ICANN Reviews: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
As a public service organization, ICANN's [[ICANN Bylaws|bylaws]] establish the scope and direction of the organization's mission, commitments, and core values.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article1 ICANN Bylaws, Article 1]</ref> The Bylaws specify review processes for ICANN and its stakeholder organizations.<ref name="reviewbl">[https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en#article4.4 ICANN Bylaws - Articles 4.4-4.6]</ref> The review processes are designed to ensure that ICANN is performing its mission in the best way possible.<ref name="ovrvw">[https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews ICANN.org - Review Dashboard]</ref> Reviews aim to evaluate the health of the [[Multistakeholder Model|multistakeholder model]], ICANN transparency and accountability, organizational effectiveness, and the security and stability of the [[The Domain Name System|DNS]].<ref name="ovrvw" /> | As a public service organization, ICANN's [[ICANN Bylaws|bylaws]] establish the scope and direction of the organization's mission, commitments, and core values.<ref>[https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en/#article1 ICANN Bylaws, Article 1]</ref> The Bylaws specify review processes for ICANN and its stakeholder organizations.<ref name="reviewbl">[https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en#article4.4 ICANN Bylaws - Articles 4.4-4.6]</ref> The review processes are designed to ensure that ICANN is performing its mission in the best way possible.<ref name="ovrvw">[https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews ICANN.org - Review Dashboard]</ref> Reviews aim to evaluate the health of the [[Multistakeholder Model|multistakeholder model]], ICANN transparency and accountability, organizational effectiveness, and the security and stability of the [[The Domain Name System|DNS]].<ref name="ovrvw" /> | ||
==ICANN Review Cycle== | |||
Specific and Organizational Reviews each follow process models that share a common set of themes and expectations. In each process, the review is planned by a team or work party. In the case of Organizational Reviews, there is then the intervening step of selecting and engaging an Independent Examiner. Then, the review is conducted. Organization Reviews move directly to implementation, while Specific Reviews submit findings and recommendations to the ICANN Board, which then acts on the recommendations. The different action phases are laid out below: | |||
{| class="wikitable" | |||
|- | |||
! Action Phase | |||
! Specific Reviews | |||
! Organizational Reviews | |||
|- | |||
| Phase 1 | |||
| Assemble a Review Team | |||
| Assemble a Working Party | |||
|- | |||
| Phase 2 | |||
| Plan Review | |||
| Plan Review | |||
|- | |||
| Phase 3 | |||
| Conduct Review | |||
| Engage Independent Examiner | |||
|- | |||
| Phase 4 | |||
| Board Action | |||
| Conduct Review | |||
|- | |||
| Phase 5 | |||
| Plan Implementation | |||
| Plan Implementation | |||
|- | |||
| Phase 6 | |||
| Implement Improvements | |||
| Implement Improvements | |||
|- | |||
| Phase 7 | |||
| New Standard Operating Procedure | |||
| New Standard Operating Procedure | |||
|} | |||
==Specific Reviews== | ==Specific Reviews== |
Revision as of 22:18, 18 May 2021
As a public service organization, ICANN's bylaws establish the scope and direction of the organization's mission, commitments, and core values.[1] The Bylaws specify review processes for ICANN and its stakeholder organizations.[2] The review processes are designed to ensure that ICANN is performing its mission in the best way possible.[3] Reviews aim to evaluate the health of the multistakeholder model, ICANN transparency and accountability, organizational effectiveness, and the security and stability of the DNS.[3]
ICANN Review Cycle
Specific and Organizational Reviews each follow process models that share a common set of themes and expectations. In each process, the review is planned by a team or work party. In the case of Organizational Reviews, there is then the intervening step of selecting and engaging an Independent Examiner. Then, the review is conducted. Organization Reviews move directly to implementation, while Specific Reviews submit findings and recommendations to the ICANN Board, which then acts on the recommendations. The different action phases are laid out below:
Action Phase | Specific Reviews | Organizational Reviews |
---|---|---|
Phase 1 | Assemble a Review Team | Assemble a Working Party |
Phase 2 | Plan Review | Plan Review |
Phase 3 | Conduct Review | Engage Independent Examiner |
Phase 4 | Board Action | Conduct Review |
Phase 5 | Plan Implementation | Plan Implementation |
Phase 6 | Implement Improvements | Implement Improvements |
Phase 7 | New Standard Operating Procedure | New Standard Operating Procedure |
Specific Reviews
ICANN's operations are subject to periodic Specific Reviews, enumerated in Article 4.6 of the bylaws:[4]
- Accountability and Transparency (ATRT) - focused on ICANN operations[5]
- Security, Stability, & Resiliency (SSR) - focused on the DNS[6]
- Registration Directory Service (RDS/WHOIS) - focused on registration data and public access to registration information[7]
- Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice (CCT) - ushered in as part of the New gTLD Program, this review is focused on the domain marketplace and the experience of registrants and other consumers[8]
Timing & Process
ATRT, SSR, and RDS/WHOIS reviews must take place periodically, and no more than five years after the last review team was convened[9] A CCT review is initiated one year after the launch of a New gTLD application round.[9]
Review teams typically include members, observers, and/or liaisons from stakeholder groups, supporting organizations and advisory committees.[9] The review process timeline runs between three to nearly five years, and involves multiple opportunities for participation, public comment, and deliberation among stakeholders.[10]
Organizational Reviews
Each supporting organization and advisory committee, as well as the Nominating Committee is periodically reviewed pursuant to Article 4.4 of the Bylaws.[11] The GAC is exempted from Article 4.4, although it is charged to implement and deploy its own review processes.[12]
Timing & Process
The bylaws state that organizational reviews should take place no more than five years from the submission of the final report of the last review to the ICANN Board. However, that requirement is flexible, and "based on feasibility as determined by the Board."[12]
An Independent Examiner is contracted to perform the fact finding, assessment, reporting, and recommendations of the review process. The examiner is selected through a competitive bid process.[13] The review timeline for organization reviews can stretch between three to five years.[11] Like specific reviews, the process has multiple stages of public comment, as well as interaction and comment between the organization being reviewed and the Independent Examiner.[13]
Past Reviews
Specific Reviews
Review Type & Number | Status | Date Initiated | Date Completed | ICANN Wiki Page | Final Report |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CCT #1 | Implementation Phase | October 1, 2015 | March 1, 2019 | CCT1 | CCT1 Final Report - PDF |
References
- ↑ ICANN Bylaws, Article 1
- ↑ ICANN Bylaws - Articles 4.4-4.6
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 ICANN.org - Review Dashboard
- ↑ ICANN.org - Specific (Article 4.6) Reviews
- ↑ ICANN.org - Accountability & Transparency Review
- ↑ ICANN.org - Security, Stability, & Resiliency Review
- ↑ ICANN.org - Registration Directory Service Review
- ↑ ICANN.org - Competition, Consumer Trust, and Consumer Choice
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 ICANN Bylaws, Article 4.6
- ↑ ICANN.org - Specific Reviews Process Flowchart, August 31, 2017 (PDF)
- ↑ 11.0 11.1 ICANN.org - Organizational Reviews
- ↑ 12.0 12.1 ICANN Bylaws, Article 4.4
- ↑ 13.0 13.1 ICANN.org - Organizational Review Process Flowchart, August 31, 2017 (PDF)