AT-LARGE GATEWAY
At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)
At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development
Page History
| Info | ||
|---|---|---|
| ||
The ICANN Board accepted the At-Large Review Implementation Final Report (ARI Final Report) on 10 September 2020, the resolution can be found here. |
In June 2018, the Board approved the preparation of a staged implementation plan that was time-bounded and would require minimal budgetary and staff implications in order to be successfully implemented.This initial |
...
At-Large Review Implementation Plan therefore consists of eight of the original sixteen issues (#1, #2, #3, #4, #7, #9, #13 and #16) identified by the independent reviewer. It was presented to the Board Organizational Effectiveness Committee (OEC) in December 2018 and was |
...
approved by the Board during their Meeting on 26 January 2019.The following is the plan for the development of each issue, but also recognizing that a program of continuous improvement is a constant focus across At-Large.Maureen Hilyard, ALAC Chair, January 2019 | |
|
...
| |
» Issue 1 - Quality vs Quantity of ALAC Advice | |
...
Work Track Leader( |
...
s): Jonathan Zuck and Evin Erdogdu Issue 1 Dashboard and Progress Chart Work Track Meetings | » Issue 7 - At-Large Working Groups Work Track Leader(s): Ricardo Holmquist and Maureen Hilyard Issue 7 Dashboard and Progress Chart Work Track Meetings |
» Issue 2 |
...
- At-Large has struggled to reflect/process end-user opinion; barriers to individual participation; perception of unchanging leadership group |
...
Work Track Leader(s): Alan Greenberg and Maureen Hilyard |
...
Etc for the 8 issues
______________________________________________________________________________________________
EXAMPLE DASHBOARD PAGE FOR EACH ITEM
At Large Implementation Plan – Issue #1 – Quality vs Quantity of ALAC Advice (So that each item’s dashboard starts off with the important sections from the Board document and this is what each working group has to base their work on…however if any changes are made to the original proposal then these need to be identified and accessible (I am imagining that MISSI and NCSG will be watching like hawks to see what we are up to and how we are progressing)
Final proposal: Staff, under the direction of At-Large leadership, has already begun to rework the website and Wiki to ensure that our “Policy Advice” pages are accurate and understandable. This will continue as volunteer and staff resources allow. We will also ensure that as documents are published, the classification of the document is clear.
Issue 1 Working group: to be completed once identified
Anticipated resource requirements
- Initially up to 40-50 hours of staff time between Jan 2019 through to June 2019 to improve clarity of wiki and web pages.
- When additional staffing resources are made available under Issue 3 Implementation, policy advice development work and communication will be a primary focus of existing staff resource time freed up from other activities.
- Differentiate between advice and comments, potentially other categories (i.e. correspondence).
- Develop communication of revisions to the pages to end users
Expected budget implications
Initially no additional, beyond already allocated, resources to At-Large. However, as noted in Issue 3, additional staff resources are needed for any ongoing work deemed necessary.
Proposed Implementation Steps
- Finalize categorization of previous statements (comments, advice, correspondence, etc.)
- Rename Sub Type to Document Type
- Populate list options for document type based on document categorization exercise
- Populate the “End User Interest” (EUI) field for previous comments
- Begin logging EUI going forward
Metrics
- Clear and Accurate Distinction between statement types.
- Statements filterable by type
- Populated EUI fields
Progress Chart (This details all activities that take place in order to implement the plan. It also needs to detail any key changes that take place to show that improvement is being made.)
Working Group Meeting 1 – date
Revised Implementation steps and metrics (for example)
Working group Meeting 2 - date
Work Track Meetings | » Issue 9 - Need for increased At-Large Community awareness and staff training regarding the use of social media Work Track Leader(s) (staff leads): Heidi Ullrich and Evin Erdoğdu Issue 9 Dashboard and Progress Chart Work Track Meetings: (staff only) |
» Issue 3 - Staff resources are disproportionately concentrated on administrative support; staff should have greater capacity to support preparation of policy advice Work Track Leader(s): Heidi Ullrich Issue 3 Dashboard and Progress Chart Work Track Meetings (staff only) | » Issue 13 - Need more systematic RALO participation in regional events Work Track Leader(s): Daniel Nanghaka and Alberto Soto Issue 13 Dashboard and Progress Chart Work Track Meetings |
» Issue 4 - ALAC and the At-Large Leadership Team Work Track Leader(s): Maureen Hilyard Issue 4 Dashboard and Progress Chart Work Track Meetings | » Issue 16 - Absence of consistent performance metrics Work Track Leader(s): Cheryl Langdon-Orr and Gisella Gruber to restart working group on Metrics. Issue 16 Dashboard and Progress Chart Work Track Meetings |
...
