[atrt2] Request for Proposals

Mon Jul 8 17:14:07 UTC 2013

Avri,

It is not typically the case that ATRT documents are vetted by ICANN
legal.  This being an RFP issued by ICANN, that process is necessary.

Brian

On 7/4/13 11:00 AM, "Avri Doria" <avri at ella.com> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>Thanks for all the work in getting this out.
>
>And thanks to all of those who worked to reach consensus on this document.
>
>I have one question on the nature of reports and such ATRT2 puts out.  In
>this case, the RFP was vetted by legal, and they did make a few edits.
>Is this the case for all ATRT2 documents or was this exceptional in that
>it was an ICANN RFP?
>
>avri
>
>
>On 3 Jul 2013, at 12:06, Alice Jansen wrote:
>
>> Dear Review Team Members,
>> 
>> This is to notify you that the Request for Proposals was posted on the
>>ICANN website yesterday  2 July 2013:
>> 	€ 
>>https://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-2-02jul13-en.htm
>> 	€ https://www.icann.org/en/news/rfps/atrt2-01jul13-en.pdf
>> Please note that the RfP has been distributed to:
>> 	€ firms that had submitted proposals to the ATRT 1 in 2010-
>>http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review/atrt/proposals-evaluation-scorin
>>g-sheet-19jun10-en.pdf (
>> 	€ international professional consulting organizations for broad
>>distribution and posting.
>> A wiki page has been created
>>https://community.icann.org/display/ATRT2/Request+for+Proposals and a
>>caption added to your wiki front page:
>>https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=40176025
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Very best regards
>> 
>> Alice 
>>  
>> From: "Larisa B. Gurnick" <larisa.gurnick at icann.org>
>> Date: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 1:33 AM
>> To: "Brian Cute (bcute at pir.org)" <bcute at pir.org>, "Fiona
>>Asonga	(fasonga at kixp.or.ke)" <fasonga at kixp.or.ke>
>> Cc: "ATRT2 (atrt2 at icann.org)" <atrt2 at icann.org>
>> Subject: Re: [atrt2] URGENT: Final Draft RFP
>> 
>> Dear Review Team members,
>>  
>> Vice Chairs finalized the details of the RFP earlier today  please see
>>attached document.  Final RFP will be posted publically via an
>>announcement on the ICANN web site today.  Once this publication takes
>>place, the following distributions will follow:
>> 	€ Direct emails to several firms that had submitted proposals to the
>>ATRT 1 - 
>>http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review/atrt/proposals-evaluation-scorin
>>g-sheet-19jun10-en.pdf (Booz Allen Hamilton , Deloitte , Ersoylu
>>Consulting, Interisle Consulting , One World Trust, PRTM ,The Berkman
>>Center)
>> 	€ Direct emails to assorted international professional consulting
>>organizations for broad distribution and posting.
>>  
>> Final document and links to public postings will be updated on the ARTR
>>2 wiki, once available.
>>  
>> Best regards,
>> Larisa
>>  
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: atrt2-bounces at icann.org [mailto:atrt2-bounces at icann.org] On
>>Behalf Of Fiona Alexander
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 3:16 PM
>> To: Brian Cute
>> Cc: ATRT2
>> Subject: Re: [atrt2] URGENT: Final Draft RFP
>>  
>> Is there an update on the timing of the RFP release?
>>  
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: atrt2-bounces at icann.org [mailto:atrt2-bounces at icann.org] On
>>Behalf Of Brian Cute
>> Sent: Monday, July 01, 2013 2:45 AM
>> To: Jørgen C Abild Andersen; Larry Strickling
>> Cc: ATRT2
>> Subject: Re: [atrt2] URGENT: Final Draft RFP
>>  
>> Vice Chairs,
>>  
>> I support the amendments proposed by Larry and supported by Jorgen.  As
>>we discussed, ATRT2 can go into much greater detail with respect to the
>>scope of work and questions to be explored in the interview process and
>>with the selected Independent Expert.  With respect to Larry's comment
>>regarding the timeline, we may need to "tighten up" the timeline as
>>suggested.  That being said, getting the RFP out today or tomorrow at
>>the latest is important given our overall time constraints.
>>  
>> Best regards,
>> Brian
>>  
>> From: Jørgen C Abild Andersen <jocaan at erst.dk<mailto:jocaan at erst.dk>>
>> Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2013 09:12:03 -0400
>> To: Larry Strickling
>><LStrickling at ntia.doc.gov<mailto:LStrickling at ntia.doc.gov>>
>> Cc: ATRT2 <atrt2 at icann.org<mailto:atrt2 at icann.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [atrt2] URGENT: Final Draft RFP
>>  
>> I fully support Larry's comments (and also Avri's attempts to avoid any
>>potential prejudice in the questions). Larry's proposals for mentioning
>>GAC in the text are very well reflecting the spirit my original proposal
>>but with a much better wording. Many thanks Larry.
>> Best regards
>> Jørgen
>>  
>> Sendt fra min iPad
>>  
>> Den 28/06/2013 kl. 22.04 skrev "Larry Strickling"
>><LStrickling at ntia.doc.gov<mailto:LStrickling at ntia.doc.gov>>:
>>  
>> I have some comments on the draft document.
>>  
>> First, I think the timeframes do not work well when matched against the
>>schedule we face to complete our work by the end of the year.  I think
>>any consultant report, to be helpful to the committee, must be submitted
>>to us in final form no later than September 20, the date now proposed
>>for a status report.
>>  
>> Second, I think it is important that the scope of work include
>>benchmarking against other relevant multistakeholder processes.  I
>>propose that language be added to include that concept in the last
>>paragraph of the scope of work as follows:  "benchmark the ICANN PDP
>>process against other relevant multistakeholder processes."  We can add
>>this phrase after the parenthetical (See Annex) in that bullet point.
>>  
>> Third, notwithstanding that the GAC is one of many stakeholders at
>>ICANN, its positioning vis-à-vis the PDP is complicated by the fact that
>>the bylaws currently contemplate the GAC providing its advice to the
>>Board and not to supporting organizations as they do their work.  I
>>strongly agree with Jorgen that some specific mention of at least this
>>aspect of the GAC issue should be included in the RFP and propose a
>>fourth  bullet point in the third part of the scope of work headed
>>"provide a critical analysis . . ." as follows:   "to what extent the
>>ICANN bylaw process by which the GAC submits advice to the Board
>>prevents or inhibits the participation of the GAC in the PDP and whether
>>the PDP process could be strengthened by encouraging the submission of
>>views and advice from the GAC and governments earlier in the process."
>>  
>> Thank you and I hope I am not too late in proposing these changes.
>>  
>> Larry
>>  
>> From:atrt2-bounces at icann.org<mailto:atrt2-bounces at icann.org>
>>[mailto:atrt2-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 11:34 PM
>> To: ATRT2
>> Subject: [atrt2] URGENT: Final Draft RFP
>> Importance: High
>>  
>> Attached please find the hopefully final RFP. Before disappearing for
>>the next week, Brian made some edits, one of which removed the explicit
>>reference to the GAC under scope of work. Since he is not here to
>>present his rationale, I have temporarily left in his comment about why
>>he felt strongly that the particular reference should not be included in
>>the RFP.
>>  
>> Partly in response to that, Lise and I, with Avri's agreement included
>>an explicit reference to ICANN ACs and SOs in the Annex description of
>>stakeholders.
>>  
>> In addition to posting this RFP publicly, staff has identified two
>>potential consultants to explicitly be invited to bid, One World Trust
>>and Ken Bour.With this note, I ask staff to explain why they believe
>>that they could meet our needs.
>>  
>> If anyone on the RT has additional suggestions for who to invite,
>>please let us know quickly. The list of those submitting proposals to
>>the ATRT1 competition can be found at
>><http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review/atrt/rfp-respondents-evaluation
>>-19jun10-en.pdf>http://www.icann.org/en/about/aoc-review/atrt/rfp-respond
>>ents-evaluation-19jun10-en.pdf .
>>  
>> If we are to meet the target issue date of July 1 (next Monday!), we
>>need to finalize everything quickly, so I ask for all comments and
>>suggestions to arrive no later that 12:00 UTC on Friday, June 28.
>>  
>> If there are any crucial edits to them RFP itself, please submit them
>>as soon as possible to allow discussion.
>>  
>> Alan
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> _______________________________________________
>> atrt2 mailing list
>> atrt2 at icann.org<mailto:atrt2 at icann.org>
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>>  
>> _______________________________________________
>> atrt2 mailing list
>> atrt2 at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>> _______________________________________________
>> atrt2 mailing list
>> atrt2 at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>>  
>> _______________________________________________
>> atrt2 mailing list
>> atrt2 at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2
>
>_______________________________________________
>atrt2 mailing list
>atrt2 at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/atrt2