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

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

Thanks Claudio.  Julie - could you test that approach with the Staff
team and if it seems doable we could modify our recommendations
accordingly.
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: Claudio Di Gangi [mailto:cdigangi@xxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 10:45 AM
        To: 'Julie Hedlund'; Gomes, Chuck; gnso-osc-csg
        Subject: RE: For Review: Task 1, Subtask 4 -- Tool Kit
Recommendations
        
        

        Julie & Chuck,

         

        Thank you.

         

        On the "Provide grants/funding for constituencies to provide
their own support" option:

         

        My recommendation, which I believe is a common practice for
companies, is that the ICANN Finance Dept. assist staff in estimating
the amount of staff time required for a particular task and come up with
a commensurate figure for outsourcing that task. 

         

        Claudio

         

         

        
________________________________


        From: Julie Hedlund [mailto:julie.hedlund@xxxxxxxxx] 
        Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 3:17 PM
        To: Chuck Gomes; Claudio Di Gangi; gnso-osc-csg
        Subject: Re: For Review: Task 1, Subtask 4 -- Tool Kit
Recommendations

         

        Claudio, thanks also for your very helpful comments!  See my
notes below in red as well.
        
        Julie
        
        
        On 8/26/09 3:09 PM, "Chuck Gomes" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

        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. 
        
        Julie - We didn't get any feedback on this from constituencies.
>From a staff point of view I believe it could be difficult to be
specific about the funding amount but I also see a problem with this
being open ended.  I also welcome any ideas you may have.
        
         
        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. 
        
        Julie - We had left this out but when we circulated the draft
document among staff at least a couple commented that as this was the
top response in the survey and it was something that was already being
provided, it should be included.  I see your point and agree that,
strictly speaking, the task does not relate directly to constituency
support.  I'm not opposed to taking it out.
        
        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. 
        
        Julie - I am fine with that too.
        
        
        
        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