Dear SSR2 Review Team members, For your reference, the Operating Standards for Specific Reviews are available here: https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/operating-standards-specific-rev.... As a reminder and as discussed on the call last week, the Operating Standards were adopted by the ICANN Board on 23 June 2019. As the SSR2 Review was already in progress when the Operating Standards were adopted, the team may choose whether it wishes to operate under the Operating Standards. Below is a cut and paste of the section in the document related to review recommendations (see page 26), as requested on the call last week. Please let us know if you have further questions. 4.1 Recommendations Review team members are empowered to formulate recommendations based on their research and evaluation of facts. The review team is expected to use all reasonably available information to provide answers, solutions, and recommendations to the issues, problems, and questions raised within the scope of the review. The review team is encouraged to provide context, inputs received, and overview of relevant discussions as they pertain to each of the recommendations. The review team should state each finding clearly and the corresponding recommendation. To help assure effective implementation and long-lasting improvements, the review team is expected to address all issues raised in the scope and provide specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound (SMART) recommendations based on fact-based findings. The review team is strongly encouraged to lay out problems it discovered and explain how its recommendations will address these, leading to substantive improvements. To facilitate the eventual implementation of its recommendations, the review team shall include, wherever possible, relevant metrics and applicable key performance indicators (KPIs) that could be applied to assess the implementation of each of its recommendations. To assure the feasibility and usefulness of its recommendations, the review team shall consult with ICANN organization and Board in addition to its community-wide outreach. An open and transparent exchange between the review team, subject matter experts, ICANN organization, ICANN Board must occur so that the identified problems, the recommended solutions, and the expected impact of implementation is clearly defined and well understood by all. The review team shall take into consideration the expected impact of implementation on ICANN resources and on the ICANN community workload. Also, the review team should consider whether there is sufficient community capacity and expertise to ensure successful implementation. These considerations should not limit the number of recommendations a review team may issue. Recommendations shall address specific problems as identified by the review team. Review teams are encouraged to categorize each recommendation as ‘high priority’, ‘medium priority’, or ‘low priority’, as a useful guideline for the planning of the implementation work, as prescribed in the Bylaws (Section 4.6 (a) (vii) (A)). Best, Jennifer -- Jennifer Bryce MSSI Associate Project Manager Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: jennifer.bryce@icann.org Skype: jennifer.bryce.icann www.icann.org