Many thanks Marika.  This is extremely helpful.  I do note that the guidelines state the following in Section 3.5:

 

“If there are recommendations to be implemented from the final CCWG outputs, an
Implementation Review Team (IRT) should be formed comprised, at minimum, of ICANN
staff and volunteers from each of the Chartering Organizations, and preferably including
members from the CCWG. Recommendations should be implemented collaboratively
and iteratively to ensure that the implementation matches the CCWG’s intent. Except in
extraordinary circumstances, the proposed implementation plan should be published
for public comment.”

 

 

 

This document may provide some further insights into the expected operation of CCWGs: https://gnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/file/field-file-attach/2016-12/uniform-framework-principles-recommendations-16sep16-en.pdf (A Uniform Framework of Principles and Recommendations for Cross Community Working Groups (CCWG). Note that these principles foresee that if an CCWG IRT is necessary, this should be recommended and communicated to the Chartering Organizations. In the case of the new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG, it seems it was left to the Board to indicate whether involvement of a CCWG IRT would be necessary.

 

Best regards,

 

Marika

 

Thanks Marika.  For some reason I thought the Chartering Organizations had adopted the procedures specified in the PDP Manual but perhaps I am wrong about that.  Could you please share more information regarding your reference to the “CCWG Implementation Team”?  Is that a team that is composed outside the GNSO processes?

Thank you,

Anne

 

 

 

Anne, please note that this provision is from the PDP manual which is specific to the GNSO policy development process. The Grant Program is the result of recommendations that were developed by a Cross-Community Working Group, not a PDP. The new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG Final Report did note that “The ICANN Board is expected to share the outcome of its consideration with the CCWG Chartering Organizations and, if deemed necessary, involve the Chartering Organizations and/or CCWG implementation team in any deliberations that would benefit from Chartering Organization and/or CCWG implementation team input”. 

 

I hope this is helpful.

 

Best regards,

 

Marika

 

Many thanks, Emily.  It would be great if Council members could get a calendar invitation for this December 1 webinar.   (Didn’t see a calendar invitation at the linked page.)

 

This might also be a good “guinea pig” topic for the SPS Discussion on the Role of GNSO Council in Implementation of policy as the ICANN Grant Program moves forward.  Annex 2 to the Operating Procedures describes that role in Section 14.

 

14. GNSO Council Role in Implementation

Upon a final decision of the Board adopting the GNSO PDP policy, the Board may, as appropriate, give

authorization or direction to ICANN staff to work with the GNSO Council to create an implementation

plan based upon the implementation recommendations identified in the Final Report, and to implement

the policy in as timely a fashion as possible. The GNSO Council must direct the creation of an

Implementation Review Team (IRT) to assist staff in developing the implementation details for the

policy, unless in exceptional circumstances the GNSO Council determines that an IRT is not required

(e.g. if another IRT is already in place that could appropriately deal with the PDP recommendations.

However, in such case the membership of the IRT will need to be reviewed to ensure that adequate

expertise and representation is present to take on the implementation of the additional PDP

recommendations). In its Final Report, the PDP Team should provide recommendations to the GNSO

Council on whether an Implementation Review Team should be established and any other

recommendations deemed appropriate in relation to such an Implementation Review Team (e.g.

composition).

ICANN staff should inform the GNSO of its proposed implementation of a new GNSO recommended

policy. If the proposed implementation is considered inconsistent with the GNSO

recommendations, the GNSO Council may notify the Board and request that the Board review the

proposed implementation. Until the Board has considered the GNSO Council request, ICANN staff

should refrain from implementing the policy, although it may continue developing the details of the

proposed implementation while the Board considers the GNSO Council request.

 

Thank you,

Anne

 

 

 

Dear all,

 

The webinar mentioned in my email below will take place on 1 December 2022 at 15:00 UTC. Please see this ICANN Announcement for further details: https://www.icann.org/en/announcements/details/register-for-the-icann-grant-program-implementation-update-webinar-17-11-2022-en.

 

Kind regards,
Emily

 

 

Hi Anne,

 

Thanks for your question regarding the October announcement that ICANN org provided an update to the ICANN Board regarding its development of the Preliminary Design and Implementation Plan for the ICANN Grant Program. It is my understanding that the org team leading this work will soon be announcing a community webinar in which they will present to the community the latest thinking on the preliminary design and implementation plan. The details of the webinar will be circulated widely, including the chartering organizations for the CCWG.

 

The staff support team will continue to share any additional updates with Council as they become available.

 

Kind regards,

Emily

 

 

Many thanks, Sebastien.  Jeff has covered the ICANN announcement on what ICANN Org is calling “Sub Pro Work Track 6” in a separate email which I have forwarded to the list. 

 

As to the “ICANN Grant Program”, I was a participant in the CCWG Auction Proceeds work and ended up being the CSG appointed voting rep on the Final Report when Marilyn Cade stepped down.  My specific question re the ICANN Announcement on its new “ICANN Grant Program” was whether the report delivered by Org to the Board in mid-October is available to the community and to the GNSO specifically.  One reason for this is that there were different methods of establishing the grant program that were summarized in the Final Report from our CCWG Auction Proceeds.   It would be good to know which method was recommended to the Board by ICANN Org taking into account the results of the policy work that was reflected in the Final Report.  It would also be good to know whether there is or is not a recommendation for ODP since Xavier had mentioned this was a possibility in one webinar on Auction Proceeds.  So I guess you would say this is of interest to the GNSO Council given that it relates to implementation work.  And I think there is a transparency interest in making the ICANN Org report to the Board available to the Community.

 

Marika is quite familiar with all the deliberations and may herself have access to this “ICANN Grant Program” report to the Board but my question is whether the Community and Council have access to the report to the Board.  That seems to me to be an appropriate topic for Council but since I am new, I wanted to run the topic by Leadership – just saw your answer.  Perhaps Marika can shed light on this topic?

 

Thank you!

Anne

 

 

 

Hi Anne,

 

Thank you for your question regarding Sub Pro Work Track 6 Outreach and the Auction Grant Program Report and whether these belong on the Council’s agenda for discussion. In general, items that are included in the agenda, are those that fit within the Council’s role as a manager of the policy development process, and/or items for which the Council is expected to take a decision or action either at that meeting or in the near future. Although the two items you listed are the result of previous actions of the GNSO Council (SubPro PDP and new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG), it does not seem that there is any immediate action expected on these topics from a Council perspective. Of course, if you, or other Council members have identified aspects of these issues that you do believe warrant Council attention, it would be good to identify these and share these with the Council so it can be decided whether these should be included in the agenda for an upcoming meeting. 

 

I would also like to encourage you and others to make use of the Council mailing list to share information or point to communications that you think the Council should be aware of – not everything may require time on the Council agenda, but it may nevertheless be of interest to share. This may also be a good opportunity to remind Council members of the anticipated topics for upcoming Council meetings google doc (see https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FSNlAHTjbWAzKcfltI7SWwzXda1NtKxfQ2k-t0oiGr8/edit#heading=h.unjpfxy4jex9 [docs.google.com]) that can be used to suggest topics that you think warrant time on a future Council meeting agenda.   

 

Kindly,

 

 

 

 

 

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.

 

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.

 

This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If the reader of this message or an attachment is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message or attachment to the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this message or any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender. The information transmitted in this message and any attachments may be privileged, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipients, and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §2510-2521.