Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] Criteria Proposal

[Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Avri,

because that is an urgent task, I suggest to add this as item and to discuss
the proposal for our call today.
I agree with Avri that I don't think that the program will be delayed to
wait for our recommendations, we agreed for deadline in May and we have to
stick to it.

Regards

Rafik

2011/4/12 Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>

> hi,
>
> I have become concerned about our ability to come to any sort of
> recommendation on criteria for a fee waver program for applicants.  We have
> a requirement to give the Board a draft on Friday, and the work currently
> being done is not close to being ready on this issue.  While various members
> have worked on general proposals for aid approval we do not have something
> to present the board that focuses on a possible fee waver program.
>
> I know there are those who hope that the application process will be
> delayed until we are ready, I for one do not believe this is going to be the
> case.  If we have not established criteria by the time the Board needs
> criteria from us, then we risk losing the chance for a fee waver program.  I
> think most of the discussion we are having in the group lend themselves more
> to the design of financial systems for future rounds and not for the round
> that starts after the June decisions.
>
> Karla and I had an extended discussion on the minimal elements that would
> need to be included in any fee waver program for the 2011-2012 round.  Any
> recommendations made in this note, while based on ideas that came out in our
> discussion have not been approved or even reviewed by staff at this point.
>  Karla provided the first draft of the proposal, but as stated above this is
> to help us in our discussions and is based on a large extent on discussions
> that have been ongoing.  It does not represent an ICANN staff proposal, but
> is hopefully an aid in our discussions.
>
> Some of the considerations that went into this proposal:
>
> - It does not go beyond the criteria for a fee waver program as discussed
> in the Milestone report.  T
>
> - Fundamentally we need to give criteria to indicate:
>
> -- Which applicants get any of the fee reductions that we recommended to
> the Board in the Milestone report.  It is also possible that these criteria
> would be sufficient for recommending applicants to donors that we may
> partner with.
>
> - In order to come up with a plan, we need to take in account the skills
> ICANN has and those which it does not have yet.  For example ICANN has no
> skill in doing needs analysis especially on a cross cultural basis.  The
> idea, therefore becomes, what skills, or whose skills, could we leverage to
> enable a program in a very short time. To this end we thought that
> leveraging off of the approval the applicant may have received from
> recognized donor organizations might be a way to jumpstart the
> considerations.
>
> - How do we enable a program based on the recommendations in the milestone
> report for fee wavers
>
> - How do we avoid gaming.  Requiring that a group be a reestablished group
> as of 2009 predates any discussion of there being a fee waiver program for
> new gTLDs.
>
> I hope the group is willing to discuss this proposal.
>
> thanks
>
> a.
>
>
>
>
>
>