Rudolph - such guidance will have to be written by the ‘implementation team’. This team will follow our work and will translate our decisions/guidance/guidelines into concrete operational processes.

Kind regards,
Erika 

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 21, 2019, at 1:39 AM, Rudolph Daniel <rudi.daniel@gmail.com> wrote:

If there are comprehensive guidelines published to assist applicants, this would negate much of the disagreements.
It is impossible to please everyone. Even underserved communities can have good grant writers.

 Providing "meaningful" feedback on proposals is very subjective and is in my opinion a very slippery slope.

RD

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019, 17:08 Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
As Sylvia pointed out, it may not be possible to tell them what the issue was, as there may have been disagreements among the evaluations. And there may be just a shortage of funds at the time even if the application was "good enough".

Project evaluation is a very subjective issue and we must not pretend that it is not.

Providing feedback may be a good way to raise disputes!

I agree with John that if we think not knowing how to apply properly" is an issue, cover that up front and not during a rejection.

All of that being said, we may well want to treat relatively small grants differently than those that will be in the multi-million $.

Alan

At 20/08/2019 04:42 PM, 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.

Maureen

On Mon, 19 Aug 2019, 9:30 PM Sylvia Cadena, <sylvia@apnic.net> wrote:

The text below is ok, however, it is important to reiterate this should be observed independently of the mechanism selected. Maybe worth mentioning that if the mechanism A is selected, there may be other traditional ICANN practices/mechanisms that will not be applicable -not only the IRP- but that will be for the implementation phase to review and analyse.

 

I also think the recommendation should not limit the feedback to the reason why they were not selected, as in some cases providing those reasons is not as simple to explain. Feedback to applicants about how to improve for future applications, feedback about what were the stronger parts or their proposal, feedback about the weakest part of the proposal, of funding availability are common ways to provide that feedback. Sometimes the committee can’t agree and a proposal doesn’t have full support but those discussions are not made public. 

 

Regards,

 

Sylvia

 

________________________________________________________________________

 

Sylvia Cadena | APNIC Foundation - Head of Programs | sylvia@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.

 

 

From: Ccwg-auctionproceeds < ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org >
Date: Tuesday, 20 August 2019 at 2:54 am
To: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca >, " ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" < ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>, Becky Burr <BBurr@hwglaw.com>, Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com >, "erika@erikamann.com" <erika@erikamann.com>
Cc: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] For your review - updated proposal for individual appeals mechanism

 

Dear All,

 

Thank you all for your input. Hereby the current language of the draft Final Report which already addressed the point of the existing accountability mechanism with added in bold and brackets new language which aims to reflect the input received to date:

 

The CCWG discussed whether an appeals mechanism should be available for applicant not selected and/but agreed that [this would create a level of complexity that was deemed not desirable or necessary, after having reviewed how other organizations deal with appeals. Instead, it is the expectation that applicants not selected would receive feedback as part of the response to their application outlining the reasons for why their application was not selected. Also, in the context of the regular review of the mechanisms, both selected applicants and non-selected applicants should be invited to participate and provide any feedback they may have on how the program can be further improved]. The CCWG did agree that appropriate measures should be taken that would exclude applicants from using ICANN accountability measures such as IRP. The reason for this recommendation is that the Board decision in this context would be in relation to the disbursement of funds based on the recommendations of the independent evaluation panel and not as a result of the ICANN’s Board assessment of an individual application. This should not necessarily prevent applicants from seeking redress through other means as defined by the mechanism responsible for disbursement of auction proceeds.

 

CCWG Recommendation #NEW: Applicants should not have access to ICANN accountability mechanisms such as IRP to challenge a decision from the independent evaluation panel to not approve their application, but applicants [not selected should receive feedback as part of the response to their application outlining the reasons for why their application was not selected] have a mechanism available that allows them to provide additional clarifications to the independent evaluation panel or flag if it is believed that something in the application was misunderstood or missed. 

 

This will be on the agenda for Wednesday’s meeting so if you have any concerns about the proposed edits, please share these in advance of Wednesday’s meeting.

 

Best regards,

 

Marika

 

From: Ccwg-auctionproceeds < ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca >
Date: Monday, August 19, 2019 at 10:22
To: " ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" < ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>, Becky Burr <BBurr@hwglaw.com>, Judith Hellerstein <judith@jhellerstein.com >, "erika@erikamann.com" <erika@erikamann.com>
Cc: John R Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, " ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" < ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>
Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] For your review - updated proposal for individual appeals mechanism

 

My recollection is that we were pretty clear that the existing accountabilty mechanisms would not apply, and that it is possible that a fundamental Bylaw change would be required to do that.

Alan
--
Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos.

On August 19, 2019 12:05:18 PM EDT, Becky Burr <BBurr@hwglaw.com> wrote: 

It will be particularly important that the final report be clear
that the CCWG does not believe that ICANN’s existing accountability
mechanisms (ombuds, Reconsiderations, or IRP) should be available to
challenge an adverse grant decision.  Those mechanisms are not well
suited to this kind of situation.



From: Ccwg-auctionproceeds
<
ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Judith
Hellerstein
<judith@jhellerstein.com
>


Date: Saturday, August 17, 2019 at 9:14 PM


To: Erika Mann
<erika@erikamann.com>


Cc: John R Levine
<johnl@taugh.com>, CCWG
Auction Proceeds
<
ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>


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



Hi Erika


I agree as well. Sylvia made some excellent points. While I like the
idea of an appeals process I can see that it adds an extra layer of
complexity to the grant process



Best


Judith


Sent from my iPhone


Judith@jhellerstein.com
<
mailto:Judith@jhellerstein.com>


Skype ID:Judithhellerstein



On Aug 17, 2019, at 7:23 AM, Erika Mann
<erika@erikamann.com
<
mailto:erika@erikamann.com>> wrote:


I believe we have an agreement ... though we had such an agreement
before but then Sam thought we should reconsider our understanding ...
hopefully we can put this item to rest now.



Erika


Sent from my iPhone



On Aug 17, 2019, at 12:21 PM, Marilyn Cade
<marilynscade@hotmail.com
<
mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote:


Wow, are we seeing "general" support for no appeal
mechanism?



Perhaps we can put this sort of to 'bed'?



Add something in our documentation - discussed extensively;
considered; recommend that an appeal mechanism is not needed, and would
add unneeded complexity, and include a paragraph of explanation, so that
in the public comment process, the community commenting feels fully
informed?



From: Ccwg-auctionproceeds
<
ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org
<
mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of
Vanda Scartezini
<vanda@scartezini.org
<
mailto:vanda@scartezini.org>>


Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2019 12:12 AM


To: Rudolph Daniel
<rudi.daniel@gmail.com
<
mailto:rudi.daniel@gmail.com>>


Cc: John R Levine
<johnl@taugh.com
<
mailto:johnl@taugh.com>>; CCWG Auction Proceeds
<
ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
<
mailto:ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>>


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



Make sense to me too. I was against an appeal as I said early on
since that is the way all R&D grants here works and the independent
panel and their report make the not appeal alternative accountable to the
society. Not having appellation makes the process quicker allowing the
start up of the projects while it makes sense due the development of the
technology in the ICT field as is the case of DNS related issues



Vanda Scartezini


Sent from my iPad


Sorry for any typos and misspellings



On 17 Aug 2019, at 00:02, Rudolph Daniel
<rudi.daniel@gmail.com
<
mailto:rudi.daniel@gmail.com>> wrote:


"That being said, grant applicants, both accepted and rejected,
should be requested to fill out a survey with their input being used for
the annul review of the program."


End quote.



This makes a lot of sense to me, given the the independent nature of
the grant process being tabled.


The strength of the selection process should be of sufficient
integrity to forgo the additional cost of an appeals procedure which
could be quite detrimental to the expected outcome and purpose of the
grants.


My view currently is to stay away from appeal procedures of all
kinds; and fine tune the mechanisms to ensure that grant awards stay well
within pre established control lines. There are already review
mechanisms, designed to keep the process in line with ICANN's mission and
purpose. I am thinking that in the context of an independent body, and
the relative size of the fund, and the advice of others on this d list,
no appeal process is going to be "very light weight" .



I think, we should keep it out of the equation if at all possible.
Each funding call should be drafted with this in mind...


RD









On Fri, Aug 16, 2019, 22:21 Alan Greenberg
<alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca
<
mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>> wrote:


I agree with John. I do not think that we should have an appeal


process. That being said, if we MUST have one it should:



- be VERY light weight;


- there must be VERY tight time requirements for submission


- go to the manager of the selection group with the final result
being final;


- the final result being the project is accepted or still rejected.


Specifically, there should be no "reason" given (as has
recently been


suggested).



Note that we may end up rejecting perfectly good projects. But they


may not, in the view of the evaluators, have a sufficiently high


benefit:cost ration. Or we may simply have used up all of our funds


for that period on projects that were better!



As John mentions, cost is an issue. If there is an appeal process,


and the cost is minimal or zero, it will be used by pretty much


everyone who is rejected, significantly increasing the cost of the


program with little positive outcome.



That being said, grant applicants, both accepted and rejected,
should


be requested to fill out a survey with their input being used for
the


annul review of the program.



Alan




At 16/08/2019 09:46 PM, John R Levine wrote:

Are we going to just ignore the input from people who actually
run


such grant making organizations @Sylvia


Cadena<
mailto:sylvia@apnic.net
<
mailto:sylvia@apnic.net>> has weighed in on this with some


factual statements that we seem to have just glossed over?


I am a trustee of the Internet Society, where we have recently set
up


an actual captive grant making foundation with no appeal process, so


no, we are not. It's a bad idea.



R's,


John



At 15/08/2019 09:32 AM, John R Levine wrote:

Following on from the last CCWG call and the input received on
the individual


appeals mechanism, please find attached an updated proposal for your
review.


Please share any comments, concerns or suggestions you may have in
advance of


the next CCWG meeting which has been scheduled for Wednesday 21
August.


It's OK to have an appeal process but this leaves some rather
important


questions open, e.g.



* Who pays for the appeal?  Is it like UDRP where the parties
split


the cost, or


is it all ICANN?



* I expect that no matter what we say, most appeals will in fact be
applicants


who are unhappy that they didn't get funded.  Is there a way to
dispose of


obviously bogus appeals efficiently?  Obviously bogus means
things like not


identifying any process failure other than saying no.



Regards,


John Levine,
johnl@iecc.com
<
mailto:johnl@iecc.com>, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet


for Dummies",


Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail.

https://jl.ly
[jl.ly]
<
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fjl.ly&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf0335de880ab40abc37608d722c929a2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637016119694986707&sdata=V%2Bl7mZ3kPaK7iXq2Fs0CwUh%2BHrGQyWPJdLko%2BS9uoPw%3D&reserved=0
[eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]>



Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list



Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
<
mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>



https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
<
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fccwg-auctionproceeds&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf0335de880ab40abc37608d722c929a2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637016119694996718&sdata=Ixv7Nn7h%2BBb9evLTSVEP6jzYTG4KX5stLTk8Ma%2F%2Fj1w%3D&reserved=0
[eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]>



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
[icann.org]
<
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Fpolicy&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf0335de880ab40abc37608d722c929a2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637016119695006723&sdata=kRiYGP3HWbBl4zenJs4jsj32EHBVi%2FFl6BnrGAv%2FhdQ%3D&reserved=0
[eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]>) and the website Terms
of


Service
(
https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos
[icann.org]
<
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Ftos&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf0335de880ab40abc37608d722c929a2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637016119695016734&sdata=%2FqodieXY9MTAfgnU9QGi88a06AbOzHM7OjrHaTByuCI%3D&reserved=0
[eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]>). 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 list



Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
<
mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>



https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
<
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fccwg-auctionproceeds&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf0335de880ab40abc37608d722c929a2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637016119695026739&sdata=jBT%2F%2FioVe50vvEH1YOC0UQi5mTkOYZU16%2BYK1EIB8Rc%3D&reserved=0
[eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]>



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
[icann.org]
<
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Fpolicy&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf0335de880ab40abc37608d722c929a2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637016119695036744&sdata=%2BHd6PW6seoZXuxm8gLTG7wAJClmTVKJ6Cj4jVXMaizo%3D&reserved=0
[eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]>) and the website Terms
of Service
(
https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos
[icann.org]
<
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Ftos&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf0335de880ab40abc37608d722c929a2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637016119695046755&sdata=YSxHm4OjnyOYz2av7pWAPZWQpJgooA3uQ%2F1orzvor1E%3D&reserved=0
[eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]>). 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 list



Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
<
mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org>



https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds
<
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fccwg-auctionproceeds&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf0335de880ab40abc37608d722c929a2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637016119695056760&sdata=NtlalUO1dc050fATd3dglODZEUvKxKeK3lp0V8f0dH0%3D&reserved=0
[eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]>



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
[icann.org]
<
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Fpolicy&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf0335de880ab40abc37608d722c929a2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637016119695056760&sdata=2IR8vhCFj3y5hLGMGrqfkripJI4hvIQJArmPDf%2FyBE4%3D&reserved=0
[eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]>) and the website Terms
of Service
(
https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos
[icann.org]
<
https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icann.org%2Fprivacy%2Ftos&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf0335de880ab40abc37608d722c929a2%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637016119695066770&sdata=N0fQyw2PDXi1E3jJAHnCzJ3RK0XNSY7msuFz%2Fb8p6vI%3D&reserved=0
[eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com]>). 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 list



Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
<
mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@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) [icann.org] and the website
Terms of Service
(
https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). [icann.org] 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 list



Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
<
mailto:Ccwg-auctionproceeds@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) [icann.org] and the website
Terms of Service
(
https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). [icann.org] 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 list



Ccwg-auctionproceeds@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) [icann.org] and the website
Terms of Service
(
https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). [icann.org] 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 list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@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 list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@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 list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@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.