[gnso-osc-csg] RE: For Review: Task 1, Subtask 4 -- Tool Kit Recommendations

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the excellent feedack Claudio.  Please see my responses
below.
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: Claudio Di Gangi [mailto:cdigangi@xxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 4:25 PM
        To: 'Julie Hedlund'; gnso-osc-csg
        Cc: Gomes, Chuck
        Subject: RE: For Review: Task 1, Subtask 4 -- Tool Kit
Recommendations
        
        

        Dear Julie:

         

        Thanks to you & Chuck for your work on this well-drafted
document. 

         

        I have a few comments: 

         

        Can you clarify why the "Provide grants/funding for
constituencies to provide their own support" 

        service proposal was not included as a CSG WT recommendation?
        [Gomes, Chuck] Your feedback is the first we have received on
this.  I don't think we received any feedback from any of the
constituencies.  I am not opposed to adding this but we might want to
think a little more about how the funding amount would be decided.  It
wouldn't work to just leave it open ended.  Do you have any ideas in
that regard. 

          

        I note this is ranked 8th on the chart on the top of page 2.
Going back to the survey results document (Appendix C), however, I note
that it was tied for second in the number of respondents that gave it
the highest priority (5 on a 1 to 5 scale) -- 13 of 28 did so.  

         

        Since there is considerable support for this approach, my
suggestion would be to add this to the list of CSG TW recommendations. 

         

        Another reason for including it is that constituencies & SG
should not have to depend upon staff to perform functions that may be a
low priority for the staff (see recommendation 2) but important to a
particular constituency.  For example, hosting and maintaining
constituency websites is item f on the list recommendations on the
bottom of page 2. If a constituency determines that in fact this
function is an important one for which it needs support, and if staff is
not available to provide it, the constituency should be able to obtain
it from an outside source. Funds should be made available for this
purpose. 

         

        Two other comments: 

         

        The top-ranked task is "assembling background and reference
materials for working groups."  Assuming that this refers to working
groups convened by GNSO to deal with specific policy issues, this is not
a matter of constituency operations at all.  It describes an activity
that staff is already performing, and only indirectly is it part of a
toolkit offered to constituencies.  It is equally offered to any of the
participants who join a working group without a constituency
affiliation.  Perhaps I am missing something but this seems out of
place.  
        [Gomes, Chuck] I thought the same thing when I first drafted the
recommendations but Staff thought it should be included so we added it
back in.  I will let Julie comment and then we can discuss it further. 

         

        Finally, under item 1(g), "organizational recordkeeping," I
suggest adding a reference to financial records.  Keeping the
constituency's books could be a useful service for the staff to perform.
        [Gomes, Chuck] I am fine with that. 

         

        Hope the group finds these comments helpful, thanks for
considering them.

         

        Claudio

         

        
________________________________


        From: owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-osc-csg@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Julie Hedlund
        Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 9:21 AM
        To: gnso-osc-csg
        Cc: Chuck Gomes
        Subject: [gnso-osc-csg] For Review: Task 1, Subtask 4 -- Tool
Kit Recommendations

         

        Dear Work Team members:
        
        Attached for your review is a draft of recommendations (in Word
and .pdf) for elements to be included in a tool kit of services for
Constituencies and Stakeholder Groups.  These also are posted to the
wiki at:
https://st.icann.org/icann-osc/index.cgi?constituency_operations_team.
        
        Here are the anticipated next steps:

        1.      Feedback and approval from the Work Team; 
        2.      Distribution to the full OSC for review, comment, and
approval; 
        3.      Distribution to the GNSO Council for review and action;
and 
        4.      Implementation. 

        
        As the first step, we look forward to receiving feedback from
you on the recommendations.  Please let me know if you have any
questions.
        
        Thank you.
        
        Best regards,
        
        Julie