in Dec 2018 through to Dec 2019 |
---|---|
Expected budget implications | Nothing additional beyond already allocated resources to At-Large. |
Proposed implementation steps: |
|
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#2 Toggle Cloak
...
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only for demonstration purposes and discussion within the AIRWG
...
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
...
Proposed implementation steps:
...
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#3 Toggle Cloak
...
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#2 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#3 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#4 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#5 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#6 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#7 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#8 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFTonly, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#9 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#10 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#11 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#12 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#13 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#14 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#15 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#16 Toggle Cloak
Cloak |
---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG |
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only for demonstration purposes and discussion within the AIRWG
...
Proposed implementation steps:
...
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#4 Toggle Cloak
...
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only for demonstration purposes and discussion within the AIRWG
...
Proposed implementation steps:
...
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#5 Toggle Cloak
...
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only for demonstration purposes and discussion within the AIRWG
...
To the extent allowed by ICANN’s mission and available funding, members of At-Large and the At-Large organizations will continue to, and potentially increase, our involvement
with other I* organizations as a method for increasing the visibility of At-Large, exploring areas for mutual collaboration and for attracting additional At-Large volunteers.
At-Large will continue to work closely with GSE Staff to contribute to regional outreach plans and to encourage participation in a cross-community, cross-organizational fashion.
...
Proposed implementation steps:
...
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#6 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | |
---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only for demonstration purposes and discussion within the AIRWG | |
Issue #6 | Election processes are excessively complex and have been open to allegations of unfairness. |
Final Proposal as approved by the Board | At-Large will continue to evolve its processes through its bottom-up, consensus based, community deliberations and update as and when needed. | Prioritization | ARIWG comments |
Issue #16 Lead: Maureen Hilyard | Absence of consistent performance metrics. |
---|---|
Final Proposal as approved by the Board | The ALAC has had a Metrics WG and an ALS Review Taskforce, both of which largely went into stasis during the IANA Transition and Accountability efforts. It is proposed to revive this activity as part of the At-Large Review Implementation. The ALAC notes that regional differences make it more difficult to have uniformity over participation metrics, but agrees that is an important target. The ALAC notes that collecting such statistics is a staff-intensive operation. |
Prioritization | 1:1:2 (Low resource needs : Low risk ; 2nd priority group) |
ARIWG comments | Metrics will be developed for each activity in which At-Large participants are involved in order to measure the effectiveness of our processes as well as the actual involvement of active participants who assist the ALAC to carry out its work within ICANN. Such evidence will not only provide transparency and accountability of the contribution made by At-Large with regards to their meaningful contribution in support of the policy development work carried out by ICANN's supporting organisations, but also of the degree of effort and engagement of the many volunteers whose meaningful contribution to the work of At-Large adds value to the development of policy that is an essential part of the the work of ICANN. Metrics could also legitimize requests made by At-Large for increased funding support for regional activities where there is still a need for further outreach to educate those in underserved sub-regions about ICANN. One specific goal for the metrics team during 2018-2019, will be the identification of 60 participants who demonstrate meaningful participation and engagement in both ICANN and their regions, to attend the ATLASIII in Montreal in November 2019. (NA) the above comments is well written and has to be carried forward to all RALOs and their ALSes. (MM) I organized an outreach event last February and submitted a report to ICANN staff which contained metrics. I am sure other people do this too. So, that what happens to that stuff at the moment? |
Status of improvement effort / staff lead | |
---|---|
Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, |
or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation | The Technology Task Force would be helpful in developing appropriate tools to record assessments of different activities based on the type of metrics being collected for some measurement purpose. The Stakeholder Analysis Tool will be able to make use of any regional or country based metrics we develop first through At-Large and then further throughout ICANN (JC) Selection of methodology for scoring identified performance metrics. |
---|---|
Who will implement the recommendation: ICANN community, ICANN Board, ICANN Organization, other? | |
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools) |
Proposed implementation steps:
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#7 Toggle Cloak
...
|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only for demonstration purposes and discussion within the AIRWG
...
Proposed implementation steps:
...
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#8 Toggle Cloak
...
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#9 Toggle Cloak
...
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#10 Toggle Cloak
...
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#11 Toggle Cloak
...
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#12 Toggle Cloak
...
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#13 Toggle Cloak
...
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#14 Toggle Cloak
...
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#15 Toggle Cloak
...
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#16 Toggle Cloak