Academy Program Committee
SUMMARY MINUTES - 21 December
Roll call
Review of the Agenda
Sandra mentioned that this project was only one section of the entire ICANN capacity building program. Our timeline would not allow connecting this element with the entire capacity building program. Once the first trial is done in Toronto, then elements can be connected.
3. Discussion on timelines and sub-tasks
The project description clarifies clearly what are the tasks to be undertaken.
Modification of the budget: It has to be submitted until the 20th of January. We should agree on how we will organize the modification of the budget.
Sandra: The term " ICANN Academy" was discussed, maybe we should think about renaming it in order to avoid confusion.
Wolf Ludwig mentioned that ICANN Academy includes all of the ICANN constituencies. But it would be wise to focus on incoming ICANN officers, people who play a role, immediately in the next couple of months. This is different from ICANN in Dakar, this is a different target group, to be more focused on the requirement of ICANN's functions.
We were specifically asked to focus on element, b) an enhanced 20 hours lecture programme for new appointed ICANN officers for the board, councils and advisory committees (financed by ICANN), and it was mentioned during the call that the training should include new staff members.
Sandra mentioned that we could give this program a new name, we should call it something else, in order not to confuse people.
Participants were asked to agree or not with the change of name " ICANN Academy" to another name to be decided at a later time.
Avri mentioned that it does not really matter what this is called. Many officers know nothing about Internet governance, from her point of view calling it an Academy is fine. With new staff also, particularly if they work with working groups.
OCL echoed what Avri said, in short that the “ ICANN Academy term” has gained recognition within ICANN and should be kept. It added that there is great demand for capacity building, for example in Africa, as seen in Dakar.
Sandra emphasized to keep in mind that we are working on 20 hrs. lecture course and nothing else.
a. Modification of the budget (to be submitted until 20. Jan 2012)
Sandra : US $ 90,000 is too much and we need to adjust the proposal. The first trial, to let the Academy growing, we need a large amount of voluntary work. We could reduce it to $10,000 and give the lectures to new appointed leaders. Sandra asked if participants agree to this proposal.
Wolf Ludwig suggested to reduce by half the costs suggested to reduce $ 30'000 from the existing budget aligning the pilot costs to 50 - 60'000 $ up to $ 20,000 for the pilot phase.
Sandra reiterated that preparation and organizing activities can also be reduced and a lot of the work can be done on a voluntary basis.
Proposal: To work on the budget on the WIKI page, and to lead the way in which direction it should go to. Any changes should be done quickly.
Avri mentioned that when you use volunteers, what you get is "best effort" and people should consider that, especially when you bring Board members.
Sandra: We should agree on what is preparation and organization costs and what these activities entail. We know the budget, in the current status, would not pass the ICANN threshold.
Sandra proposed to build "table” and then we could decide if task could be fulfilled in a voluntary basis or not.
Sandra asked if project can be worked using a WIKI space. Staff replied that it could.
Proposal: Sandra will prepare a table and will open it to the working group to comment on the "table", this will differentiate between paid work and voluntary work.
AI: Sandra will prepare the table and implement it in the WIKI space.
4. Scheduling of WG and PC Meetings through Costa Rica Meeting
Sandra proposed 2 calls each month (Jan and Feb)
OCL: Suggested a call every week, and if you do not need it, you can skip a call.
AI: Sandra agreed and asked staff to organize one conference call every week starting the second week of January and asked staff to send a doodle to organize the calls.
CA: January was a difficult time.
The question of whether a member of GAC could also be a member of the WG was discussed.
It was mentioned that this is an At-Large Working Group open to the entire At-Large community.
OCL: Because we are open, pretty much everyone can participate. Chair or Working group decides, no definitive answer.
Heidi, mentioned that the currently there are no requirements regarding conflict of interests in WG, the WG on the Rules of Procedures will discuss this issue.
AI: Sandra will tell Olga that the Programme Committe had some objections, because she is member of the GAC and will tell her that she can be added as an observer without voting rights. Participants agreed with this approach.
It was emphasized that the objection mentioned regarding membership of working groups was with regards only in the aspect of conflict of interest.
