<div>I think these are good questions.</div><div><br></div><div class="protonmail_signature_block"><div class="protonmail_signature_block-user"><div>Ayden <br></div></div><div class="protonmail_signature_block-proton protonmail_signature_block-empty"><br></div></div><div><br></div><div>‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐<br></div><div> On 12 July 2018 11:53 AM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:<br></div><div> <br></div><blockquote class="protonmail_quote" type="cite"><div dir="ltr" style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;" id="divtagdefaultwrapper"><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">My questions were perhaps not clear -- I thought it was understood that I had questions by raising issues, but let me try again:<br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">What is the basis that the consultant used to suggest that there is low cost and low start up time for Options 1 and 2? This makes no sense to me -- managing segrated funds is of course not hard for ICANN finance, but
this is simply NOT the real work of managing a grants making activity, or tracking and reporting on grants. <br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">I would like to also hear more about how it would work to have each and every grant reported on the ICANN tax forms, and whether that increases the likelihood of iRS auditing ICANN. <br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">I'd also like to understand whether the ICANN present not for profit status includes such functions, under California law. <br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">Segregating staff; identifying how to create needed firewalls, and accountability mechanisms is not without cost but these were ignored in my view by the consultant.<br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">"Firing /laying off staff" upon the conclusion of the disbursement of funds can be perhaps taken into account, but I am not sure how -- as ICANN has a pay scale/benefits plan that exceeds what is typical for grant making
organizations, in my experience. So, deciding that ICANN will add staff to bring in expertise, have a time sheet approach to allocate some time from other staff, such as legal, financial, etc. is fairly complex. Would staff brought into ICANN to add grant
making and management/evaluation have to be brought in as contract staff, with time specific contracts? <br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">How will the IRS review ICANN's status, if the $100++M/or $230M is somehow now brought into ICANN's oversight? <br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">What is the competency requirement of the Board of ICANN to engage in Grant making/grant review/etc.? <br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">Will making oversight of the grant making/review require a change in the competency of Board members, and does this put the larger mission and core responsibilities at risk? Just a comment that in my experience, Boards
of grant making organizations are selected for a variety of skills, which may include experience in understanding the core mission but also brings in experience in the field of grant making/management/evaluation of outcomes. <br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">The ICANN Board already speaks to how overworked they are and they are very committed. BUT, there is a set of core responsibilities that the Board has, that does not include grant making. Further, the Board does not
have expertise in grant review and grant making - How did the consultant determine that the Board of ICANN was 'qualified/competent" to engage in reviewing grants, and how did the consultant propose that the process would work for using existing staff, and
Board members? What would the additional time for existing Board members be to take on internal review of grants/review/management? <br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">How does the consultant perceive to curtail [and I mean curtail] the usual approach of the ICANN community to assume that they can "advocate" about decisions taken within ICANN processes? This is not a conflict of interest
issue but a comment that we have to understand that it is human nature to to seek to influence outcomes of who receives funding. The CCWG should focus on guidance for what kind of projects can receive funding, in my view, but create a process that is external
and not subject to the internal advocacy that will naturally develop. This puts ICANN's integrity, and even perhaps creates repetitional risks. <br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">I have more questions about an internal process, but let's start with those.<br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">Finally, I posted a question raised by a member of the CSG about the need to have grants reviewed for human rights implications. The consultant acknowledged the need to review all applications for IFAC [this is not a
simple task] but did not address how an internal process within ICANN would fulfill this. <br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">I also would like to hear the consultant's perspective about the need to review for human rights implications. <br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">If this is needed, I will have questions about how an internal process would address this requirement. And, frankly, I don't think having volunteers from the ICANN community will "pass" the red face test with the IRS.
But the retained consultant may have great answers to my questions.<br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0">Marilyn <br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><p style="margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0"><br></p><div><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><div><hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block;width:98%"><br></div><div dir="ltr" id="divRplyFwdMsg"><div><span class="font" style="font-family:Calibri, sans-serif"><span class="colour" style="color:#000000"><b>From:</b> Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org><br> <b>Sent:</b> Thursday, July 12, 2018 4:08 AM<br> <b>To:</b> Marilyn Cade; ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<br> <b>Subject:</b> Re: [Ext] Re: Proposed agenda - new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting of 12 July at 14.00 UTC</span></span> </div><div> <br></div></div><div lang="EN-US"><div class="x_WordSection1"><p class="x_MsoNormal">Thanks, Marilyn for your input. I looked back at the email you sent prior to ICANN62, but it seemed to raise some concerns not necessarily questions, but I may have missed them? If you could please resend the questions you have for Sarah,
staff can pass these on together with the one below.<br></p><p class="x_MsoNormal"> <br></p><p class="x_MsoNormal">Best regards,<br></p><p class="x_MsoNormal"> <br></p><p class="x_MsoNormal">Marika<br></p><p class="x_MsoNormal"> <br></p><div style="border:none; border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt; padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in"><p class="x_MsoNormal"><b><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">From: </span></span> </b><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com><br> <b>Date: </b>Thursday, July 12, 2018 at 10:01<br> <b>To: </b>Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org>, "ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org" <ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org><br> <b>Subject: </b>[Ext] Re: Proposed agenda - new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting of 12 July at 14.00 UTC</span></span></p></div><div><p class="x_MsoNormal"> <br></p></div><div id="x_divtagdefaultwrapper"><p><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Dear colleagues</span></span><br></p><p><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"> </span></span><br></p><p><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">During the session that the CSG hosted with Xavier, during ICANN62, one of the attorneys raised a question with Xavier and myself regarding the need to review all grants for human rights implications. I haven't
been able to properly research this, but wanted to raise it to staff to ask the retained consultant for more information. This would add significant review criteria to grant proposal reviews. </span></span><br></p><p><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"> </span></span><br></p><p><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">I am not sure that I have seen answers to the questions that I raised, but I am still reviewing the documents in the attachment. </span></span><br></p><p><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"> </span></span><br></p><p><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Looking forward to our call.</span></span><br></p><p><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"> </span></span><br></p><p><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Marilyn Cade</span></span><br></p><p style="margin-bottom:12.0pt" class="x_MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"> </span></span><br></p><div><div style="text-align:center" align="center" class="x_MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"><hr align="center" width="98%" size="2"></span></span><br></div><div id="x_divRplyFwdMsg"><p class="x_MsoNormal"><b><span class="colour" style="color:black">From:</span></b><span class="colour" style="color:black"> Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Marika Konings <marika.konings@icann.org><br> <b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, July 11, 2018 6:44 AM<br> <b>To:</b> ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org<br> <b>Subject:</b> [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Proposed agenda - new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting of 12 July at 14.00 UTC</span><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"></span></span></p><div><p class="x_MsoNormal"><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"> </span></span><br></p></div></div><div><div><p class="x_xmsonormal"><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Dear All,</span></span><br></p><p class="x_xmsonormal"><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"> </span></span><br></p><p class="x_xmsonormal"><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Please find below the proposed agenda for the upcoming meeting of the new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG which is scheduled for Thursday 12 July at 14.00 UTC.</span></span><br></p><p class="x_xmsonormal"><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"> </span></span><br></p><p class="x_xmsonormal"><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Best regards,</span></span><br></p><p class="x_xmsonormal"><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"> </span></span><br></p><p class="x_xmsonormal"><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Marika</span></span><br></p><div><p class="x_xmsonormal"><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"> </span></span><br></p></div><p style="orphans:auto; text-align:start; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px" class="x_xmsonormal"><b><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Proposed Agenda – new gTLD Auction Proceeds CCWG meeting – Thursday 12 July at 14.00 UTC</span></span></b><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">:</span></span><br></p><p style="orphans:auto; text-align:start; widows:auto; word-spacing:0px" class="x_xmsonormal"><span class="colour" style="color:black"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"> </span></span><br></p><ol type="1" start="1"><li style="color:black" class="x_MsoNormal"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Roll Call</span><br></li><li style="color:black" class="x_MsoNormal"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Welcome / SOI-DOI Updates</span><br></li><li style="color:black" class="x_MsoNormal"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Recap from CCWG62 related meetings and updates</span><br></li><li style="color:black" class="x_MsoNormal"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Review of proposed responses to charter questions</span><span class="colour" style="color:windowtext"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"> (updated version to be shared by staff shortly) </span></span><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"></span><br></li><li style="color:black" class="x_MsoNormal"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Final review of summary descriptions provided by Sarah Berg -<span class="x_xapple-converted-space"> </span></span><span class="highlight" style="background-color:white"><span class="colour" style="color:rgb(51, 51, 51)"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">ICANN
Contracted Advisor on Strategic Development and Philanthropic Programs (see attached)</span></span></span><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt"></span><br></li><li style="color:black" class="x_MsoNormal"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Feedback on remaining steps and proposed timeline (see attached)</span><br></li><li style="color:black" class="x_MsoNormal"><span class="size" style="font-size:12pt">Confirmation of next steps and next meeting (26 July 2018 at 14.00 UTC)</span><br></li></ol></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>