[Ccwg-auctionproceeds] For your review - updated proposal for individual appeals mechanism

Wed Aug 21 01:03:23 UTC 2019

Hi Sam

You attributed something to me that John Levine wrote in response to my
saying that some people needed support in writing the sort of application
that we may require them to complete. But really they need to fully
understand its requirements well in advance of even applying. And while
they may get feedback on the process, no reference should be made of the
actual evaluation.

As John pointed out, and we all agree, this is a capacity development need
not an evaluation need.

Maureen

On Tue, 20 Aug 2019, 1:23 PM Sam Lanfranco, <sam at lanfranco.net> wrote:

> Three quick small comments:
>
> 1. I don't think there is any thought about applicants not being able to
> re-apply in subsequent rounds. As noted, some applicants learn from both
> their rejections and access to the proposals of those who were funded.
>
> 2. The policies for handling subsequent proposals from successful
> applicants need to be thought through carefully, and be made clear from the
> start. Some funding sources have a two-stage funding process built in,
> wherein a successful preliminary project has specified access to a second
> level project proposal window, but no assurance of funding. Others do not,
> and expect successful projects to look elsewhere for subsequent funding, or
> to reapply with no preferential treatment.
>
> 3. Maureen Hilyard writes:  "*I really do not think it is our job to tell
> people how to rewrite their  proposals so they can reapply.  (Will there
> even be a chance to reapply?)  If we want to provide grant writing help, we
> should make that part of the **plan and not confuse it with the grant
> evaluation*." As one of those who proposed some training or orientation
> for applicants, I agree with her here. I would like to see some open access
> training materials used to help make clear what the ICANN auction funds
> Calls for Proposals should have to constitute a relevant and adequately
> constructed application for funding. This would assist those writing the
> proposals, be they those who will execute the project, or those retained to
> assist with proposal writing.
>
> Sam L.
> On 8/20/2019 6:50 PM, Sylvia Cadena wrote:
>
> Once a call is closed no one can apply to that particular call, but I have never heard of a grants program that does not allow organizations that were not successful to apply for future rounds of funding. They should be able to re-apply, as there is no plan to allocate all auction proceeds in one go. As long as the criteria is met, that should not be an issue.
>
> It is very common to have a percentage of unsuccessful applicants re-applying. In our case, some organizations applied at least 3 times before they are granted funding. Considering the number of organizations that work around the objectives of this fund, that seems very likely.
>
> Successful applicants that have already received funding should -in my opinion- be able to request additional funding as well. Either for the same project or for a totally different one. That is done by most large donors to support scale-up and achieve impact for a solution that works, or to support organizations that are done really well on their reporting and outcomes, as impact takes time. But that is -again- a different subject. That is particularly important with large organizations such as universities, where funding can go to one department/faculty once and then to a different one in the future.
>
> Regards,
>
> Sylvia
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Sylvia Cadena | APNIC Foundation - Head of Programs | sylvia at apnic.net | http://www.apnic.foundation
> ISIF Asia, WSIS Champion on International Cooperation 2018 & 2019 | http://www.isif.asia | FB ISIF.asia | @ISIF_Asia | G+ ISIFAsia |
> 6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD,  4101 Australia | PO Box 3646 | +10 GMT | skypeID: sylviacadena | Tel: +61 7 3858 3100 |  Fax: +61 7  3858 3199
> * Love trees. Print only if necessary.
>
>
> On 21/8/19, 6:58 am, "Ccwg-auctionproceeds on behalf of John R Levine" <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.org on behalf of johnl at taugh.com> <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces at icann.orgonbehalfofjohnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>
>     On Tue, 20 Aug 2019, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
>
>     > I agree with Sylvia and especially with regards to feedback to those whose
>     > proposals are rejected. They need appropriate feedback that will help them
>     > to produce the applications that are going to  make the grade. This is more
>     > needed by those from underserved communities that do not have experience in
>     > writing such proposals yet are requesting something that is really
>     > worthwhile.
>
>     I really do not think it is our job to tell people how to rewrite their
>     proposals so they can reapply.  (Will there even be a chance to reapply?)
>
>     If we want to provide grant writing help, we should make that part of the
>     plan and not confuse it with the grant evaluation.
>
>     Regards,
>     John Levine, johnl at taugh.com, Taughannock Networks, Trumansburg NY
>     Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
>     _______________________________________________
>     Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
>     Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
>     _______________________________________________
>     By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing listCcwg-auctionproceeds at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------
> "It is a disgrace to be rich and honored in an
>  unjust state" -Confucius
>  邦有道，贫且贱焉，耻也。邦无道，富且贵焉，耻也
> ------------------------------------------------
> Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus), Econ, York U., CANADA
> email: sam at lanfranco.net   Skype: slanfranco
> blog:  https://samlanfranco.blogspot.com
> Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
> Ccwg-auctionproceeds at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-auctionproceeds/attachments/20190820/0c5a9d82/attachment.html>