[NCUC-DISCUSS] Replenishment Strategy for the ICANN Reserve Fund Webinar 1 March 2018 1700 UTC
Ayden Férdeline
icann at ferdeline.com
Tue Feb 27 14:30:44 CET 2018
Hi, all-
I think a few things are being conflated here; the proposed Budget for fiscal year 2019, which includes SO/AC spend (I consider the ABRs that Thato highlighted to be an important form of discretionary spend for us - however they are not related to this issue), and the replenishment of the Reserve Fund, which could happen in multiple ways, and is not only funded through fees collected from registrants (by registries or registrars, perhaps, but the money at present is ultimately coming from domain name registrants).
Please remember that the NCSG has been tracking this issue for some time. Last December [we submitted this comment](https://mm.icann.org/pipermail/comments-reserve-fund-12oct17/attachments/20171201/6b6dd376/NCSGComment-ReserveFund-0001.pdf) on the Reserve Fund; I can't speak for others but I know that I remain extremely concerned that the organisation only has enough $ at present to cover 4.8 months of operating expenses (down from 11.5 months in 2014).
I think this is something which should concern us all too.
As for how the reserve fund can be replenished, we don't know yet what the ICANN org strategy is. Presumably that will be announced during the webinar, but there are essentially five ways through which it could happen:
- Cut costs and focus on core business areas relevant to ICANN’s main mission, and transfer the savings from reduced spending into the Reserve Fund (and to be clear, this is the only option that I believe the NCSG should support);
- Transfer the budget contingency, presuming there is any left, to the Reserve Fund (however this is unpredictable and only likely to raise at most $5m);
- Take funds from the New gTLD Auction Proceeds fund (a fundamentally unsound practice, as these funds are supposed to be sequestered, and ICANN has said as much in legal fillings);
- Raise fees on registries and registrars (an option we do not support because costs will then be passed on to domain name registrants); or
- Identify a new revenue stream and use this to fund the Reserve Fund (unpredictable, unlikely, etc.).
So Thato, if you are asking what position I would like the Finance Committee to take, I would like to suggest that only option 1 can be on the table.
Kind regards,
Ayden Férdeline
[linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 26 February 2018 5:16 PM, Thato Mfikwe <thatomfikwe at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Kris,
> Just to comment on your statement (apologies for ll this color contrasts and the lengthy response):
>
> 1. ICANN model, how the resources are allocated and why?
>
> ICANN’s primary source of funding comes from fees it collects from gTLD registries and registrars. Therefore, ICANN’s financial stability is entirely dependent on the registration of domain names. These fees were collected on a quarterly basis from primarily a small group of large registries and registrars. The quarterly collection meant that delays in payments would give ICANN issues with its cash flow and its ability to pay wages and other expenses.
>
> ICANN decided therefore to set up a Reserve Fund in 2007 in order to reduce its dependence on the timing of fee collections, as well as to provide it with sufficient financial resources to enable it to defend its multi-stakeholder governance model against possible litigation. In October of 2012, the ICANN Organization conducted a benchmarking study on how not-forprofit and other organizations set their Reserve Funds, which was a basis for a 12 moths operational expense coverage although the GNSO feels that this need to increase to 24 months according to their [latest comment](https://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/draft-comments-icann-reserve-fund-27nov17-en.pd).
>
> Allocation of the Reserve FundIn 2014, the Reserve Fund stood at US$ 85 million corresponding to 11.5 months of operating expenses. Without any withdrawals and taking into account the repayment of new gTLD historical development costs and interest earned. The Reserve Fund should be approximately US$94 million by end June 2018.
> - withdrawals from the Reserve Fund have been made since 2015 for the purpose of paying for the IANA Stewardship transition expenses ($36 million).
> - on 30 June 2017, the Reserve Fund was US$ 62 million and the Board Finance Committee had approved, during its meeting held on 22 September 2017, a recommendation to the Board to allocate an additional US$5 million to the Reserve Fund from ICANN’s operational surpluses which was be considered in October 2017 at Abu Dhabi. This trend of coordination needs to improve as it is difficult to track how the Reserve Fund is used or funded on an ongoing basis, hopefully we will get clarity in the webinar on the 1st of March.
> YEAR BALANCE EXPENSES COVERED
> June 2014 $85 million - actual 11.5 months
> June 2017 $62 million - actual
> June 2018 $58 million - estimate 4.8 months
> Between 2014 and 2017, there were payments of IANA transition expenses ($36 million) from the Reserve Fund and on September 2017 there was an allocation of $5 million from 2017 operational surpluses. Net withdrawals being $31 million and currently standing at $62 million ($94 million - $31 million = +/- $62 million) by 12 October 2017.
>
> 2. Risks and projects that work
> The analysis of ICANN's 2019 FY operational plan & budget is underway, providing a good opportunity for comment and propose changes to ICANN's spending priorities on portfolios and projects. It would also be helpful if members can start reviewing ICANN operational plans so that we can provide informed recommendations in regard to listed projects and portfolios listed on ICANN operational plans.
>
> 3. Long term strategy and existence.
>
> I have managed to assess the allocation of resources to AC's and SO's through 2018 additional budget request and below are the findings, however I have not been able to identify the role of NCSG in ICANN operational plans. Some of the questions relating to long-term sustainability will hopefully be addressed during the webinar.
>
> Summary of ICANN 2018 FY additional budget request approval from community
>
> ICANN groups listed budget allocations Listed allocations
> Declined request / no support
> Approved by Requiring further ICANN engagement
> Unlisted allocations& project description
> SO's $ 250 800,00, ho
> GNSO $ 107 400,00 0 PDP WG Chair travel funding - ICANN 61, 62 & 63 and GNSO Council Strategic Planning Session
> BC $ 16 200,00 2 2 Leadership development & support (developing countries - 2 regional participants for ICANN 60, 61 & 62)
> NCUC $ 32 000,00 3 2 Policy Advocacy training and 3 members of NCUC panelists @ IGF
> NCSG/NPOC $ 66 000,00 0 0 Capacity building - NCUC and NPOC joint request for a program to create future leaders @ ICANN 61
> NCSG $ 13 000,00 1 4 IGF workshop on cybersecurity and DNS (2 panelists from NCSG)
> NPOC $ 8 100,00 0 0 Piloted by members of CSG, leadership dev and support for 1 participant from a developing region ICANN 60-62
> ISPCP $ 8 100,00 0 2 Not utilised in 2017, for a pilot travel support for local businesses leaders in developing regions
> RrSG, ASO & ccNSO -
> 1 for RrSG 1 for RrSG RrSG support for video call steam will be implemented in ICANN meetings, ASO and ccNSO did not make budget requests
> AC's $ 215 000,00
> GAC $ 81 000,00 0 0 Government travels for the GAC HLGM - High Level Government Meeting
> SSAC $ 4 000,00 0 0 Travel for outreach at a non IGF event (an interesting potential innovation to outreach efforts)
> RSSAC $ 10 000,00 0 0 Strategic outreach for co-chairs (Up to 3 joint outreach trips for co-chairs or up to 6 individual outreach trips)
> At-large $ 58 000,00 2 3 RALO engagement activities, global capacity building at IGF, & tracking of ALAC advise to the Board & responses to ICANN public comments
> APRALO $ 8 000,00 0 5 Leadership participation at the IGF (2 panelists from APRALO)
> AFRALO $ 8 000,00 0 1 Workshop at the IGF (2 workshop panelists from AFRALO)
> EURALO $ 8 000,00 1 0 IGF workshop on the public interest (2 panelists from EURALO)
> LACRALO $ 20 000,00 2 1 Creating leaders at LACRALO - educational training/ICANN collab
> NARALO $ 18 000,00 0 1 Global indegenous persons mentorship prog for ICANN 60 & 61
> Other allocations $ 251 000,00 Unlisted allocation & project description
> ICANN academy $ 86 000,00 0 0 Academy Chairing skills prog & media support
> RySC $ 95 000,00 0 0 Increase of leadership program slots & document development support
> ISOC Ecuador $ -
> 1 0 Not supported by NCSG or any ICANN community
> Public and media support $ 70 000,00 0 1 Allows participation by all SO-AC communities, ICANN communications Team will manage development of all community outreach content,
>
> CROP $ -
> 0 1 The CROP Program has been removed and the activity has been moved to the Policy Development Support budget as part of the core activities to be coordinated by that staff in collaboration with the GSE team.
>
> Total 2018 ICANN annual budget allocations $ 716 800,00 13 23
> Note 1: that unlisted allocations mean that projects have been approved but there is either no funds or liaison with ICANN staff, regional teams or communication teams is needed to access these funds as allocations in the form of provisions made available within ICANN org. Not sure why ICANN academy would fall within additional budget requests, unless internal staff are permitted to make such requests. Any funds that were available in 2017 but were not accessed are worth trying to retrieve, it is probable that they can still be accessed,
>
> Note 2: CROP funds were moved to the policy development core budget but the respective budget has not increased but was decreased by $6 million.
>
> I have also viewed the operational plan in terms of significant budgetary changes and below were the findings:
>
> MAJOR BUDGET CHANGES FOR 2019 FY
>
> Strategic objectives Changes in portfolio spending and allocations
> Evolve and further globalize ICANN: STRAT OBJ 1 - significant increased spending 0f $12,5 million SIGNIFICANT BUDGET INCREASES - spending increase Vs YA, mainly driven by $6.7 million net increase on "Bringing ICANN to the world & proactive engagement of stakeholders goal"
> - $5,9 million increase on Ëngaging stakeholders regionally
> - $1.5 miiion increase on "Meeting services"
>
> SIGNIFICANT BUDGET DECREASES- $3.4 million net decrease Vs YA mainly affected by spending reduction on "Regionalisation and globalisation of ICANN functions goal:
> - complete removal of the GSE team coordination & admin budget -$ 1.2 million
> - $1.9 million reduction on "Language services"
>
> Support a healthy, stable and resilient unique identifier ecosystem: STRAT OBJ 2 - decreased spending of $8.8 million SIGNIFICANT BUDGET DECREASES- spending decrease Vs YA mainly affected by $7.1 million spending reduction on "Support the evolution of domain name marketplace to be robust, stable and trusted goal":
> - $1.4 million budget reduction on "Universal Acceptance"
> - $4.2 million budget reduction on "New gTLD Program"
> Another significant budget reduction of $2 million on the "Fostering a secure, stable, and resilient identifier ecosystem" affected by reduced spending of $2.4 million on "Product Management"
>
> NOTABLE BUDGET INCREASES - $900K spending increase Vs YA on "Proactively plan for changes in the use of unique identifiers and develop technology roadmaps to help guide ICANN activities"
> - Identifier evolution expenses experienced a $1.4 million fund injection
> Under the "Support the evolution of domain name marketplace to be robust, stable and trusted goal" $700k was allocated to IDN
>
> Now, as the finance committee, we would like to learn about what members want so that we can champion their interest and provide direction when working with ICANN Finance staff, thanks.
>
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 1:22 PM, Kris Seeburn <seeburn.k at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> All this is for the good but one should look further than set rules. Has anyone looked at the model ICANN i still working how the resources are allocated and why? Sorry i also have the background of chairing and looking at finance strategies and also Board audit committees. Have we looked up on Risks and have we looked up on projects that works and bring the necessary to ICANN.
>>
>> Replenishment is not the only thing ICANN should be looking at but long term strategy and existence. The models are changing be it financial and the internet. So we should be looking at all these in a very strategic way. One is re-evaluate and look at the ICANN strategy and projects and then you start looking at SO/AC and houses/constituencies. Project based budgets, and win/gain strategies.
>>
>> Its not only about money some projects may not bring the money but surely goes as an outreach.So we need to think clear.
>>
>>> On Feb 26, 2018, at 13:39, Thato Mfikwe <thatomfikwe at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> The ICANN’s Finance Team is organising a webinar to look into replenishment of ICANN Reserve Fund and would like to invite you to attend a webinar.
>>>
>>> The webinar will cover the following:
>>>
>>> - Replenishment Strategy for the ICANN Reserve Fund
>>>
>>> - Questions
>>>
>>> Below are the details for the webinar and please also see the announcement on ICANN.org at the following link: https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2018-02-23-en
>>>
>>> If you are unable to participate in this session, it be recorded and posted to the community wiki for future viewing and additional questions.
>>>
>>> Looking forward to your participation.
>>>
>>> Webinar Details and How to Attend
>>>
>>> Date: 1 March 2018
>>>
>>> Time 17:00 UTC
>>>
>>> To participate please access the Remote Participation:
>>>
>>> https://participate.icann.org/planning
>>>
>>> Brief background on Reserve Funds:
>>>
>>> When initially established, the ICANN Reserve Fund is targeted to cover 12 month of ICANN operational expenses due to ICANN's risk profile, unexpected expenses and changing environmental factors of a particular FY. The Reserve fund is governed by [ICANN's Investment Policy](https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/investment-policy-2017-09-18-en) and normally used to address expenses relating to possible and potential consequential events:
>>>
>>> - Replenishing operating expenses due to unbudgeted events, payment of liabilities and maintenance/replacement of assets
>>>
>>> - Downsizing or restructuring of ICANN's operations
>>>
>>> - Mitigation of security and stability threats and attacks
>>>
>>> - Unplanned legal costs, unforeseen external events and operations after disaster
>>>
>>> - New and major programs resulting from a new strategic plan
>>>
>>> To learn more about the Reserve Fund, please click [here](https://www.icann.org/public-comments/reserve-fund-2017-10-12-en) ,looking forward to your participation, thanks.
>>>
>>> Thato Mfikwe - NCSG Finance Committee
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>> Kris Seeburn
>> seeburn.k at gmail.com
>>
>> - www.linkedin.com/in/kseeburn/
>>
>> "Life is a Beach, it all depends at how you look at it"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20180227/22718dbf/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: KeepItOn_Social_animated.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 51490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20180227/22718dbf/attachment.gif>
More information about the Ncuc-discuss
mailing list