[ALT-Plus] [ALAC-Members] ICANN Board resolution approving the At-Large Review Implementation Plan (27 Jan 2019)

Sun Jan 27 20:12:12 UTC 2019

Great news, thanks for letting us know Maureen!

Regards

Sent from my mobile
Kindly excuse brevity and typos

On Sun, 27 Jan 2019, 20:20 Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com wrote:

> Consideration of the At-Large Advisory Committee Detailed Implementation
> Plan
>
>
>
> Whereas, ICANN Bylaws Article IV, Section 4.4 calls on the ICANN Board to
> “cause a periodic review of the performance and operation of each
> Supporting Organization, each Supporting Organization Council, each
> Advisory Committee (other than the Governmental Advisory Committee), and
> the Nominating Committee by an entity or entities independent of the
> organization under review.
>
>
>
> The goal of the review, to be undertaken pursuant to such criteria and
> standards as the Board shall direct, shall be to determine (i) whether that
> organization has a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure,and (ii) if
> so, whether any change in structure or operations is desirable to improve
> its effectiveness.”
>
>
>
> Whereas, the independent examiner of the At-Large Review produced a Final
> Report in February 2017. That report was received by the Board in June
> 2018, and at the same time the Board accepted the At-Large Review
> Recommendations Feasibility Assessment & Implementation Plan and the
> At-Large Review Implementation Overview Proposal as approved by the ALAC.
>
>
>
> Whereas, in response to that June 2018 resolution, the At-Large Review
> Implementation Working Group was created. That Working Group developed and
> approved the At-Large Review Implementation Plan (the “Implementation
> Plan”) on 19 November 2018, which was endorsed by the ALAC endorsement on
> 27 November 2018.
>
>
>
> Resolved (2019.01.27.xx), the Board acknowledges the At-Large Review
> Implementation Working Group’s work and thanks the members of that Working
> Group for their efforts.
>
>
>
> Resolved (2019.01.27.xx), the Board accepts the At-Large Review
> Implementation Plan, including the phased approach contained within. The
> Board acknowledges that more details with regard to implementation details
> may be required for implementation of Priorities 2 and 3 activities.
>
>
>
> Resolved (2019.01.27.xx), the Board directs the At-Large Review
> Implementation Working Group to provide updates to the OEC every six
> months. Those bi-annual updates shall identify achievements as measured
> against the existing  implementation plan, as well as details on future
> implementation plans. It is during these updates that the At-Large Review
> Implementation Working Group shall provide more details on implementation
> progress, and measurability. The OEC may request interim briefings if
> deemed necessary.
>
>
>
> Resolved (2019.01.27.xx), that any budgetary implications of the At-Large
> Review implementation shall be considered as part of the applicable annual
> budgeting processes.
>
>
>
> Rationale for Resolutions 2019.01.27.xx – 2019.01.27.xx
>
>
>
> To ensure ICANN's multistakeholder model remains transparent and
> accountable, and to improve its performance, ICANN organizes independent
> reviews of its supporting organizations and advisory committees as
> prescribed in Article IV Section 4.4 of the ICANN Bylaws. The second
> At-Large started in 2016 and the independent examiner presented its Final
> Report in May 2017.
>
>
>
> The At-Large Review Implementation recommendations as noted in the
> At-Large Review Implementation Overview Proposal have the potential to
> advance ICANN's transparency and accountability objectives and have been
> considered carefully by the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee
> as well as by the full Board.
>
>
>
> The Board resolution will have a positive impact on ICANN and especially
> the ALAC and At-Large community as it reinforces ICANN's and the ALAC and
> At-Large community’s commitment to maintaining and improving its
> accountability, transparency and organizational effectiveness throughout
> the implementation process.
>
>
>
> Due to the number of recommendations that need to be implemented, the
> Board supports the approach by priorities as laid out in the
> Implementation Plan (Exhibit A). This will allow the community time to
> refine details as the implementation process proceeds– especially during
> Priority 2 and 3 activities set out in that Implementation Plan.
>
>
>
> Some recommendations – especially those foreseen to be implemented under
> Priority 2 and 3 activities – may benefit from additional details
> regarding their exact implementation. Due to the difficulty to predict
> these issues months in advance, the Board supports the idea that the
> At-Large Review Implementation Working Group provides updates bi-annually
> to the OEC. It is during these updates that the ALAC can provide greater
> implementation details with regard to those recommendations that are going
> to be scheduled for the forthcoming six-month period following the
> respective OEC update. At that time, the ALAC would be in a better position
> to flag any significant variations from the original implementation plan
> and timing. The At-Large Review Implementation Plan sets out the
> prioritization, expected resource allocation in terms of staff time, web
> and wiki resources, expected budgetary implications such as additional
> staff resources, and the steps to implementation.
>
>
>
> While the majority of implementation activities will use existing At-Large
> resources, any additional fiscal implications are noted below. The ALAC
> will utilize the normal annual budgetary comment process to request the
> required resources. If such resources are not provided, the likely result
> would be a significant slow down in the speed of the Review Implementation.
>
>
>
> Why is the Board addressing the issue?
>
> This resolution moves the second review of the At-Large community into the
> implementation phase. Following the assessment of the Implementation Plan
> and the feedback from the Board’s Organizational Effectiveness Committee,
> the Board is now in a position to consider the Plan and instruct the ALAC
> to continue the implementation process as set out in the Plan. This step is
> an important part of the Organizational Review process of checks and
> balances, to ensure that the spirit of Board-approved recommendations will
> be addressed through the implementation plans, while being mindful of
> budgetary and timing constraints.
>
>
>
> What is the proposal being considered?
>
> The proposal the Board is considering is the Organizational Effectiveness
> Committee’s recommendation of the adoption of the At-Large Review
> Implementation Plan, drafted and adopted by the At-Large Review
> Implementation Working Group, endorsed by the ALAC.
>
>
>
> Which stakeholders or others were consulted?
>
> Immediately after the Board passed the Resolution on the At-Large Review,
> the leadership of the At-Large Review Working Group provided updates on the
> Review and next steps on each of the five RALO monthly teleconferences. The
> creation of the At-Large Review Implementation Working Group involved
> careful consideration of members to ensure geographical balance and
> diversity within each RALO, including among the 232 At-Large Structures and
> over 100 individual members.
>
>
>
> During the development of the At-Large Review Implementation Plan, the
> At-Large Review Implementation WG members updated the ALAC as well as each
> RALO on a regular basis with the progress that was being made. There were
> also several discussions on the At-Large Review Implementation during
> ICANN63 face-to-face sessions. At each step, feedback was discussed by the
> At-Large Review Implementation WG and incorporated into the final Plan.
>
>
>
> What concerns, or issues were raised by the community?
>
> During the development of the At-Large Review Implementation Plan, the
> At-Large community raised the concern over whether the third At-Large
> Summit (ATLAS III) would take place as tentatively scheduled during ICANN66
> in Montreal in October 2019 and identified as a Priority 1 activity and
> requiring budgetary consideration in advance of the broader organizational
> budget cycle. In September 2018 the Board confirmed that the ICANN
> organization still had authority to proceed with the planning and
> contracting.
>
>
>
> What significant materials did the Board review?
>
> The Board reviewed the At-Large Review Implementation Plan as adopted by
> the At-Large Review Implementation Working Group and endorsed by the ALAC.
>
>
>
> Are there fiscal impacts or ramifications on ICANN, the Community, and/or
> the Public (strategic plan, operating plan, or budget)?
>
> The work to improve the effectiveness of the At-Large organization – by
> implementing the issues resulting from the Review and the At-Large Review
> Implementation Overview Proposal, may require additional financial
> resources that are subject to ICANN’s normal budgetary processes. This
> resolution does not authorize any specific funding for those implementation
> efforts. The Board understands that some of the Priority 1 work, such as
> skills development and communication efforts, will require FY20 Additional
> Budget Requests. The Board also understands that the ongoing and Priority 2
> activities are estimated to require the addition of one Full Time Employee
> equivalent, and there are other anticipated resource needs for items such
> as communications and data collection.
>
>
>
> Are there any security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS?
>
> This action is not expected to have a direct impact on the security,
> stability or resiliency of the DNS. Still, once the improvements are
> implemented, future activities of the ALAC and At-Large community,
> including advice or inputs into the policy development processes, will
> become more transparent and accountable, which in turn might indirectly
> contribute to the security, stability or resiliency of the DNS.
>
>
>
> Is public comment required prior to Board action?
>
> The Draft Report of the independent examiner was posted for public
> comment. There is no public comment required prior to this Board action.
> The voice of the ALAC has been reflected throughout the review process –
> via the At-Large Review Working Party that produced the ALAC Implementation
> Overview Proposal; the At-Large Review Implementation Working Group that
> developed the implementation plan; and the ALAC that endorsed the
> implementation plan.
>
>
>
> How is this action within ICANN's mission and what is the public interest
> served in this action?
>
> Given that At-Large represents the best interests of individual Internet
> end users within ICANN’s multistakeholder governance approach, the approval
> of the At-Large Review Implementation Plan, which will lead to a
> strengthened At-Large community, will have a direct positive impact to
> ICANN’s mission in its bottom-up policy development process. The public
> interest is also served through this action which furthers the continued
> development and support of a diverse and informed multistakeholder
> community.
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC-Members mailing list
> ALAC-Members at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-members
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/private/alt-plus/attachments/20190127/e58684b4/attachment-0001.html>