Draft%20At-Large%20Review%20Implementation%20Outline%20v2.1%20-%20EN.xls (updated version from 27 October incorporating the priorities identified during the ALAC & Regional Leadership Working Session from 25 October 2009 in Seoul)
Draft%20At-Large%20Review%20Implementation%20Outline%20v2.xls (updated version from 5 October 2009 incorporating comments received on v1)
Draft%20At-Large%20Review%20Implementation%20Outline%20v1.xls
Version Francais
Version Espanol
Status of this Document: Draft, open for At-Large Community Comments
Final Date for Comments: 30th September 2009
To leave a comment, please click the 'Comment' button above and don't forget to include your name before saving as otherwise your comment will be anonymous.
You may retrieve a PDF version of the below from the menu on the right-hand side of this page.
Whilst all comments are important, respondents may wish to include responses which provide input with respect to the following questions:
> How important, on a scale of 1 (most important) to 3 (least important), is a given element of the outline?
> Do you believe that any of the proposed actions is not a correct response to a given recommendation? If so, which one(s) and why?
> Is an element of the Final Report missing from the Outline Plan? If so, which one?
The Final Report of the At-Large Review Working Group may be found in several language editions at http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/alac/
| Recomendation Number |
Recommendation Description |
Task Number |
Task Description |
Priority | Resources Required |
Reference in ALRWG Report |
Notes | |||||||||||||
| 1 | The ALAC has a continuing purpose in the ICANN
structure. This continuing purpose has four key elements: * providing advice on policy; * providing input into ICANN operations and structure; * part of ICANN’s accountability mechanisms * an organising mechanism for some of ICANN’s outreach The section of the ICANN Bylaws that deals with ALAC should be changed to reflect this purpose. |
1 | pg7 | |||||||||||||||||
| 1.1 | Amend Bylaws Article XI,s2(4)(a) to clarify purposes as proposed | |||||||||||||||||||
| 1.1.1 | Staff to create draft redlined edits of relevant section of the Bylaws | |||||||||||||||||||
| 1.1.2 | Draft created in 1.1 to be reviewed by ALAC | |||||||||||||||||||
| 1.1.3 | ALAC-reviewed edit to be transmitted with ALAC's recommendation to the Board via the SIC to ratify the changes, subject to public comment processes required for Bylaw amendments and subsequent revisions if any. | |||||||||||||||||||
| 1.2 | Review proposed IIC/post-JPA accountability mechanisms to ensure congruence with the recommendation | Page 8, para 2 | To give effect to report recommendation that
"As the key representative of the individual Internet user in the broader ICANN process, ALAC should have a voice in the mechanisms being developed through the President’s Strategy Committee and other mechanisms to provide greater accountability. Although the exact shape of these mechanisms is not yet decided, the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user need to be included as an important part of any mechanism that is developed." |
|||||||||||||||||
| 1.2.1 | Review existing or recently concluded public comment processes related to this subject, identify any lacunae related to this recommendation | |||||||||||||||||||
| 1.2.2 | Define further steps or measures required | |||||||||||||||||||
| 1.3 | ALAC Engagement in ICANN Structural Improvements Programmes | page 7, para 4 | To give effect to the recommendation that "ALAC
needs to contribute to the organizational structure discussions that are
taking place as ICANN undertakes reviews of the Board and the Supporting
Organizations and Advisory Committees. The voice of the individual Internet
user is an important input into this process." |
|||||||||||||||||
| 1.3.1 | Review whether additional processes are required above those currently in place within At-Large | |||||||||||||||||||
| 1.3.2 | Review whether additional processes external to At-Large are required | |||||||||||||||||||
| 1.3.3 | After completion of 1.3.1 and 1.3.2, staff to report to the ALAC with the results. | ALAC to review any measures identified, agree on follow-on programme if any | ||||||||||||||||||
| 1.4 | Extend the Term of Office of the ALAC Chair to two years | Page 21, Recommendation 11 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | The ALS-RALO-ALAC structure of At-Large should remain in place for the present | 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 3.1 | Ensuring the existing structure does not present obstacles to effective community operation and development | Page 9, para 2 | To address the statement "Many members of the WG feel that the current system does impede the flow of information to and from the individual Internet user on some occasions." | |||||||||||||||||
| 3.1.1 | Review information flows between the three tiers of the At-Large system to identify any improvements to information dissemination that can be made. | |||||||||||||||||||
| 3.1.2 | Taking into account the results of 3.1.1, implement any improvements that may be found useful | ALAC to review any measures identified, agree on follow-on programme if any | ||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | Educating and engaging the ALSes should be an immediate proirity; compliance should be a longer-term goal | 4 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 4.1 | Education | Section will develop an educational campaign to help
ALSes and those individual Internet users who wish to engage directly to gain
greater understanding of the issues behind decisions to be taken. Gives effect to the statement in the report "Staff have an important role to play ... in helping to develop material that explains policy issues in ways that make sense to the individual Internet user. While this is not a trivial task, it is critical to the success of the At Large process and this aspect should be considered when the allocation of resources is being considered." |
||||||||||||||||||
| 4.1.1 | Develop high-level principles to guide development of an externally-focussed campaign of this kind | |||||||||||||||||||
| 4.1.2 | Once principles in 4.1.1 are reviewed and approved, draw up plan with specific deliverables congruent with the principles | |||||||||||||||||||
| 4.1.3 | Once 4.1.3 is approved, create and execute plan to implement | |||||||||||||||||||
| 4.2 | Engagement | Page 9, para 6 / Page 10 para 1 | Section will develop an educational campaign to help
At-Large community members to participate in ways that ensure their input has
can have maximum impact on ICANN's work, and ensure that they feel their
volunteer activities were impactful, thereby incentivizing continuing
volunteer engagement in ICANN. Gives effect to the statement in the report "Staff have an important role to play ... in helping to develop material that explains policy issues in ways that make sense to the individual Internet user. While this is not a trivial task, it is critical to the success of the At Large process and this aspect should be considered when the allocation of resources is being considered." |
|||||||||||||||||
| 4.2.1 | Develop high-level principles to guide development of an externally-focussed campaign of this kind | |||||||||||||||||||
| 4.2.2 | Once principles in 4.2.1 are reviewed and approved, draw up plan with specific deliverables congruent with the principles | |||||||||||||||||||
| 4.2.3 | Once 4.2.3 is approved, create and execute plan to implement | |||||||||||||||||||
| 4.3 | Outreach and Recruitment | page 8, para 3 / page 12, para 4 | To give effect to the following statement: "Through ALAC’s interactions with the ALS structures, ICANN is able to reach out to thousands of Internet users across the globe. As such, ALAC has an important role to play in coordinating and facilitating some of ICANN’s outreach activity... This outreach may also extend to capacity building as At Large activity coordinated through ALAC educates Internet users on the issues that underlie policy and other debates in the ICANN arena." | |||||||||||||||||
| 4.3.1 | Outreach and Recruitment to increase At-Large community size and diversity | |||||||||||||||||||
| 4.3.1.1 | Design an outreach and recruitment strategy for At-Large | ALAC to review the plan, agree on next steps | ||||||||||||||||||
| 4.3.2 | Outreach messaging to the individual Internet user about ICANN's activities | |||||||||||||||||||
| 4.3.3 | Design a process which will ensure that information about the issues being dealt with by the ICANN community can be easily understood by individual Internet users. | ALAC to review, agree on follow-on programme | ||||||||||||||||||
| 4.4 | Explore whether additional measures need to be taken to involve the individual Internet user in the work of At-large, where such persons wish to contribute in their personal capacity | page 9, para 4 | Gives effect to the statement "The WG
encourages ALAC and the RALOs to continue to explore ways that individual users can be involved in the process without having to become part of an ALS." |
|||||||||||||||||
| 4.5 | Leadership Engagement / Development | Page 10, para 2 | 4.5's objective is to address the statement "The WG also believes that there is a need for substantial improvement in the levels of participation by ALAC members in ALAC policy processes and operational matters. Under the current Chair, significant improvement has taken place and the WG wishes to commend and support these. However, there is still a long way to go based on data from recent ALAC activity." | |||||||||||||||||
| 4.5.1 | Create "Job Description" for ALAC members, liaisons, other leaders that includes qualification requirements, responsibilities, objective criteria to evaluate performance | This is currently underway in the community | ||||||||||||||||||
| 4.5.2 | Create and implement sanctions process for non-performance | To include objective process for identification of issues, graduated responses for continued non-compliance, succession process for replacement. This will apply also to the NomCom in replacing non-performing appointees to the ALAC from the NomCom. | ||||||||||||||||||
| 4.5.3 | In creating sactions processes above, include elements that ensure travel support is unavailable to ALAC leaders subject to these processes. | page 18, para 1 | To give effect to the recommendation that "ICANN resources should only be used to support those who are active in ICANN policy and operations issues. The WG supports and acknowledges the steps being taken within ALAC to approve accountability and transparency of the activity of members of the ALAC and RALOs and suggests that this information be utilized when considering travel support." | |||||||||||||||||
| 4.5.4 | ALAC and the NomCom shall jointly decide upon a process for mid-term replacement of NomCom appointments TO the ALAC, and ALAC appointments TO the NomCom, where required | |||||||||||||||||||
| 4.5.4 | Implementation of agreed processes | |||||||||||||||||||
| 4.5.5 | Provide finalised results from 4.5.2, 4.5.3, and 4.5.4 for Board approval | page 19, para 4 | To implement recommendation that "WG recommends that ALAC and the RALOs develop these themselves and present them to the ICANN Board for approval." | |||||||||||||||||
| 4.6 | Compliance | This section intentionally left as a placeholder, as per the Report's recommendation that Compliance should be dealt with after the other elements of Recommendation 4 are completed. | ||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | ALAC should develop strategic and operational plans (including performance criteria and cost information) as part of ICANN’s planning process | 5 | Page 10, section 3.2.1.3 / Page 21, Recommendation 10 | |||||||||||||||||
| 5.1 | Strategic Planning - ALAC Processes | |||||||||||||||||||
| 5.1.1 | Review current processes within At-Large to contribute to strategic and operational planning; identify any barriers | |||||||||||||||||||
| 5.1.2 | Propose measures to eliminate any barriers identified in 5.1.1 | ALAC to review any measures identified, agree on follow-on programme if any | ||||||||||||||||||
| 5.2 | Operational Planning - ALAC Processes | |||||||||||||||||||
| 5.2.1 | Review current processes within At-Large to contribute to strategic and operational planning; identify any barriers | |||||||||||||||||||
| 5.2.2 | Propose measures to eliminate any barriers identified in 5.2.1 | ALAC to review any measures identified, agree on follow-on programme if any | ||||||||||||||||||
| 5.3 | Review ongoing At-Large staff support levels and budget allocations during the FY2009/2010 period and increase support as provided throughout this project, congruent with the recommendations in the ALRWG Report. | Page 11 / Page 20, Recommendation 5 | To give effect to the report's recommendations on
page 11, especially "The WG recommends that consideration be given to
increasing resources available to ALAC based on initiatives proposed through
the planning process. These resources may involve extra staff and/or extra
funding, depending on the particular initiative and the desired
outcomes." This will also be useful in connection with the resourcing requirements identified for ongoing efforts related to other recommendations in the report. |
|||||||||||||||||
| 5.3.1 | The ALAC and the staff shall develop an annual support agreement | further details as per the Report, Section 3.2.1.4 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 6 | More effort needs to be put into developing accurate cost models for At Large activity | 6 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 6.1 | Review with At-Large what additional information would be useful, subsequent to the improvements in financial reporting in FY2009/2010 | |||||||||||||||||||
| 6.2 | In planning for meetings, ensure that At-Large representatives are provided equal treatment to other funded communities with respect to accomodations | page 18, para 2 | As per the report's statement: "the WG recommends that At Large representatives be treated equally with other funded participants when accommodation is being organized." | |||||||||||||||||
| 8 | The public comment period should be kept at 30 days except in special circumstances, in which case ALAC may request an extension to 45 days | 8 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 8.1 | ALAC Internal Processes | |||||||||||||||||||
| 8.1.1 | Develop process for requesting extended consultation window | |||||||||||||||||||
| 8.1.2 | Draft process transmitted after ALAC endorsement to the Board | |||||||||||||||||||
| 8.2 | Staff / Board Processes | |||||||||||||||||||
| 8.2.1 | Develop process to implement extension requests received | |||||||||||||||||||
| 8.3 | Review of Public Comment Processes | page 13, paras 3-4, page 14, paras 1-2 | Section 8.3 is to give effect to recommendations in section 3.2.2.2 of the report. | |||||||||||||||||
| 8.3.1 | Activities in Advance of Comment Period Opening | page 13, para 4 | 8.3.1 is to give effect to the following
recommendation: "If ALAC only begins to educate the At Large community
at the start of the public comment period, there is little hope of
getting representative advice from a global membership in 30 days. Education about issues should start as early as possible. Where feasible, early drafts of documents could be shared so that At Large members can begin considering their response before the public comment period begins." |
|||||||||||||||||
| 8.3.1.1 | Review internal processes at the staff level to determine how advance notice of public comment periods, and availability of prerelease drafts, could be possible. Produce recommendations for community review. | Changes proposed should be suitable for horizontal application across all of the ICANN communities and should be beneficial to all, to ensure equal treatment. | ||||||||||||||||||
| 8.3.1.2 | Review internal processes to determine how materials could be prepared and released in advance of the opening of comment periods to support advance understanding of issues | Examples of the types of materials are: such as
issue briefing webinars, production of documents to explain issues, and other
materials supportive of informing volunteer communities, can be
implemented Measures proposed should be suitable for horizontal application across all of the ICANN communities and should be beneficial to all, to ensure equal treatment. |
||||||||||||||||||
| 8.4 | Review measures to make the policy development activities across ICANN's communities more accessible, propose measures for community review. | pg 13, para 4 | Section 8.3.2 is to give effect to recommendation:
"Supporting Organizations should work more closely with ALAC to inform
them of upcoming policy issues and of the status of issues currently under
debate. In this way, ALAC could begin preparations and education efforts in
advance of the comment period. Staff who support the ALAC and various other
parts of ICANN could play a useful role in assisting communication across
groups..." An example of the type of improvement relevant to 8.3.2 is potentially implementing a cross-ICANN version of the At-Large Policy Advice Development page found at http://www.atlarge.icann.org/policycalendar. |
|||||||||||||||||
| 9 | ICANN should strengthen its translation and interpretation processes | 9 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 9.1 | Interim Measures (near term) | |||||||||||||||||||
| 9.1.1 | Propose any near-term modifications to processes necessary for increased policy engagement which is dependent upon availability of translations | Staff proposal to be reviewed by the ALAC/At-Large | ||||||||||||||||||
| 9.2 | Adoption of Translation Policy | A draft Translation Policy for ICANN exists and has been subjected to two public consultations but never sent to the Board for assent or implemented by the staff as an administrative measure. | ||||||||||||||||||
| 9.2.1 | Staff to review draft document, determine whether additional modifications are required, and whether to ask the Board to approve or to implement directly as an administrative matter | The review of the document should take into account lessons learnt in translation since the report was prepared, budgetary impacts based upon costs over the last two fiscal years. | ||||||||||||||||||
| 9.3 | Implementation of Translation Policy | Implementation of the translation policy is outside of the scope of this programme of work. | ||||||||||||||||||
| 10 | ALAC as the representative body for At Large is the
primary organisational home for the voice and concerns of the individual
Internet user in ICANN processes. (though ICANN’s multi stakeholder model provides opportunity for individual users to choose to participate in many other ways in the ICANN process.) |
10 | Activities related to this recommendation are covered under recommendation 1 | |||||||||||||||||
| 11 | There needs to be a clear statement from the Board that recognises the place of At Large as the primary organisational home for individual Internet users, and that clarifies the relationship between ALAC and the User House currently being developed within the GNSO | 11 | Activities related to this recommendation to be undertaken along with those in recommendation 1 | page 17, paras 2-3 | ||||||||||||||||
| 11.1 | Staff to create draft redlined edits of relevant sections of the Bylaws | |||||||||||||||||||
| 11.2 | Draft created in 11.1 to be reviewed by ALAC | |||||||||||||||||||
| 11.3 | ALAC-reviewed edit to be transmitted with ALAC's recommendation to the Board to ratify the changes, subject to public comment processes required for Bylaw amendments and subsequent revisions if any. | |||||||||||||||||||
| 12 | ICANN should develop a mechanism for allowing the voice of those recognised bodies who represent consumer interests to be heard at critical points in key decisions and to provide input into policy processes. | 12 | page 17, para 1 | As this recommendation affects recruitment across
two communities, development of an integrated outreach programme for this
stakeholder group will be developed centrally (Target date for completion: 1
November 2009. Upon completion it will be provided to At-Large for review and comment. |
||||||||||||||||
| 12.1 | Consumer Representatives and At-Large | |||||||||||||||||||
| 12.2 | Consumer Representatives and the GNSO | |||||||||||||||||||
| 13 | As the provision of advice on policy is part of ALAC’s purpose, ALAC should strive to provide policy advice on any issues that affect individual Internet users. Processes for providing advice on policy should be strengthened within ALAC for the development of policy advice, within SOs for requesting input from ALAC on policy issues and from SOs, ACs and the Board to provide feedback on how ALAC advice has been used. | 13 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 13.1 | Review ALAC's/At-Large's Policy Advice Development processes. | pg7, para 3 | To give effect to the statement "ALAC should strive to provide policy advice on any issues that affect individual Internet users." | |||||||||||||||||
| 13.1.1 | Review ALAC's/At-Large's internal processes, identify any barriers to advice development | |||||||||||||||||||
| 13.1.2 | Taking into account the result of 13.1.1, staff to prepare proposals for measures which would reduce barriers identified | |||||||||||||||||||
| 13.1.2 | Review external processes which create barriers to ALAC's development of advice | |||||||||||||||||||
| 13.1.3 | Taking into account the result of 13.1.1, staff/consultants to prepare proposals for measures which would reduce barriers identified for review by At-Large | |||||||||||||||||||
| 13.2 | Processes for developing policy should be strengthened *within* SOs and ACs for requesting and considering input from ALAC on policy issues | Page 12, para 6 / Page 13, para 1-3 | The objective of this section is to give effect to the statement: "...the policy development processes of the GNSO, the ccNSO and the ASO be changed so that these organisations are responsible for reaching out to At Large in the early stages of their policydevelopment processes. In their policy processes, the Supporting Organisations should demonstrate that they have obtained the views of At Large and that this input has been taken into account. One way of dong this would be to require the inclusion of some form of “environmental impact statement” early in the policy development process that, amongst other things, describes the impact of the policy on Internet users." | |||||||||||||||||
| 13.2.1 | Review current process in each of the ACs and SOs | |||||||||||||||||||
| 13.2.2 | Develop recommendations to make relevant changes for community consideration | |||||||||||||||||||
| 13.3 | Processes *between* SOs, ACs and the Board need to
be developed / strengthened to provide feedback on how ALAC advice has been considered and used within their processes. |
As the scope of application of this recommendation
is so broad, and other reviews incorporate similar or congruent
recommendations, proposals for implementation which holistically address all
such recommendations will be forthcoming in due course (target date: 1
November 2009). The first step will be to identify a bottom-up-based process involving the affected bodies in developing recommendations for community consultation and review. |
||||||||||||||||||
| 13.4 | Ensure the GNSO PDP Process incorporates measures that ensure input from ALAC is included and considered as an integral part of the PDP process | pg7,p3 / pg13, para 1 | To give effect to recommendation that "There are multiple policy arenas where the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user need to be heard. The GNSO Policy Development Process is probably the area where the ALAC is most likely to be providing input." and "In their policy processes, the Supporting Organisations should demonstrate that they have obtained the views of At Large and that this input has been taken into account." | |||||||||||||||||
| 13.5 | Ensure the ccNSO PDP Process ensures input from ALAC is requested and considered as an integral part of the PDP process | pg7, p3 / pg13, para 1 | To give effect to the recommendation that "There are multiple policy arenas where the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user need to be heard. ... There may well be occasions where ALAC may wish to provide advice on matters before the ... ccNSO." and "In their policy processes, the Supporting Organisations should demonstrate that they have obtained the views of At Large and that this input has been taken into account." | |||||||||||||||||
| 13.6 | Ensure the ASO's policy development processes ensure input from ALAC is requested and considered as an integral part of the process | pg7, p3 / pg13, para 1 | To give effect to the recommendation that "There are multiple policy arenas where the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user need to be heard. ... There may well be occasions where ALAC may wish to provide advice on matters before the ... ASO..." and "In their policy processes, the Supporting Organisations should demonstrate that they have obtained the views of At Large and that this input has been taken into account." | |||||||||||||||||
I would like to make the following comments and proposals:
1.1 / Notes: To take care of the possible new official liaisons
1.4 / comment: Extend the term of Office of the Chair to two years; what about the other officers?
3.1.1 Three tiers? In my view they are 4 “tiers” Individual members/ALS/RALO/ALAC
4.1.1 and 4.2.1 …”externally-focused”… / As we are talking about engaging ALSes, it must be an “internally-focused”
4.3.1.1 Notes: ALAC and RALO
4.3.2 Task: Outreach messaging to the individual Internet user and organizations about ICANN’s activities
4.5.2 and 4.5.3 I am not sure about the word “sanctions”.
ALAC and RALO leaders
5.1 and 5.2 Notes to be added: RALO must be involved
9 Yes ICANN must have a global policy but At-Large can have its own objectives
13 Link with 1
There are mistakes about the numbering (the second 13.1.2 must be 13.1.3…)
Sébastien Bachollet
contributed by sebastien.bachollet@isoc.fr on 2009-09-04 06:45:13 GMT
