View source for Second RSSAC Organizational Review

==Final Report & Recommendations==
Interisle received and incorporated feedback from the Assessment Report, and presented draft recommendations to the Review Work Party on April 3, 2018.<ref>[https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rssac-review2/2018-April/000117.html Email from April Graves to RSSAC Review2 listserv]</ref><ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rssac-review2/attachments/20180403/471b08dd/RSSACReviewDraftRecommendationsforRWP20180402.pdf RSSAC Review Draft Recommendations (PDF)]</ref> The draft recommendations were the subject of a teleconference meeting between Interisle, MMSI, and the RWP on April 12, 2018.<ref>[https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/71601202/RSSAC%20Review2%2012%20april%202018.m4a?version=1&modificationDate=1523572608000&api=v2 Archive audio, Meeting #10, April 12, 2018 (M4A)]</ref><ref>[https://community.icann.org/display/ACCRSSAC/RSSAC+Work+Party+Meetings?preview=/71601202/84214879/Interisle%20RWP%20Status%20Update%20Presentation%2020180412.pdf Independent Examiner Slide Presentation - Draft Recommendations (PDF)]</ref>

On April 20, RSSAC issued its feedback on the draft recommendations to Interisle.<ref>[https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rssac-review2/2018-April/000121.html Email from Carlos Reyes to RSSAC Review2 listserv]</ref><ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rssac-review2/attachments/20180420/4e798b0f/RSSACRWPFeedbackonDraftRecommendations1-0001.pdf RSSAC RWP Feedback on Draft Recommendations (PDF)]</ref> Interisle responded on April 25 with comments appended to the RWP's feedback document.<ref>[https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rssac-review2/2018-April/000124.html Email from Angie Graves to the RSSAC Review2 listserv, April 25, 2020]</ref><ref>[http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rssac-review2/attachments/20180425/d861da4d/RSSACRWPFeedbackonDraftRecommendations-IEresponse-0001.docx Independent Examiner's Response (DOCX)]</ref> 

On May 1, 2018, Interisle released its Draft Final Report for public comment.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/public-comments/rssac2-review-final-2018-05-01-en Draft Final Report for Public Comment]</ref> 
The final report listed six principal recommendations; there was no change from the draft to the final report.
# Modify the RSSAC membership criteria to allow the RSSAC to recruit a variety of skills, perspectives, and interests that include but are not limited to those available from the root server operator organizations.
# Resolve the apparent mismatch between the charter and operational procedures of the RSSAC and the requirements and expectations of the ICANN Board and Community for interaction with the root server system.
# Formalize the responsibilities of the RSSAC to the ICANN Board and Community in a work plan that is periodically reviewed and published, and hold the RSSAC accountable for work plan deliverables.
# Develop and implement a leadership training and succession plan.
# Engage more actively with the rest of ICANN and its Community.
# Clarify the role and responsibility of the RSSAC with respect to other groups with adjacent or overlapping remits, including the SSAC, the RZERC, and the RSSAC Caucus.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rssac-review-final-02jul18-en.pdf RSSAC Organizational Review Final Report (PDF)]</ref>

The Draft Final Report received public comments from a variety of sources. On June 8, 2018, RSSAC published '''RSSAC036''': RSSAC Statement on the Draft Final Report of the Second Organizational Review of the RSSAC.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rssac-036-14jun18-en.pdf RSSAC Statement on the Draft Final Report of the Second Organizational Review of the RSSAC (PDF)]</ref> The RSSAC repeated its objections to the scope and focus of the review in its statement. [[ALAC]] published a response that commented on three of the proposed recommendations.<ref>[https://atlarge.icann.org/advice_statements/11539 ALAC Statement Regarding RSSAC Organizational Review]</ref> Notably, its response to Recommendation 2 strongly favored action to ensure that ICANN had a sufficiently robust relationship with [[RSO|RSOs]]:
<blockquote>Although there is no clear way to address the issue, since ICANN has a part to play in ensuring that the DNS is a trusted and reliable resource, then it must have the ability to interact with all players who have a role in carrying that out and that must include the Root Server Operators. Simply lowering expectations does not address the issue. Whether this is done by widening the scope of the RSSAC or through some other mechanism is less important than noting that the current chasm must be bridged.<ref>[https://community.icann.org/download/attachments/84219445/AL-ALAC-ST-0618-01-01-EN.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1546864796000&api=v2 Draft Statement of ALAC - ratified without change (PDF)]</ref></blockquote>
The [[BC|Business Constituency]] agreed: "The BC requests that this recommendation be prioritized, noting it is 'highly concerned...that RSSAC does not consider itself accountable to ICANN Board and Community.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/report-comments-rssac2-review-final-15jun18-en.pdf Summary Report of Public Comment Proceeding, p.4 (PDF)]</ref>'"

RSSAC, for its part, "conclude<nowiki>[d]</nowiki> that neither the ICANN Board nor the ICANN community harbor the mismatch raised in the draft final report."<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rssac-036-14jun18-en.pdf RSSAC Statement on the Draft Final Report of the Second Organizational Review of the RSSAC, p. 4 (PDF)]</ref>

After the public comment period closed, the draft final report was a topic of an open session at ICANN 62.<ref name="icann62">[https://participate.icann.org/p4ynjd8bp6s/ Adobe Connect Archive - ICANN 62]</ref> Interisle released its final report on July 2, 2018.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/rssac-review-final-02jul18-en.pdf RSSAC Organizational Review Final Report (PDF)]</ref>