Dear Lars, here we go with the real number. I have a slightly higher total now, of about 11,4 million. Does not change my comments a lot though. Calculation are in page 2 of the spreadsheet attached. Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez _____________________ email: carlosraulg@gmail.com Skype: carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 (cel) +506 4000 2000 (home) +506 2290 3678 (fax) _____________________ Apartado 1571-1000 San Jose, COSTA RICA
On Apr 28, 2015, at 10:11 AM, Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann@icann.org> wrote:
that’s great – thank you so much, Carlos. Please let me know if I can assist in any other way. Lars
From: "Carlos Raúl Gutierrez (carlosraulg@gmail.com <mailto:carlosraulg@gmail.com>)" <carlosraulg@gmail.com <mailto:carlosraulg@gmail.com>> Date: Tuesday, 28 April 2015 18:10 To: Lars HOFFMANN <lars.hoffmann@icann.org <mailto:lars.hoffmann@icann.org>> Subject: Re: [GNSO-budgetreview] Budget Information
Great
with excel I can prepare a better table, and compare with the other SO/ACs
you will get it by the end of my business day or the draft
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez _____________________
email: carlosraulg@gmail.com <mailto:carlosraulg@gmail.com> Skype: carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 (cel) +506 4000 2000 (home) +506 2290 3678 (fax) _____________________ Apartado 1571-1000 San Jose, COSTA RICA
On Apr 28, 2015, at 9:21 AM, Lars Hoffmann <lars.hoffmann@icann.org <mailto:lars.hoffmann@icann.org>> wrote:
Carlos – just a quick private note. I found the .xls documents (below). And to let you know that the increase to 10.9 is mianly due to the policy budget now including the community travel budget. Which was separate before. There is no figure that we could find for the FY15 community travel budget, but it is in the region of 2.5 million meaning that the net increase to policy was less than you assumed in the email to the group. Best wishes. Lars
Draft FY16 Operating Plan & Budget [PDF <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-opplan-budget-fy16-18ma...>, 26 MB] [DOCX <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-opplan-budget-fy16-docx...>, 2.8 MB] FY16 Projects by project [PDF <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-opplan-budget-portfolio...>, 573 KB] [XLSX <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/proposed-opplan-budget-portfolio...>, 79 KB]
From: "Carlos Raúl Gutierrez (carlosraulg@gmail.com <mailto:carlosraulg@gmail.com>)" <carlosraulg@gmail.com <mailto:carlosraulg@gmail.com>> Date: Tuesday, 28 April 2015 16:40 To: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@icann.org <mailto:Glen@icann.org>>, Lars HOFFMANN <lars.hoffmann@icann.org <mailto:lars.hoffmann@icann.org>>, Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com <mailto:jonathan.robinson@ipracon.com>>, David Olive <david.olive@icann.org <mailto:david.olive@icann.org>> Cc: "gnso-budgetreview@icann.org <mailto:gnso-budgetreview@icann.org>" <gnso-budgetreview@icann.org <mailto:gnso-budgetreview@icann.org>>, Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: Re: [GNSO-budgetreview] Budget Information
FY16 Budget
Dear Councillors
The good news is that we are really cheap to support!
It is difficult to analyse numbers out of pdf, instead of spreadsheets. But let me I’ve you an overview of what I see in the first look since Staff has not been able to access the data in spreadsheet format for the time being.
ICANNs Operating Expenses have increased by almost 12% from FY15 (from 101 to 113 million, excluding non recurring items)
Half of the increase ($6 million) is related to hiring in FY15 and FY16, Nevertheless form the documents the increase for SO/AC support staff is not obvious
Out of this overall figure, only one single line can be directly attributed to Policy, as you can see in section 1.1 of the presentation: SO/AC Policy & Engagement with and amount of $10.6 million
This line has increased by almost 28% from FY15 (from 8,3 to 10,6 million)
Still, it represent only 9,4% of the total Operation Expense Budgeted for FY 16 (vs. 8,2% in FY15)
Then we can go to the second document, that has no reference to the FY15 numbers, which was the original question in the Council.
If we go to the objective #1 (Future Globalized ICANN) and look under GOAL 3 Evolve and further globalise ICANN we find a similar figure, but not exactly the same one as per above of $10.9 million, but at least somewhat higher….
Out of this $10.9 million dedicated to SO/ACs, only $ 6.5 million can be directly attributed to specific support for SO/ACs (i.e. 5.8%), the rest being distributed mainly over the year for supporting all SO/AC to participate in the 3 yearly meetings meetings for a total of $4.5 million. Yes f2f meetings are expensive.
Out of the 5.8% of operating expenses dedicated to support all SO/ACs, I would consider that $1.5 million are Overhead for all SO/ACs (Budget lines 31481-31485, including Effectiveness Program, Budget managing, Communications and General Management)
So we are left with $5.0 million for direct support of all SO/ACs, of which the GNSO gets directly assigned the Lions share, with $1.3 million, or, in percentage a full percentage point of ICANNs operating expenses!!!! 1,15% to be exact, without the travel support lines of course.
Now drilling further down, the $1,3 million are spread between a global charge of $0,5 million for Policy Development Support (Budget line 31429), and then unevenly distributed charges of $100,000 some, and $0 the others for a total of 12 projects (both pep, non-pdp) Not sure if this list covers all policy development lines presently liste in the GNSO web page, but without a spreadsheet, it is quite difficult to make the comparison. The level of summarisation does not allow to go deeper into the actual cost of policy development.
My personal take is what many of us would have assumed even before seeing the numbers, that Policy Development in ICANN is almost a 100% voluntary activity by "the Community", supported by a great, professional and dedicated staff, but pretty small in numbers and costs to the Organisation. And independently of the amounts involved, it is also my very personal view, that in the same spirit of internal checks and balances, and as it has been suggested the IANA functions should become a separate division, Policy Development (independently if it is bundled together with all SO/ACs or not) deserves a better organisational and structural separation, including the budgeting process, in the same lines Senators Thune and Rubio have already suggested.
Just looking at the number once a year is not enough and with such marginal amounts, I doubt it is of great value to further make a FY15 vs FY16 comparison at this stage.
Cheers
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez _____________________
email: carlosraulg@gmail.com <mailto:carlosraulg@gmail.com>
Skype: carlos.raulg +506 8837 7176 (cel) +506 4000 2000 (home) +506 2290 3678 (fax) _____________________ Apartado 1571-1000 San Jose, COSTA RICA
On Apr 24, 2015, at 12:58 PM, Glen de Saint Géry <Glen@icann.org <mailto:Glen@icann.org>> wrote:
Sent on behalf of Lars Hoffmann
On 24/04/2015 18:28, "Lars Hoffmann" <lars.hoffmann@icann.org <mailto:lars.hoffmann@icann.org>> wrote:
Dear all,
As the 1 May deadline for public comments to the draft FY16 Budget is approaching, I hope you don't mind me reaching out again. You might recall that Jonathan Robinson had suggested to complete a document today to sent to the GNSO list so that the Council can discuss on list before 1 May. Of course, this is a very busy time- and so to facilitate your work, staff has looked at the FY16 budget and extracted a few items that, for the purpose of providing comment on the FY16 proposal, could be relevant to the GNSO Council. A summary document is attached. This is thought as a starting point for your discussion and might potential serve as the basis for a document to be then circulated to the whole Council.
Please let me know if there is anything else you might need at this point, such as organising a call for you early next week.
Many thanks and very best wishes, Lars
PS: Please note that figures appearing in this document are taken directly from the proposed FY 16 Budget plan that is open for public comment. Links to allrelevant documents are included in the attachment.
On 20/04/2015 15:57, "Lars Hoffmann" <lars.hoffmann@icann.org <mailto:lars.hoffmann@icann.org>> wrote:
Dear all,
I just wanted to let you know that in case you need any help/assistance in your work, I would be very happy to assist where I can. As a start, I could try and get someone from the Finance Department involved so we have a contact person for possible questions, as per Carlos¹ suggestion. Setting up calls and doing some of the initial drafting would also be a possibility.
Very best wishes, Lars
--- Lars Hoffmann Policy Specialist
ICANN | Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers 6 Rond Point Schuman | 1040 Brussels, Belgium | www.icann.org <http://www.icann.org/>
lars.hoffmann@icann.org <mailto:lars.hoffmann@icann.org> | +32 491 507680
<Budget Background Information.doc>_______________________________________________ gnso-budgetreview mailing list gnso-budgetreview@icann.org <mailto:gnso-budgetreview@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-budgetreview <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-budgetreview>
participants (1)
-
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez