ICANN's functions, as one vital part of the Internet ecosystem, has been growing with the development of the INTERNET (i.e. very fast). ICANN requires a forward looking approach to the accountability and transparency of its finances in this particular fast growing period.

ICANN is presently incrementing the scope, as well as the expected volume of business with the new gTLD program

It is reasonable to assume the the new gTLD program will not only require more resources in its day to day operations and global outreach, but also require more and more frequent policy and implementation reviews, as well as adjustments in compliance issues, like adjustments on the RAAs etc.

Furthermore, it is expected that from the new gTLDs program a new level of competition will develop in the DNS service markets. This in itself also requires more resources for monitoring compliance of all new and old players to this development to greater competition and its impact on consumer trust.

Some ICANN activities, from my own personal perspective, are on the one hand vital for its public interest role of the technical global coordination of the DNS, on the other hand rely mostly on voluntary stakeholders, like the GNSO. In terms of ICANNs expenses this activity may look as limited, but its quality, independence and future participation has to be guaranteed over time. This upgrade and increase in activity have to be considered a growing fixed cost in terms of ICANNs expenses and projected accordingly.

Another vital activity is the compliance role (as per “ICANN inner regulator” comments). This is another public interest role that requires careful projection of expenses over time to guarantee its quality

Both, the policy development process and all what goes with it in terms of supporting AC/SOs (support for non-commercial stakeholders, GAC Secretariat, BOARD Secretariat, Accountability and Transparency reviews, etc.) as well as the compliance functions should be budgeted separately, in a bottom-up fashion and its true costs made transparent to all stakeholders. 

Furthermore, they should be charged to R&R at cost and billed independently from other contributions. This transparent and separate accounting of income and revenue for the public interest functions of ICANN should greatly increase confidence that this particularly visible and vital roles are financially guaranteed over time and to the highest standards of professionalism. The fact that today is not possible to track this expense projections over multiple years in a separate way is worrisome and cannot be just covered by the fact that ICANN is presently producing surpluses.

Similarly, it is not clear how much of the very important Outreach efforts can be attributed to those (public interest/voluntary based) functions and what other part to the development of the day to day operations.