Closure of the CROP Review Team - During their monthly meeting of 23 July 2018, the ALAC voted unanimously to close the CROP RT. The RALOs will work directly with their CROP Points of Contacts on their RALO trips going forward.
Introduction
This Working Group has been used by At-Large to coordinate and manage its efforts related to ICANN's Community Regional Outreach Pilot Program (CROPP). The program is no longer a pilot, and has thus been renamed "CROP". Each of the 5 RALOs may apply for CROP funding for up to 5 "regional" outreach trips (limited to four days; three nights) within a fiscal year (FY). FY18 is from July 1 2017 to 30 June 2018.
Similar to how RALO budget requests were reviewed by the ALAC Subcommittee on Finance and Budget (FBSC) before submitting to ICANN Finance, the At-Large CROP Review Team (CROP RT) was established by the ALAC to:
- Review and approve RALO requests for CROP funding to ensure the objectives of travel requests are in line with both ICANN and regional engagement strategy, as well as At-Large outreach strategy.
- Confirm with the regional Global Stakeholder Engagement (GSE) VPs that the purpose of CROP requests are consistent with the specific RALO outreach strategic plan and ICANN's regional engagement strategy.
- Submit the travel requests to ICANN once approved by the CROP RT.
The At-Large CROP Review Team (CROP RT) has 10 members. Two members are from each RALO, one each from:
- ALAC Subcommittee on Outreach and Engagement (Outreach SC)
- ALAC Subcommittee on Finance and Budget (FBSC)
It is not possible to subscribe directly to the mail list for this WG.
To understand the basics of CROP RT, please kindly review the former CROPP presentation slides At-Large-CROPP-15-Oct-2014.pdf.
Procedure for RALOs to Apply for CROP Funding
- RALO Must Have an Outreach Strategic Plan, Approved by Regional GSE
Before a RALO is able to submit CROP proposals, it must have a clear Outreach Strategic Plan explaining its FY18 outreach goals, strategy, and planned outcomes so that its specific activity can be coordinated with the appropriate ICANN GSE team.The Outreach Plan should be developed by the ALAC Subcommittee on Outreach and Engagement in close coordination with RALO leaders, and must be approved by the regional ICANN Global Stakeholder Engagement VP.
CROP RT members must ensure that the approved Outreach Strategic Plans are filed on the CROP wiki. - RALO-Specific CROP RT Draft Trip Proposal
Once a Outreach Strategic Plan is in place, the RALO-specific CROP RT, in coordination with RALO Leaders and members of the ALAC Subcommittee on Outreach and Engagement, may draft proposals linked to the At-Large RALO CROP Draft Proposals Status Page.
RALO-specific CROP RT members and RALO Leadership should develop proposals to confirm that each proposal:- Complies with CROP Procedures & Guidelines
- Ensures all questions on the form are answered in full
- Ensures the purpose and goals are specific, and in line with the specific RALO Outreach Strategic Plan
- Ensures proposed travellers are fully aware of, understand, and agree to abide by the terms and conditions of CROP as outlined on the CROP Procedures & Guidelines page. Discussion point: How to ensure this? Suggestion: CROP RT representatives may have a briefing call with potential travellers to ensure travellers fully understand their responsibilities under CROP terms and conditions.
- CROP RT Submits Proposal for CROP RT to Begin Review Process
Once the proposal by the RALO is complete and RALO Leadership approves, the RALO-specific CROP RT will email the CROP RT mailing list with a link to the proposal for the CROP RT to begin review. Please note under the CROP Procedures & Guidelines, a proposal must be approved by the CROP RT and the applicable regional GSE VP a minimum of 6 weeks prior to the proposed travel date. Therefore, to allow sufficient time for CROP RT and regional GSE VP to review, and for RALOs to update proposals based on comments received, proposals should be submitted to the CROP RT list 8 weeks prior to the proposed travel date. - CROP RT Review
The CROP RT will review the proposal, ask questions regarding the purpose and goals of the proposed trip and details provided. Are the goals specific enough and in line with the relevant RALO Outreach Plan?
The RALO-specific CROP RT members will respond and update the proposal based on the feedback from CROP RT.
It is anticipated that this review process should take 5-7 days. Typically approval is called by the Chair, followed by a last call for comments on the mailing list.
Discussion point: Should a more structured process for approval (or disapproval) be done? For example, have on the proposal wiki page, a section requiring CROP RT members to login, edit the wiki outlining their approval (or disapproval). - Regional GSE Review
The RALO-specific CROP RT, upon obtaining the CROP RT approval, will email the regional GSE VP directly for their review and comment.
Discussion point: Should the regional GSE VPs be added to the CROP RT mailing list so that the review by both CROP RT and regional GSE VPs can happen concurrently? - Submission of Approved Proposal to ICANN CROP
Throughout each stage, the RALO-specific CROP RT update the "Acknowledgements" section of the proposal, noting (dis)approvals. Only when this section is completed will ICANN CROP Support Staff process the proposal (if done 6 weeks before proposed travel date). - Completing Trip Assessment
After the event, the RALO-specific CROP RT will collaborate with travellers to complete the trip assessment forms under the At-Large RALO Drafts page, as to how the purpose and goals of the proposal were or were not realised.
Once the trip assessment has been completed by travellers, the RALO-specific CROP RT will email the CROP RT and regional GSE VP for review and comment.
Discussion point: Trip assessments by travellers could be used to assess whether such travellers be able to use the CROP for future proposals.
CROP FY18
Submitting CROP Proposals for FY18
Please note that CROP proposals must be coordinated with the RALO leadership AND At-Large Community Regional Outreach Pilot Program Review Team (CROP RT) members!
CROP RT will use the forms to submit proposals can be found on the At-Large RALO CROP Draft Proposal Status Page
Approved CROPP proposals can be found at Approved At-Large RALO CROP proposals
CROPP FY17
For CROPP Proposals approved and filed with ICANN for FY17, see At-Large Proposals approved by CROPP RT and filed with ICANN.
CROPP FY16
For CROPP Proposals approved and filed with ICANN for FY16, see At-Large Proposals approved by CROPP RT and filed with ICANN.
CROPP FY15
For CROPP Proposals approved and filed with ICANN for FY15, see At-Large Proposals approved by CROPP RT and filed with ICANN.
CROPP FY14
For FY14, see At-Large Proposals approved by CROPP RT in FY14 (trip reports are on the same page as the filed proposal).
For FY14, from 3Q 2013 to June 2014, the CROPP RT used a Google Form to collect information about the travel proposal. The links to this Google Form and other resources for FY14 are in CROPP FY14 Documents and are for historical reference only. See also CROPP FY14 Approved Proposals for the proposals approved and filed by the CROPP RT for FY14.
Members
The members of the At-Large Community Regional Outreach Review Team for FY18, organized by regional affiliation, are:
Region | Member | Office | Group Representative |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dev Anand Teelucksingh | Chair | ||
| AFRALO | Tijani Ben Jemaa | Member | FBSC |
| AFRALO | Daniel Nanghaka | Member | O&E |
| APRALO | Cheryl Langdon-Orr | Member | FBSC |
| APRALO | Ali AlMeshal | Member | O&E |
| EURALO | Olivier Crepin-Leblond | Observer | FBSC/O&E |
| EURALO | Yuliya Morenets | Member | O&E |
| EURALO | Wolf Ludwig | Member | FBSC |
| LACRALO | Leon Sanchez | Member | FBSC |
| LACRALO | Juan Manuel Rojas | Member | O&E |
| NARALO | Alan Greenberg | Observer | FBSC/O&E |
| NARALO | Glenn McKnight | Member | O&E |
| NARALO | Judith Hellerstein | Member | FBSC |
Meetings
Next meeting: TBD
Workspaces
Community Regional Outreach Pilot Program FY15
Community Regional Outreach Pilot Program FY14
Monthly Reports
Documents
Contact
Staff Support Lead: Silvia Vivanco
cropp-rt@atlarge-lists.icann.org
The mailing list is not public.
8 Comments
Tijani Ben Jemaa
Here is a draft charter for the ALAC CROPP RT that I propose for discussion
ALAC Community Regional Outreach Pilot Program Review Team (CROPP RT)
Draft CHARTER
The CROPP Review Team is used by the At-Large to coordinate and harmonize its efforts related to ICANN's Community Regional Outreach Pilot Program (CROPP) in which each of the 5 RALOs can apply for funding up to 5 "regional" outreach trips within the fiscal year which start on First July and end on 30 June.
Mission
The At-Large CROPP Review team (CROPP RT) is established by the ALAC to:
Membership
The At-Large CROPP Review Team is composed of 10 members regionally balanced:
These members are the PPCs of the 5 RALOs (2 per RALO).
The term of the CROPP RT members is one year renewable.
Working methods
Before a RALO can submit any CROPP proposals, they must develop a clear Outreach Strategic Plan for the fiscal year explaining their outreach goals, strategies, and planned expectations. These Outreach strategic plans must be approved by the regional ICANN Global Stakeholder Engagement.
The CROPP RT must ensure that the approved Outreach Strategic Plans are filed on the CROPP wiki.
2. Drafting trip proposals
With the help of the RALO PPCs (when needed), the travellers draft their proposals that should:
a. Be conform with CROPP Procedures & Guidelines
b. Answer fully all questions on the form
c. Ensure that the purpose and goals are specific and are in line with the RALO's Outreach Strategic Plan.
All trip proposals must be linked on the At-Large RALO CROPP Draft Proposals Status Page. and should be approved by the RALO Leadership
3. Submission of travellers’ proposals to the CROPP RT for review
Once the proposal is complete by the traveller and approved by the RALO leadership, the RALO's PPCs emails the CROPP RT mailing list with a link to the proposal for the CROPP RT to begin their review.
To allow sufficient time for CROPP RT and regional Stakeholder VP to review and for travellers to update their proposals based on comments received, proposals should be submitted to the CROPP RT list 8 weeks prior to the proposed travel date. This period of 8 weeks is only to comply with the 6 weeks required by the CROPP Program administration.
Program administration requirement: A trip Proposal must be approved within the participant's organization/structure, including coordination with the applicable regional Stakeholder Engagement V.P. team a minimum of 6-weeks prior to the proposed travel date. This 6-week period is the absolute minimum time and should not be considered a "best practice". Notice and planning with regional teams should take place as early as possible.
4. CROPP RT review
The CROPP RT review the proposal and ask any clarifying questions as to the purpose and goals of the proposed trip and/or the details provided, and how specific and in line with the RALO's outreach plan are the goals.
Every member of the CROPP RT fills in a spreadsheet that the CROPP RT creates on its wiki giving their written appreciations and comments on each application.
The RALO PPCs inform the traveller that the remarks and comments of the CROPP RT members are available on the wiki, advising him/her about the corrections he/she should do so that the proposal becomes acceptable by the CROPP Program Administrators The traveller should update the proposal based on the feedback from CROPP RT and inform the relevant RALO PPCs.
Once the proposal is completed, the RALO PPCs contact the Regional GSE VP for his/her review and approval and then complete the acknowledgment section with their approval/disapproval and the one of the Regional GSE VP.
The CROPP RT review process takes up to 7 days.
5. Completing Trip Assessment
After the event, the RALO's PPCs should collaborate with the travellers to complete the trip assessment forms under the At-Large RALO DRAFTS page within 3 weeks from the return date, as to how the purpose and goals of the proposal were, or were not realized.
Once the trip assessment has been completed by the travellers, the RALO PPCs shall email the CROPP RT and regional GSE VP for their information.
Olivier Crepin-Leblond
Thanks for submitting this Tijani.
The process you are proposing is significantly different than the current process. Indeed, the drafting of the CROPP request was to be undertaken by CROPP RT representatives. You are now asking that the traveller rites the CROPP request. This does not make sense: the traveller, before making a CROPP request, should ask its RALO leadership and the RALO leadership should give its green light before passing it on to the CROPP RT representatives who should format the request. After all the CROPP RT representatives have much more experience in the format that a request should have. Otherwise you are introducing a huge barrier to people who are not insiders.
I therefore disagree with:
This is not only a waste of time for potential travellers, but also for any kind of efficiency because travellers will go back and forth with CROPP RT. At the end, a potential traveller will just be turned off by all the bureaucracy which it should not be subjected to. In addition, a traveller might not be English speaking as a first language and asking them to fill complex forms using a complex procedure is unfair and discriminative.
With the help of the RALO PPCs (when needed), the travellers draft their proposals that should:
a. Be conform with CROPP Procedures & Guidelines
b. Answer fully all questions on the form
c. Ensure that the purpose and goals are specific and are in line with the RALO's Outreach Strategic Plan.
Sorry but this does not make any sense for someone who is not an insider. The RALO should make sure the traveller who proposes to go to a meeting funded by CROPP is aware of the strategic plan. The CROPP RT should write the request so that it is in line with the strategic plan. You cannot expect someone who will travel on CROPP to be an expert in ICANN's & the RALO's strategic plan. That is the job of CROPP RT & the RALO leadership.
This amendment to the procedures is, in my opinion, likely to make RALOs less bottom-up as the system can be played by these in CROPP RT & RALO to make it as difficult as possible for a non-insider to give up in writing a CROPP request.
We should not introduce barriers towards our community. Quite the contrary, we should make life as easy as possible for our community to engage, without them needing to learn all the bureaucracy.
Judith Hellerstein
I disagree with Olivier. I agree with Tijani as this is the way we in NARALO work. We advertise the availability of CROPP each time at our monthly meetings and encourage people to apply. People send us their requests for a trip, we suggest that they make sure their trip matches the strategic plan we filed. If yes, than we discuss this at a monthly meeting and if all agree than the traveller goes forward with submitting the request. The assigned rep of each ALS is very capable of filling out the form, provided they are given the exact link to the document. We go over with them what is required as per the CROPP rules and then they fill out the form. The CROPP RT reviews it and then if we have any questions or feedback we provide it to the traveller and ask them to update or clarify the issue on their application. We then approve it and then put it forward to the GSE Rep for their approval we also check to make sure the progression of the trip in the approval process is proceeding normally.
I do disagree only with the part of Tijani's comments on the CROPP RT team. I think the team can give their comments/thoughts on any CROPP proposal even if it is not in their region. This is especially true if the rep thinks that the trip is not going to bring the outreach desired. However, their comments are simply that comments and are not taken as objections. It is ultimately up to the RALO and their GSE reps to approve.
Glenn McKnight
We have 'a failure to communicate'( guess which movie) as depicted in the flowchart we have checks and balances in the CROPP process. We should be spending our time on issues such as 1. Rejection of proposals by GSE for out of region, not a consistent approach in each region. 2. New travellers not being oriented on the program 3. Followup 3 or 6 months after travel as to results . 4. Clear communication to the RALO on trip results-even if didn't meet expectations and why 5. Assessment of trips vs RALO strategic plans as to metrics. 6. Cost Benefit analysis of the programme etc
Judith Hellerstein
Exactly as Glenn Says
Glenn McKnight
Change in naming convention in # 3 step
Ali AlMeshal
1 - Below point extracted from the Procedure for RALO to Apply for Outreach. I disagree with the approach of having the ALAC OE getting involve in this process.
- RALO must have an Outreach Strategic Plan, approved by regional GSE
- “These Outreach plans should be developed by the ALAC Subcommittee on Outreach and Engagement (in close coordination with RALO leaders) and must be approved by the regional ICANN Global Stakeholder Engagement.”
Filling and Submitting the CROPP request.
2 – Maybe as it says One Size does not fit all , but at least for us in APRALO and from day one this program was started we were practicing the process of all request goes through the Leadership Team and until it get approved then the PPC rep take care of updating the CROPP application form. Also we are the one who follow up for the trip assessment and we evaluate against the goals and objectives then again the PPC will update the CROPP assessment page. And this has proven its successfulness from our point view.
Tijani Ben Jemaa
@Alan,
For clarity, what would happen if the requester/RALO do not agree with the proposed changes? It is submitted, but withthe understanding that the CROPP-RT did not support it (which says nothing about how staff will treat it)?
This will never happen for the following reason:
@Olivier,
The process you are proposing is significantly different than the current process. Indeed, the drafting of the CROPP request was to be undertaken by CROPP RT representatives.
Olivier, I’m a Pilot Program Coordinator for AFRALO since the inception of the CROPP. I can attest that no AFRALO trip proposal has been drafted by the CROPP RT. All of them were drafted by the travellers. So saying that this is different from the current situation is not accurate.
You are now asking that the traveller rites the CROPP request. This does no make sense: the traveller, before making a CROPP request, should ask its RALO leadership and the RALO leadership should give its green light before passing it on to the CROPP RT representatives who should format the request.
Indeed, the approval of the RALO leadership is a condition for any proposal to go. This is what the draft charter I proposed clearly stipulate (see 2. Drafting trip proposal)
After all the CROPP RT representatives have much more experience in the format that a request should have. Otherwise you are introducing a huge barrier to people who are not insiders.
Olivier, I don’t know if you have already drafted a proposal. I really don’t understand that you insist that the request form is very complicated. It is a template to fill in, and the information requested are rather simple such as name, date of the event, dates of the trip, the event website, the event sponsors, etc. If the traveller can’t fill those information in, I doubt that his trip will be of any interest for the community.
You are speaking about huge barriers. Please explain how drafting the proposal represents a barrier, especially that the draft charter I propose envisage that the PPCs (members of the review team for the concerned RALO) assist the travellers to draft their proposals if needed.
For the record, this is exactly what the CROPP Guidelines says. Also, the other beneficiaries from the GNSO don’t have a review team, and they draft their proposals alone. Do you mean that they are facing huge barriers?
Also, you are speaking about “not insiders”, means outsiders. What you mean by outsider? Do you mean people who are not member of RALOs? For the record, the CROPP is for the RALOs and non contracted constituencies of the GNSO.
I therefore disagree with:
This is not only a waste of time for potential travellers, but also for any kind of efficiency because travellers will go back and forth with CROPP RT.
Travellers will not go back and forth with the CROPP RT. The CROPP RT is not created to replace the travellers to draft their proposals, but to ensure that the proposal fulfills the terms and conditions of the CROPP guidelines. Making an intermediate person to draft the proposal is a source of time consumption.
At the end, a potential traveller will just be turned off by all the bureaucracy which it should not be subjected to.
Making the traveller drafting their trip request proposal is bureaucracy??? Adding an intermediary person do it for them is less bureaucracy??? We may have different definition of bureaucracy
In addition, a traveller might not be English speaking as a first language and asking them to fill complex forms using a complex procedure is unfair and discriminative.
Good point. This is why the PPCs must help the travellers in drafting their proposals. Our experience in AFRALO is that when a traveller drafted his proposal in French, Fatimata and myself who were the AFRALO PPCs translated it for him. The PPCs are key in the CROPP Process as per the ICANN CROPP Guidelines.
Sorry but the following paragraph does not make any sense for someone who is not an insider. The RALO should make sure the traveller who proposes to go to a meeting funded by CROPP is aware of the strategic plan. The CROPP RT should write the request so that it is in line with the strategic plan.
With the help of the RALO PPCs (when needed), the travellers draft their proposals that should:
The outreach Strategic Plan is done by the RALO, and all travellers are members of the RALO (see above). All members of the RALO are at the same level of knowledge of their outreach strategic plan.
You cannot expect someone who will travel on CROPP to be an expert in ICANN's & the RALO's strategic plan. That is the job of CROPP RT & the RALO leadership.
For the GNSO non contacted constituencies, there is not a CROPP RT. And yet, they used this CROPP program without any problem
This amendment to the procedures is, in my opinion, likely to make RALOs less bottom-up as the system can be played by these in CROPP RT & RALO to make it as difficult as possible for a non-insider to give up in writing a CROPP request.
This is not an amendment. This is the original procedure (see the CROPP Guidelines). Is it more bottom-up to draft the proposal by an intermediary person for the traveller?????
We should not introduce barriers towards our community. Quite the contrary, we should make life as easy as possible for our community to engage, without them needed to learn all the bureaucracy.
Barriers? Bureaucracy? (see above)
I agree 100% with you that we shoud make things as simple, as easy as possible: not adding steps in the process, not giving proxies to replace the original players, only help and advise to harmonize and to make all the proposals acceptable
@Judith,
I do disagree only with the part of Tijani's comments on the CROPP RT team. I think the team can give their comments/thoughts on any CROPP proposal even if it is not in their region.
I never said that the review team don’t give their comments and thoughts on all CROPP proposals of the 5 regions. I don’t know how did you understand that. Anyway, in the draft charter I proposed, the paragraph 4 (CROPP RT review) of working methods section says: “Every member of the CROPP RT fills in a spreadsheet that the CROPP RT creates on its wiki giving their written appreciations and comments on each application”. So, I 100% agree with you