AT-LARGE GATEWAY
At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)
At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development
Page History
...
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 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 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.
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 finalisationfinalization.
This task is expected to be completed by 18 December 2018.
...
To access the Issue you would like to view, click the Toggle cloak > You will see that a demonstration model Item #1 has been started. But this is only draft and for demonstration purposes only.
...
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 discussion by the ARIWG
|
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
| ||||||||||
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: | Continuous Improvement(s) | Metrics | How long will it take to implement this plan? |
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#3 Toggle Cloak
...
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
Issue #3
Lead: Holly Raiche
...
- Consider further use of staff as proofreaders for non-native English speakers
- Consider use of staff as translators for non-english participants in advice development
- Consider further use of staff to present issues on webinars
- (JC) Consider capacity of staff in being the librarian for At-Large's policy repository
- (JC) Consider knowledge of staff in actual issues of policy considered by At-Large to enable them to be effective points of reference for queries, past positions, webinars etc
- (JC) Consider capacity of staff in monitoring, distilling and applying commentary contributions by At-Large community members collected through various tools / channels, as well as usage of tools for facilitating such contributions
- (JC) Performance review
8. (NA) A targeted policy development training program to at-large staff goes hand-in hand with at-large community development or capacity building program. Reasoning the peer learning and discussions enhances the learning.
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#3 Toggle Cloak
Cloak |
---|
NOTE: text in cells below |
...
Proposed implementation steps:
...
- (JC) Identify what policy support activities ALAC / At-Large needs first
- (JC) Consider capacity of staff in being the librarian for At-Large's policy repository
- (JC) Consider knowledge of staff in actual issues of policy considered by At-Large to enable them to be effective points of reference for queries, past positions, webinars etc
- (JC) Consider capacity of staff in monitoring, distilling and applying commentary contributions by At-Large community members collected through various tools / channels, as well as usage of tools for facilitating such contributions
- (JC) Performance review
- Consider further use of staff as proofreaders for non-native English speakers
- Consider use of staff as translators for non-english participants in advice development
- Consider further use of staff to present issues on webinars
...
- (JC) Performance review
...
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
| The ALAC Chair will work with members of the ALAC and staff to better communicate the role and activities of the ALT ensuring that it is clear what the ALT does and does not do. | |||||
Prioritization | 1:1:1 (Low resource needs : Low risk ; 1st priority group) | ARIWG comments | Status of improvement effort / staff lead | Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation | Introduction of the organigram to all the members to get buy in to the organisational model and the purposes behind making the information more transparent. This is proposed to take place during the Development Session of the ALAC , Regional Leaders and Liaisons which will be held at the conclusion of ICANN63 in Barcelona. This session will also give implementation issue teams a chance to discuss their plans for the items they have been assigned, with each other and to get feedback Other organisational teams (CPWG and O&E leads will be able to share some goals and objectives for their working teams during 2019, especially as we lead up to ATLASIII.
Continue to look for opportunities to utilize and develop the skills of At-Large support staff while ensuring that the positions taken by At-Large represent solely those of users. Ensure that the volunteer community has sufficient support services so as to best utilize their volunteer time. This may require a shift or development of skills among At-Large Staff as well as additional staff. | |
Prioritization | 3.3.1. (High resource needs; High risk; #1 priority) |
---|---|
ARIWG comments |
8. (NA) A targeted policy development training program to at-large staff goes hand-in hand with at-large community development or capacity building program. Reasoning the peer learning and discussions enhances the learning. 9. (NA) Review the job description of at-large staff to develop separate positions /roles with clear organizational structure. 10.(HM) The staff is to research the topic at hand and propose relevant material to the participants/members 11. (JH) Staff should take notes and summarize the discussion connected with each agenda item in a meeting |
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? |
(JC) ICANN Org for HR aspects, ALAC for actual implementation, with supervision also provided under CPWG leadership (or any other WG dealing with ALAC policy) (HM) with supervision provided by the implementation working group of the ALAC |
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, |
---|
tools) | |
---|---|
Expected budget implications | |
Proposed implementation steps: |
Many of the issues raised have already been addressed in some way by the Incoming Chair. The following steps have been covered:
1. An Organigram has been developed to show a new At-Large Leadership model that is more inclusive and collaborative, as well as being more transparent and accountable.
2. The Organigram demonstrates how leadership roles are dispersed among ALAC and Regional Leaders, as well as to key leads who take responsibility for the core tasks of At-Large - namely, Development of Policy Advice; Outreach and Engagement; and Organisational Matters
3. Regional Leaders have been incorporated into what is now the At-Large Leadership Team to enable them to share in ALAC discussions about key issues, and then to share any key messages with their regional members.
4. At-Large Leadership team meetings will be open to the ALAC and the public unless there are specific, usually personnel, issues to be discussed (as per any ALAC meeting). These matters will be discussed in camera.
5. A specific page on the At-Large Website will display the organigram which will be regularly updated with regards to current Working Groups and appointees to various roles that are allocated by the vote of the ALAC.
6. Roles and responsibilities of the different levels of leadership within At-Large will be more clearly defined on a page set aside for this purpose on the website, and available to all.
7. Staff will be assigned to the steps #5 and #6 as per Implementation Task #1 which is related to At-Large Wikis and the Website, and the work of At-Large..
Any changes to personnel involvement will be recorded on the wiki spaces within one month of the change taking place
...
|
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
| 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 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. | |||||
Prioritization | 2.2.1 (Medium needs; medium risk; #1 priority group) | |||||
ARIWG comments | (MH) Collaboration and coordination with Issue Teams #12, #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? (AC) Agree with Maureen’s comment on metrics. A detailed rubric should be in place. (AC) What is the objective of the Capacity Building Program? What metrics are we using to ensure this.. therefore this item has to be linked to the Metrics item #16 as well | 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? |
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 Issue #6 Lead: Sebastien Bachollet | 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 | 3.3.2. (High resource needs; High risk; #2 priority) | ARIWG comments | Status of improvement effort / staff lead | Activities, if any,||||||
Cloak | |||||||||
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG Issue #7 Lead: Javier Rua-Jovet | Excessive amounts of At-Large Community time spent on process and procedure at expense of ALAC’s mandated responsibilities to produce policy advice and coordinate outreach and engagement activities. Too many internal working groups are a distraction. | ||||||||
Final Proposal as approved by the Board | The ALAC has begun to review our WGs, ensuring that the ones we have are active and relevant. We have also started the process to revamp our WG web and Wiki presence to ensure that all WGs are properly represented and documented. Groups no longer active will be segregated, but still documented for historical purposes | ||||||||
Prioritization | 1:1:1 (Low resource needs : Low risk ; 1st priority group) | ||||||||
ARIWG comments | (MH) Collaboration advised due to relationship of this issue with Item issue #1 - Quality vs quantity of policy advice | Status of improvement effort / staff lead | Activities, if any, on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation
on which implementation is dependent, or that are dependent on implementation of this recommendation |
---|
Proposed implementation steps:
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#7 Toggle Cloak
| Continuous Improvement(s) | Metrics | How long will it take to implement this plan? |
---|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#8 Toggle Cloak
...
|
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#5
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFTonly, for discussion by the ARIWG
Issue #8
Lead: John Laprise
...
(MH) This item highlights how we can use social media to enhance the work that is being done in O&E, so that some collaboration with the task teams working on areas #5, #12. #13 and #15 would be appropriate
Also to the communication channels item #10, looking at effective ways to disseminate important messages out to the wider public as well as the At-Large Community
...
Proposed implementation steps:
...
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
| The ALAC will request additional staff skill development in the area of social media, and to work cooperatively with ICANN Communications social media specialists. |
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. | |
Prioritization | 2.2.1 |
---|
(Medium needs; medium risk; |
#1 priority group) | |
ARIWG comments | (MH) |
---|
(AC) Also linked to Capacity Building Program as a transversal objective to build O&E, besides disseminating information.
(AC) It seems that ICANN produces Regional Newsletters, in addition to those prepared by Regions. Could this effort be coordinated to avoid duplication of efforts? See - https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/global-newsletter
Proposed implementation steps:
ARIWG Prioritization and Dependencies - Issue#10 Toggle Cloak
...
|
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
|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
Issue #10
Lead: Dev Anand Teelucksingh
...
The ALAC Technology Taskforce regularly reviews various communications tools with the aim of improving At-Large participation. The At-Large Community is very diverse and the selection of any new tools must accommodate this diversity. We will also need to continue to investigate how we can overcome the lack of affordable communications for many of our participants and future participants.
...
(MH) This item also highlights how we can use what communication channels are available to disseminate important messages out to the wider public as well as the At-Large Community.
Some collaboration with the social media items (#8 & #9) but also with the task teams working on areas #5, #12. #13 and #15 would be appropriate, to enhance the work that is being done in O&E
As well as some metrics to assess the effectiveness of any communication channels that we implement. For example is there any way we can check how often Capacity building webinars are being accessed after their real-time presentation? Also if transcripts or recordings are being accessed by participants who cannot attend the meetings in real-time. Are their current formats relevant to what our target audiences need in order to be informed?
(Satish) Some RALOs bring out their periodic newsletters, which are useful in providing information (including policy updates and progress of initiatives) to their community. I'd like to suggest an At-Large-wide newsletter that can periodically update the At-Large community as a whole, besides also informing other AC/SOs on the activities of ALAC.
(AC) A trimester newsletter (depending on resources) could be used as an O&E tool, as well as inform the At-Large community.
...
Proposed implementation steps:
...
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 Issue #11 Lead: Olivier Crepin Leblond | While broadly popular, Global ATLAS meetings every 5 years have been difficult to organize and short on effective results. More frequent regional meetings would be more effective in encouraging both policy input and outreach while familiarizing more of At Large with workings of ICANN. |
Issue #7 Lead: Javier Rua-Jovet | Excessive amounts of At-Large Community time spent on process and procedure at expense of ALAC’s mandated responsibilities to produce policy advice and coordinate outreach and engagement activities. Too many internal working groups are a distraction. |
---|---|
Final Proposal as approved by the Board | The ALAC has begun to review our WGs, ensuring that the ones we have are active and relevant. We have also started the process to revamp our WG web and Wiki presence to ensure that all WGs are properly represented and documented. Groups no longer active will be segregated, but still documented for historical purposes |
Prioritization | 1:1:1 (Low resource needs : Low risk ; 1st priority group) |
ARIWG comments | (MH) Collaboration advised due to relationship of this issue with Item issue #1 - Quality vs quantity of policy advice (NA) Would be handy to have a one stop shop document as a wiki page that serve as tool to document all the working groups and their members and process used. This page, will be also good for branching out to the working space or the different resources. |
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? | As mentioned above in the general comments, this should be lead by ALAC, and there is also a carpentry work that must be done by staff. |
Anticipated resource requirements (FTEs, tools) | The expected amount of carpentry by staff is very low, just maintain the groups up to date, We should expect less than 10% of one person per month, or 0,1 FTE, if any. |
Expected budget implications | So far, this 0,1 FTE, no need for additional software, since it is on the wiki site, |
Proposed implementation steps: |
|
Continuous Improvement(s) | This is an ongoing work. With the new organization of ALAC, Policy, O&E and Organizational will work as umbrellas of all other working groups. |
Metrics | WG pages up to date. Annual review by Cross Policy, Organizational and Outreach and Engagement Heads |
How long will it take to implement this plan? | Most of the work was already done in the last year (Mainly in ICANN 60). The remaining process should not take more than 3 months. With the exception of the change of the RoP that should take up to a year. |
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
| ||||||||
Final Proposal as approved by the Board | The ALAC will proceed with its plans as approved by the Board, pending appropriate funding. As with all At-Large activities, there will be an increased focus on tracking and metrics. | |||||||
Prioritization | 3.3.1. (High resource needs; High risk; #1 priority) | ARIWG comments | (MH) ATLASIII, ICANN66 Montreal, Canada in November 2019 will be dependent on the outcomes of this implementation plan. The Metrics Issue #16 also relates to this task
. | |
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? |
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
| Prioritization | 3.3.1. (High resource needs; High risk; #1 priority)
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.
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 |
(AC) At-Large on the Road approach...
Proposed implementation steps:
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#14Issue#15 Toggle Cloak
Cloak | |||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NOTE: text in cells below shown in colour is DRAFT only, for discussion by the ARIWG
| ARIWG comments | 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? |
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
|
...