BACKGROUND

In August 2022, the GNSO Council approved the GNSO Guidance Process (GGP) Initiation Request to perform work on Applicant Support.  

This GGP will operate as a Working Group, which may initiate sub-teams if the need arises.  This GGP Working Group will follow the method of operation as detailed in the GNSO Working Group Guidelines.  The GGP Working Group will employ a “Representative + Observers” model, consisting of Members and Observers.

The “Representative + Observers” model is chosen to enable the GGP Working Group to conduct and conclude its work in an efficient/effective manner while allowing for inclusive community participation. As this GGP builds on the existing Subsequent Procedures work and is intended to conclude in an expeditious manner. Members must either possess a level of expertise in previous deliberations and/or knowledge that may have been lacking during those initial deliberations.

What is the Applicant Support Program?

The Applicant Support Program was developed to ensure worldwide accessibility and competition in the 2012 new generic top-level domain (gTLD) Program. It enabled new gTLD applicants meeting certain qualifying criteria to receive financial and non-financial support. Community work continues to advance improvements to Applicant Support for the next round of new gTLD applications.

The GNSO Council has determined that the provision of guidance, for the next round, is best accomplished via the GNSO Guidance Process (GGP).  Learn more.

RESOURCES: 

GGP APPLICANT SUPPORT PUBLIC COMMENT (31 JULY - 11 SEPTEMBER 2023)

• Formal announcement: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/icann-seeks-input-on-ggp-applicant-support-initial-report-31-07-2023-en
• Guide to Public comment inputs: guided-input-form-ggp-applicant-support-25-07-2023-en.docx
• The GNSO Guidance Recommendation Initial Report: 12 July 2023-GNSO Guidance Recommendation Draft Report.pdf
• ALAC GGP Team Guidance for CPWG responses: 

GGP PRESENTATIONS TO CPWG (Maureen Hilyard & Sarah Kiden/Satish Babu)

• 16 August-GGP-APPLICANT-SUPPORT-4-CPWG - MHILYARD .pdf
• 19 JULY 2023-GGP final draft report 4 CPWG-MH.pdf
• 12 July 2023-GNSO Guidance Recommendation Draft Report.pdf
• 17May2023-GGP-presentation-CPWG.pdf
• 12 April-CPWG feedback to GGP.docx
• 25Jan CPWG GGP report-amended.pdf
• 23 Jan 2023-GGP Applicant Support GDS ppt Briefing.pdf
• 11Jan CPWG GGP report.pdf

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE GGP APPLICANT SUPPORT

• GNSO Workspace: Guidance Process (GGP) Initiation Request for Applicant Support Home
• GNSO Guidance Process (GGP) Initiation Request for Select New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Topics
• Policy Transition Program pilot - Topic: GNSO Guidance Process and the Applicant Support Program
  • Module 1 Paper

Notes are top-posted (newest first)*

Applicant Support GGP - 19 Dec 2022

Received a briefing from Global Domains & Strategy (GDS) about the implementation of the 2012 Applicant Support Program.

• A handbook was developed and published to help applicants understand the new gTLD Program and the Applicant Support Program.
• Applications were reviewed on 3 criteria:
  • Public interest: offer demonstrable benefit to the public or suitable community group
  • Financial need: show they lack sufficient resources to pay for the application fee and execute their projects
  • Financial capabilities: able to manage funds and execute the project, if successful. 

• Results from 2012
  • Three applicants in the Applicant Support Program
    • . KIDS (by Dot Kids Foundation)
    • .IDN (by Nameshop)
    • .UMMAH (by Ummah Digital Ltd) 
  • Only one applicant prevailed and met the three criteria (.KIDS met all three; .IDN did not meet any; and .UMMAH met two)
• Lessons Learnt 
  • Begin Applicant Support process earlier to give applicants additional time so that applicants can apply through the regular round if they do not qualify for the Applicant Support Program. 
  • Outreach and Awareness for potential applicants to make them aware that there are options for public interest applications. 
  • Hard to say what success looks like (few applicants provides no data for analysis)
  • Not everyone needs support
• Further discussion
  • Geographic distribution is a metric that can be considered if we know what success looks like. 
  • Make sure we provide guidance (the criteria were not established well enough) 
  • The GGP is not expected to review the previous process. 

Discussion on Tasks 3, 4 and 5

• General agreement that we need objectives and/or KPIs.
• We are obliged to consider Implementation Guidance 17.9. If we want to reject some metrics, we should explain why. 
• Tasks 3 and 4 should be undertaken together. We have an opportunity to suggest other metrics that are not covered by Task 3. 
• Staff to share framework (and sub tasks) to further break down the tasks
  • Priority
  • How to collect data
  • Measurement techniques 
  • Who collects the data?
  • Is this an indicator of success?
  • What represents success, if applicable?
  • Approach for impact of outreach, education, business case development, and application evaluation 

CPWG - 07 Dec 2022

The discussion started during the call and continued on the mailing list. 

GGP Tasks

1. Task 1 - Review the 2011 Final Report of the Joint Applicant Support Working Group and the 2012 implementation of the Applicant Support program in detail, to serve as resources for other Applicant Support related questions/tasks.
2. Task 2 - Working with ICANN org staff as appropriate, identify experts with expertise to aid in tasks 3, 4, and 5.
3. Task 3 – Analyze the set of suggested metrics in Implementation Guidance 17.9 and propose which ones should be prioritized. The set of prioritized metrics is NOT limited to what is identified in 17.9.
4. Task 4 – Identify any other appropriate metrics and measures of success to help in identifying the necessary program elements and measuring program success after the fact. In identifying the suggested set of metrics, propose how data can be collected, how metrics can be measured, who can collect the data, as well as what represents success.
5. Task 5 – Consider, and to the extent feasible, suggest how the “outreach, education, business case development, and application evaluation” elements of the Applicant Support Program may be impacted by the identified metrics and measures of success. For example, based on the success metrics for Awareness and Education, this may impact the approach for performing outreach and education. To the extent feasible, suggest an approach to outreach, education, business case development, and application evaluation assistance.
6. Task 6 - Recommend a methodology for allocating financial support where there is inadequate funding for all qualified applicants.

We discussed Tasks 1, 2 & 3, focusing on Task 3 (analysing and prioritising metrics identified in Implementation Guidance 17.9 (see page 3 of the GNSO Guidance Process Initiation Request for Select New gTLD Subsequent Procedures Topics). 

• Set clear objectives of what we want to see achieved from the applicant support program (e.g. what are potential applicants?).
• Portfolio applications (multiple applications for gTLDs)
  • Is it possible to put a cap on the number TLDs for portfolio applications? (Note: Limiting the number is complex and there will be objections from people who want to submit multiple applications)
• ICANN should make it clear that there are policy issues behind the metrics

------

Implementation Guidance 17.9: The dedicated Implementation Review Team should seek advice from experts in the field to develop an appropriate framework for analysis of metrics to evaluate the success of the Applicant Support Program. The Working Group identified a non-exhaustive list of potential data points to support further discussion in the implementation phase. The Working Group anticipates that the dedicated IRT will consider how these and other potential metrics may be prioritized:

• Awareness and Education:
  • number of outreach events and follow up communications with potential applicants
  • level of awareness about the New gTLD Program/Applicant Support Program
  • number of enquiries about the program/level of interest expressed/number that considered applying
  • number of applicants 
    • first-time applicants versus repeat applicants
    • applicants submitting a single application versus portfolio applicants
    • applications based on  pre-existing trademarks
  • diversity and distribution of the applicant pool: geographic diversity, languages, scripts
• Other Elements of Program Implementation:
  • number of ICANN staff members and contractors supporting the Applicant Support Program
  • number of service providers offering pro-bono assistance and value of assistance offered/provided
  • number of applicants accessing/using pro-bono assistance
  • number of approved applicants for financial assistance
  • number of applicants who received bid credits, multiplier, other and were successful in auction
  • the value of the bid credits, multiplier, other
  • number of applicants who withdrew from auction
  • number of applicants who entered in to a business combination or other forms of joint ventures
  • length of time before any change of ownership occurred
• Success of Launched gTLD:
  • The number of registrants of domain names registered in “regional” TLDs (e.g., TLDs focusing mainly on a local, limited market), keeping in mind that there are other barriers for registrants in developing countries to access domain names, such as inability to access online payment services and a lack of local registrars. 
  • The number of domain names registered in “regional” new gTLDs compared to the number of Internet users in such regions. These numbers could be compared with the same numbers for Internet users and “regional” new gTLDs in developed regions such as Europe and North America.

At-Large input on GGP Applicant Support

• Tasks 3-5 Framework (Jan 2023)
• 3-5 Indicators of Success by Applicant Support Lifecycle Elements (Jan 2023)

*Please feel free to add your comments into the Google doc (suggest mode only) or post them using comment feature on this page.