[alac] Ombudsman report 06-264
Dear Vint, I write to update the ICANN Board of Directors on the actions of the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC) regarding the At Large Structure (ALS) application process, which was a subject of the ICANN Ombudsman's report of November 2005. In response to the Ombudsman investigation number 06-264, the ALAC would like to acknowledge and apologize for the fact that delays have been experienced in relation to the processing of ALS applications. The ALAC has been focused on a number of issues, especially the formation of the Regional At Large Organizations over the past spring and summer, and has not focused as closely on the ALS application process as, in retrospect, it should have. Also, with no disrespect meant towards our temporary staff support contractor, we have not had an Executive Director in place in the last four months, since the end of May. To summarize the attached material that follows, long-delayed ALS applications were processed by the end of September 2006. The ALAC conducted a vote during the period of 21 September 2006 at 12 noon and though 27 September 2006 at 12 noon ((GMT)) in order to process applications that were suffering delays. In addition, there are currently fourteen outstanding applications; the oldest was received in mid-July. ALAC regional advice is being sought, and another election will be held in the next two weeks. The new vote will process all applications received by 2006-10-01. Furthermore, a timetable for processing ALS applications was approved by the ALAC at its 5 October teleconference meeting. It is attached below, but ALAC would like to stress that much of the administrative work and due diligence within the timeline must be done by ICANN staff, over which ALAC has no control. In addition, new offline and online tools have been developed to help keep things more organized and on track. Also, and with reference to the related investigation 05-1090, the ALAC would like to inform that Board that ALS votes are now being conducted by the changes to the bylaws made in December 2005 (http://alac.icann.org/announcements/announcement-07dec05.htm) and that this change is working well. In addition, the ALAC would like to inform the Board and the Ombudsman that minimum participation requirements criteria for ALAC members are being finalized, and will be submitted to the Board by 2006-10-20. In the future, the members of the ALAC have committed to review ALS applications on a regular basis. In order to keep the important focus on the processing of ALS applications, the ALAC commits to discuss the status of all open ALS applications during the monthly telephone conferences or in-person meetings. The members of the ALAC appreciate the efforts of the Ombudsman and the interest expressed by members of the ICANN Board on this important process. Respectfully submitted, Annette Muehlberg ALAC Chair Additional Information The Ombudsman has asked ALAC to complete the entire process--application to notification of results--within three months. We believe this is enough time. However, it takes the ALAC a certain time to do our job and the rest is really out of our hands at the ICANN staff level. We can propose a 3-month timeline inclusive of both staff and committee work but the only thing we can really control ourselves is our 7.5-week period. Here are several recent examples where delays were experienced that were out of ALAC's control: --When an organization applies to become an ALS, it sends its application to an ICANN mail distribution list. The list is supposed to include ALAC staff and all ALAC members. It became apparent that not all ALAC members were being automatically notified that new ALS applications had arrived. ALAC asked staff to fix the mailing list but the problem continued for more than a year. In June 2006, thanks to the efforts of one of our committee members, ALAC learned that indeed only some members of the ALAC were included on this mailing list. Newer members-- back over a year and a half-- had never been added to the mailing list and were not being sent notification when new ALS applications arrived. This problem has now been fixed by ICANN staff, but not until Sept 21 2006. Before this time, it is a simple fact that not all ALAC members were notified that a new application had been received. If all of ALAC is not notified that a new application has been received, ALAC can't provide oversight of staff. --On July 17, 2006, staff received application number 60. Staff did not complete and distribute a due diligence form until September 20, two months later. Often, due diligence forms have taken staff a long time to complete. --On September 21, ALAC began a weeklong voting period on eleven applications. On Sunday Sept 24, Staff pointed out to the ALAC Chair and the Vice-Chair for Structures that the election was statistically decided, even though not all ALAC members had yet voted. On Sunday, it was clear to staff and the Chair and Vice-chair that some applications would result in non-certification. On Weds Sept 27, the vote ended. Within 32 minutes of the close, staff informed the Chair and Vice-chair that no public announcement of the results should take place until Denise Michel could approve letters to the affected organizations. The Vice-chair was uncomfortable with an open-ended timeframe and suggested to staff that the delay should be no more than 48 hours, suggesting close of business Friday for the public announcement. Signoff was not achieved within that time period. No further word until eight days later, 5 October, when the Vice-chair noticed that the alac.icann.org website had been updated to reflect the new ALS's, although the ALAC Chair herself had not yet been given clearance to announce the results on the public ALAC list or the ALAC-controlled icannalac.org website. When this fact was pointed out on the alac-admin listserv, staff notified ALAC members that the letters to the ALS's had already been sent. Copies were then distributed to ALAC members. ALAC was not given a chance to review the contents of the acceptance or rejection letters before they were distributed, even though they went out under ALAC's name, ALAC has approved, in its meeting by teleconference on 2006-10-05, a timetable for processing ALS applications (see below). Staff adherence to these deadlines is out of ALAC's control. Week 1 (1 week) STAFF Step 1 Application received by ALS list Step 2 Applicant sent notice that ALS application was received Step 2.1 Translate or transcribe application if needed. Step 2.2 Post on ICANN website Weeks 2-3 (2 weeks) STAFF Step 3 Due Diligence Period begins. Step 3.1 Due Diligence Period ends. Step 4 Completed Due Diligence form handoff to ALAC Chair and region. Week 4-7 (4 weeks) ALAC Step 4.1 Regional caucus and recommendations due Week 8-9 (2 weeks) ALAC Step 4.2 Question period from other regions on the application. Answers. Week 10 ALAC Step 5 Vote on application begins. Week 11 ALAC and STAFF Step 5.1 Vote on application ends. Step 5.2 Staff and Chair certify vote. Step 6 Letters of Acceptance or Rejection are prepared by staff. ALAC is given the opportunity to sign-off on the letters before they are sent. Step 7 Notify applicant of decision. Step 8 Announce results to public list. Week 12 STAFF Step 9 Newly-certified ALS's are sent support materials. We would also like the Board and Ombudsman to know that we have recently improved the tools that help us keep the process moving: --As of this summer, Staff created and is regularly updating a process tracking spreadsheet with the following information on each applicant. Region Group / Date of Application Email Confirmation Due Due Diligence Deadline ALAC Review Deadline ALAC Vote Deadline ALAC Notification Deadline This document is distributed to ALAC as milestones are updated. --ALAC now (October) has a one-stop web repository for all open applications and their Due Diligence forms. The password-protected online repository makes it much easier for ALAC to find and consider relevant documents, rather than searching through old emails to find the correct attachments. --ALAC has now successfully completed two elections using a secure online voting tool. Each ALAC member is sent an individual code prior to the vote, and a URL where the votes may be recorded. Email confirmation of the votes is sent to the voter as well as Staff and the ALAC Chair and Vice-chair. All three log the results and then compute and compare them at the end of the voting period in order to certify the election. This process is very easy on both the ALAC and Staff, as compared with the former email-only method of voting. Attachment:
In response to the Ombuds.doc |