[council] Fwd: Adoption of GNSO Review Recommendations

["James M. Bladel" <jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Council, FYI.  This topic is on our Discussion agenda today.

Thank you,

J.
____________
James Bladel
GoDaddy

Begin forwarded message:

From: Rinalia Abdul Rahim 
<rinalia.abdulrahim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:rinalia.abdulrahim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Date: June 30, 2016 at 06:49:25 GMT+3
To: jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:jbladel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: heather.forrest@xxxxxxxxxx<mailto:heather.forrest@xxxxxxxxxx>, 
Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:Donna.Austin@xxxxxxxxxxx>,  
marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:marika.konings@xxxxxxxxx>, 
Glen@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:Glen@xxxxxxxxx>, 
gnso-secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:gnso-secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,  
Board-ops-team@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:Board-ops-team@xxxxxxxxx>, 
Effectiveness-comm@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:Effectiveness-comm@xxxxxxxxx>,  Rinalia 
Abdul Rahim <rinalia.abdulrahim@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:rinalia.abdulrahim@xxxxxxxxx>>
Subject: Adoption of GNSO Review Recommendations

Dear James and Members of the GNSO Council,

I am pleased to share with you the ICANN Board Resolution from its meeting on 
25 June 2016 
(https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-2016-06-25-en).  As 
I mentioned during the GNSO Council meeting this week, the Board has approved 
the adoption of 34 out of 36 recommendations from the GNSO Review.  The 
resolution outlines the next steps regarding the development of the 
Implementation Plan for the adopted recommendations.  For ease of reference, I 
paste the relevant sections below.

Please let me know if you have any questions.  My committee looks forward to 
working with you and the GNSO in the next phases of this important project of 
strengthening the effectiveness of the GNSO.

Best regards,

Rinalia Abdul Rahim
Chair, Organizational Effectiveness Committee of the ICANN Board (OEC)



  1.
Independent Review of the Generic Names Supporting Organization Final Report 
and Recommendations

Whereas, ICANN Bylaws Article IV, Section 
4.1<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en#IV-4> calls on 
the ICANN Board to "cause a periodic review of the performance and operation of 
each Supporting Organization, each Supporting Organization Council, each 
Advisory Committee (other than the Governmental Advisory Committee), and the 
Nominating Committee by an entity or entities independent of the organization 
under review. The goal of the review, to be undertaken pursuant to such 
criteria and standards as the Board shall direct, shall be to determine (i) 
whether that organization has a continuing purpose in the ICANN structure, and 
(ii) if so, whether any change in structure or operations is desirable to 
improve its effectiveness."

Whereas, the second independent review of the GNSO 
<https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/org/gnso#gnso2-2014-2015> commenced in 
2014.

Whereas, the independent examiner that conducted the GNSO Review produced a 
Draft 
Report<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/gnso-review-draft-29may15-en.pdf>
 [PDF, 2.5 MB] that was published for public 
comment<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-review-draft-2015-06-01-en> 
in May 2015.

Whereas, the independent examiner produced a Final 
Report<https://www.icann.org/zh/system/files/files/gnso-review-final-summary-15sep15-en.pdf>
 [PDF, 727 KB], containing thirty-six (36) recommendations in September 2015.

Whereas, the GNSO Review Working Party serving as a liaison between the GNSO, 
the independent examiner and the Organizational Effectiveness Committee of the 
Board assessed the implementation feasibility of all 36 recommendations and 
suggested a prioritization of recommendations.

Whereas, the GNSO Council adopted the GNSO Working Party's Feasibility and 
Prioritization Analysis of the GNSO Review Recommendations with a modification.

Whereas, the Organizational Effectiveness Committee of the Board concluded that 
the GNSO Working Party's Feasibility and Prioritization Analysis of the GNSO 
Review Recommendations as adopted by the GNSO Council, ought to guide the 
implementation process of the 36 recommendations.

Resolved (2016.06.25.10), the Board acknowledges the independent examiner's 
hard work and thanks them for producing a comprehensive set of recommendations 
to improve the GNSO's effectiveness, transparency, and accountability.

Resolved (2016.06.25.11), the Board acknowledges the work and support of the 
GNSO Review Working Party during the review process, as well as its insightful 
Feasibility and Prioritization Analysis that was 
adopted<http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/resolutions#201604> by the GNSO 
Council on 14 April 2016 and guided the OEC's recommendation to the Board. The 
Board thanks the GNSO Review Working Party for its efforts.

Resolved (2016.06.25.12), the Board accepts the Final Report from the 
independent examiner.

Resolved (2016.06.25.13), taking into account the GNSO Working Party's 
Feasibility and Prioritization Analysis of the GNSO Review Recommendations, 
adopted with modifications by the GNSO Council, the Board adopts thirty-four 
(34) recommendations of the Final Report (i.e. all recommendations excluding 
recommendations 23 and 32).

Resolved (2016.06.25.14), the Board requests that the GNSO Council convene a 
group that oversees the implementation of Board-accepted recommendations. An 
implementation plan, containing a realistic timeline for the implementation, 
definition of desired outcomes and a way to measure current state as well as 
progress toward the desired outcome, shall be submitted to the Board as soon as 
possible, but no later than six (6) months after the adoption of this 
resolution.

Resolved (2016.06.25.15), the Board directs the GNSO Council to provide the 
Board with regular reporting on the implementation efforts.

Rationale for Resolutions 2016.06.25.10 – 2016.06.25.15

To ensure ICANN's multistakeholder model remains transparent and accountable, 
and to improve its performance, ICANN organizes independent reviews of its 
supporting organizations and advisory committees as prescribed in Article IV 
Section 4.1<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en#IV-4> of 
the ICANN Bylaws. The second GNSO Review started in 2014 and the independent 
examiner presented its Final Report in September 2015.

The Board's action today is consistent with ICANN's commitment pursuant to 
section 9.1 of the Affirmation of Commitments (AoC) to maintain and improve 
robust mechanisms for public input, accountability, and transparency so as to 
ensure that the outcomes of its decision-making reflect the public interest and 
that ICANN is accountable to all stakeholders.

The GNSO Review recommendations have the potential to advance ICANN's 
transparency and accountability objectives and have been considered carefully 
by the Board's Organizational Effectiveness Committee as well as by the full 
Board.

The Board resolution will have a positive impact on ICANN and especially the 
GNSO as it reinforces ICANN's and the GNSO's commitment to maintaining and 
improving its accountability, transparency and organizational effectiveness.

Development of implementation steps for the Board-adopted GNSO Review 
recommendations is not expected to have a considerable budgetary impact on the 
organization. However, implementation work may necessitate certain expenditures 
(including staff support) and may require a significant commitment of volunteer 
time. Volunteer workload and ICANN resources will be considered during the 
implementation planning and prioritization.

Why is the Board addressing the issue?

This resolution completes the second review of the GNSO and is based on the 
Final Report of the independent examiner, Westlake Governance, as well as the 
GNSO Review Working Party's assessment of the recommendations as adopted by the 
GNSO Council. Following the assessment of all pertinent documents and community 
feedback by the Board's Organizational Effectiveness Committee, the Board is 
now in a position to consider and act on the recommendations and instruct the 
GNSO to start the implementation process in due course.

What is the proposal being considered?

The proposal the Board is considering is the Final Report by the GNSO Review's 
independent examiner in combination with "GNSO Review Working Party's 
Feasibility and Prioritization Analysis of the GNSO Review Recommendations", 
adopted by the GNSO Council, and considered by the Organizational Effectiveness 
Committee.

What significant materials did the Board review?

The Board reviewed the independent examiner's GNSO Review Final 
Report<https://community.icann.org/x/lJNYAw> containing 36 recommendations; the 
Board also reviewed the "GNSO Review Working Party's Feasibility and 
Prioritization Assessment" as adopted by the GNSO Council, and it reviewed the 
considerations by the Organizational Effectiveness Committee with regard to 
both the Final Report and the Feasibility Assessment. Additionally, the Board 
considered the Report of Public 
Comments<https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/report-comments-gnso-review-draft-26aug15-en.pdf>
 [PDF, 1.58 KB] on the Independent Examiner's Initial Report as well as the 
overview of 
changes<https://community.icann.org/display/GR2/Final+Report+of+Independent+Examiner?preview=/56136596/56138662/GNSO%20Review%20Recommendations%20-%20changes%20from%20Draft%20to%20Final%20Report.pdf>
 [PDF, 114 KB] that took place from the Initial to the Final Report as a result 
of this community feedback.

Are there fiscal impacts or ramifications on ICANN (strategic plan, operating 
plan, or budget)?

The work to improve the effectiveness of the GNSO organization may require 
additional resources beyond those included in the Board-approved FY17 Operating 
Plan and Budget, when adopted. This determination depends on the implementation 
planning and the definition of desired outcomes and prioritization. 
Additionally, implementation work should serve as an input into the next 
strategic planning cycle.

Are there any security, stability or resiliency issues relating to the DNS?

This action is not expected to have a direct impact on the security, stability 
or resiliency of the DNS. Still, once the improvements are implemented future 
policy-development will become more transparent and accountable, which in turn 
might indirectly impact the security, stability or resiliency of the DNS in a 
positive way.

Is public comment required prior to Board action?

A Public 
Comment<https://www.icann.org/public-comments/gnso-review-draft-2015-06-01-en> 
was opened following the publication of the Draft Report in May 2015. As this 
is a result of a Bylaw-mandated organizational review, public comment is not 
necessary prior to implementation. It is important to note that throughout the 
GNSO Review process there has been extensive discussion and exchange of ideas 
and information between the independent examiner, the GNSO Review Working 
Party, the GNSO community and the ICANN Board.