1 of 13

Continuous Improvement Program �Community Coordination Group (CIP-CCG)

APRALO CIP Small Team Members

APRALO Monthly Call

18 July 2024

APRALO Submission

| 1

2 of 13

Agenda

About the CIP-CCG

Background and Challenge
Solution

CIP-CCG Membership, Timeline
APRALO CIP-CCG Representatives & APRALO CIP Small Team
Draft APRALO Submission to CIP-CCG
Next Steps for APRALO

| 2

3 of 13

The CIP-CCG: Background and Challenge

Third Accountability and Transparency Review (ATRT3) Rec 3.6 calls for Organizational Reviews (ORs) to be evolved into a Continuous Improvement Program (CIP)

ICANN Bylaw-mandated ORs assess effectiveness of Supporting Organizations (SOs) and Advisory Committees (ACs)

(i) continuing purpose in the ICANN structure;
(ii) any change in structure/operations to improve effectiveness;
(iii) accountability to its constituencies, stakeholder groups, organizations, and other stakeholders.

Community-perceived shortcomings of ORs - understanding and competence of Independent Examiners and quality of produced recommendations

Deference of next Organizational Reviews cycle to consider implementation of CIP

BACKGROUND

CHALLENGE

| 3

4 of 13

The CIP-CCG as the Solution

ATRT3 Rec 3.6 to replace Organizational Reviews with a Continuous Improvement Program to hold the SO/AC/NomCom accountable to their stakeholders, focused on meaningful changes to improve their structures.

ICANN org proposed a Continuous Improvement Program Community Coordination Group (CIP-CCG) to convene in January 2024, with goal of developing a framework for implementation of ATRT3 Rec. 3.6.

Specifically, the CIP-CCG will:

Develop a shared understanding of the meaning of Continuous Improvement in the context of ATRT3 recommendation 3.6,
Consider a range of methodologies for effective continuous improvement programs,
Agree on the methodology that is fit for ICANN purpose, and
Formulate a CIP Framework, to be used by each SO, AC, and NomCom.

SOLUTION

PRINCIPLES

CIP FRAMEWORK

CRITERIA

SMART INDICATORS

| 4

5 of 13

Overall CIP Roadmap, Timeline

| 5

6 of 13

High Level Timeline for Year 2024

| 6

7 of 13

CIP-CCG Composition

Supporting Organizations (SO)

GNSO Council
NPOC
BC
ISPCP
RySG
RrSG
IPC
NCUC
ccNSO

Advisory Committees (AC)

ALAC
AFRALO
APRALO
EURALO
LACRALO
NARALO
GAC
RSSAC
SSAC

Nominating Committee (NomCom)

| 7

8 of 13

APRALO CIP-CCG Reps & APRALO CIP Small Team�

APRALO Representatives to the CIP-CCG

Amrita Choudhury (Representative)
Justine Chew (Alternate)

APRALO CIP Small Team

Amrita Choudhury
Justine Chew
Cheryl Langdon-Orr
Barkha Manral
Pranav Bhaskar Tiwari
Jasmine Ko
Shita Laksmi

8. Ashirwad Tripathy

9. Phyo Thiri Lwin

10. Faheem Soomro

11. Priyatosh Jana

12. Adarsh Bu

13. (Ali Al-Meshal)

| 8

9 of 13

CIP-CCG Framework – Draft APRALO CI Submission

5 PRINCIPLES

CIP FRAMEWORK

CRITERIA

SMART INDICATORS

Principle 1: The APRALO is fulfilling its purpose.

Principle 2: The structure of APRALO is effective.

Principle 3: The operations of APRALO are efficient.

Principle 4: The APRALO is accountable internally to its stakeholders and/or substructures (where applicable), and externally to the wider ICANN community.

Principle 5: The SO, AC or NomCom APRALO collaborates within the ICANN community to further the mission of ICANN and the effectiveness of the ICANN bottom-up multistakeholder model.

| 9

10 of 13

Draft APRALO CI Submission to CIP-CCG

PRINCIPLE 1 Fulfilling purpose	Criterion 1 Fulfilling purpose, contributing to ICANN mission	Criterion 2 Contributing to global public interest	Criterion 3 Contributes to ICANN Strategic Plan (FY21-25) esp. MSM gov
PRINCIPLE 2 Effective structure	Criterion 1 Has WG, processes to address annual goals, priorities	Criterion 2 Process(es) in place is (are) accessible and clearly communicated.	Criterion 5 Processes for assessing, measuring output
PRINCIPLE 3 Efficient operations	Criterion 1 Processes promote planning, setting priorities, identify emerging issues	Criterion 2 Assesses input to scope of responsibility	Criteria 3 Develops and recommends internal and external outputs for its purpose	Criterion 5 Workload managed	Criterion 6 Nurtures consensus within membership	Criterion 9 Appropriate level of funding support
PRINCIPLE 4 Accountable internally & externally	Criterion 3 Accountable to membership in recruiting, development, maintenance	Criterion 4 Support and resources for recruiting and onboarding newcomers	Criterion 5 Maintaining skill sets, technical expertise needed through capacity building	Criterion 6 Maintaining levels of active participation	Criterion 7 maintains sufficient levels of utility and transparency	Criterion 9 Implemented prior review recommendations	Criterion 10 Processes to assess, prioritize and implement CIP outputs
PRINCIPLE 5 Collaborates to further ICANN mission & MSM	Criterion 1 Processes for communicating & coordinating within ICANN

5 PRINCIPLES

20 CRITERIA

61 SMART* INDICATORS

| 10

Speaker: Pranav and Adarsh

APRALO was given 33 criteria by ICANN Org to consider
The Small Team considered all 33 criteria and rationalized them, opting to consolidate some and dropping some.
The criteria identified on this slide may not be numbered consecutively because the Small Team recommends either consolidation or dropping of some criteria from an original list of 33 criteria to avoid repetition and which can be addressed using common indicators.
Result is 19 criteria with 61 associated SMART Indicators.
Note: SMART means Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound
There are too many criteria and indicators to speak to here, but all details are found in the APRALO CIP Reporting Copy which has been circulated earlier. Each Criterion is hyperlinked to the relevant section of the APRALO CIP-CCG Reporting Copy Googledoc.
Maybe pick 2 Criteria to speak to at high level – mention next 2 slides/speakers will give more specific examples.

��

11 of 13

Draft APRALO CI Submission – Examples of Indicators

PRINCIPLE 2: The structure of APRALO is effective
EDITED Principle 2 Criterion 1

The APRALO has working groups or processes to plan and address its goals and priorities each year, to help APRALO meet its purpose.

APRALO - Rules of Procedure (ROP) (Process) �SMART Indicator 13: APRALO should continue to comply with its existing ROP of 2013, and if adopted shortly, the new ROP of 2024, in administering the various processes which it relies on (including membership categories, leadership selection process and leadership criteria, meetings)
Annual Outreach & Engagement Plan (Process)�SMART Indicator 14: APRALO should continue to use the annual outreach and engagement planning process and encourage the inclusion of at least 1 engagement activity per ALS each year.
APRALO Policy Forum (Standing Working Group)�SMART Indicator 16: APRALO should continue to utilise the APRALO Policy Forum (APF) as a standing work team to design and implement initiatives or activities which address APRALO’s policy-related goals and priorities as identified through a Hot Topics Survey.
APRALO Small Teams (Working Groups)�SMART Indicator 19: Continue to convene and utilise small teams (i.e. non-standing work teams) to engage APRALO Members in developing policy positions on issues of interest to APRALO that are being deliberated on in the ICANN community (such as GNSO policy development processes or ICANN public comment proceedings or ICANN Board consultations). Examples of more recent small teams are: (i) APRALO ROP WG, (ii) APRALO CIP-CCG Small Team, and (iii) APRALO Small Team on Draft Applicant Support Handbook.

SMART INDICATORS

| 11

12 of 13

Draft APRALO CI Submission – Examples of Indicators

PRINCIPLE 2: The structure of APRALO is effective
Principle 2 Criterion 5

Process(es) is (are) in place for assessing and measuring output.

As mentioned earlier, the APRALO has a number of working groups and processes for addressing its goals and priorities annually. What is needed is a process for assessing and measuring outputs.

SMART Indicator 25: By mid 2025, to have devised a plan to facilitate an annual strategic reporting process for APRALO which can demonstrate how the work of APRALO’s working groups and/or its processes (“outputs”) address its goals and priorities and help APRALO meet its purpose each year. Such a reporting process should address:-
A set of bottom-up developed metrics for assessing and measuring YoY output such as participation rates, how an activity has met its one or more APRALO aims and priorities;
Whether the outputs have produced a desired outcome;
Whether those outputs were implemented in a timely fashion,
The use of activity takeaway report or action plan; and
Any areas for improvement.
SMART Indicator 26: To continue the practice of identifying action items for each APRALO / APF call and improve the tracking of such action items to their conclusion.

SMART INDICATORS

| 12

13 of 13

Next Steps for APRALO

Date	Action
15 July	Draft APRALO continuous improvement (CI) submission shared with APRALO community, Call for comments https://docs.google.com/document/d/183-E15qWUsfPsNXwySUWM9AOvvyvRpM-HqqqcYurhbw/edit?usp=sharing
18 July	Presentation of submission at APRALO Monthly Call, Q&A
22 July	Close of call for comments, clarification
23 July	Consensus call for APRALO Leadership Team
24 July	APRALO CI submission submitted to CIP-CCG

| 13