<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [council] Travel policy draft and other comments

Thanks Olga.  If as Doug seems to suggest that the travel support must be allocated on a head count basis based on airfare and/or per diem, what happens if the total head count cannot be evenly divided across constituencies or stakeholder groups in the future?  To use our current situation as an example, what happens if there are 10 full heads (airfare + per diem) funded for a given meeting; how would/could that be divided evenly across six constituencies?  It seems to me that it is likely that we would end up with partial airfare and/or per diem for some individuals: 10 fully funded heads divided by 6 = 1.67 heads per constituency; it becomes even more complicated if some only get airfare and others only get per diem, The end result in most cases is the same: constituencies would get partial amounts for airfare and/or per diem, which it appears ICANN will not support.
 
I hope I am not overly complicating this, but the proposal below combined with Doug's feedback does not seem to be feasible.
 
Chuck

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Olga Cavalli
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 2:26 PM
To: GNSO Council
Subject: [council] Travel policy draft and other comments


Hi,
In preparation for our conference call tomorrow, I am enclosing in this email the draft text prepared by the drafting team, which includes the suggestions made by Phillip and acceppted by some of us.
There is also a brief summary of Doug Brent´s response in relation with the request of flexibility for fund allocation.
There has not been a lot of feedback from constituencies to this text, so am not sure if we are ready yet to draft a motion.
Looking forward to talking to you tomorrow.
Regards
Olga

 

GNSO PRINCIPLES FOR ALLOCATION OF TRAVEL SUPPORT FUNDS FOR ICANN MEETING

Allocation and Control:

The total GNSO Travel support budget (less the amount allotted to the NCAs and GNSO Council chair) should be divided to the extent possible on an equal basis among the GNSO constituencies. 

The use of travel support funds is for travel to ICANN meetings, including regional, inter-sessional, and face-to-face working group meetings.

The use of travel support funds is to be solely determined by each constituency independently as it sees fit to most effectively progress the work of the GNSO.

The GNSO Council has no role in deciding how these funds are allocated
to individuals.

Transparency and Reporting:

ICANN staff will publish the names of all those who receive travel support together with a list of the relevant meeting(s) for which the support was given and which were attended by the support recipient.

 

Highligts of the comments sent by Doug Brent:

The current travel procedure talks about a certain number of people getting travel support for meetings (air and per diem). To add some flexibility at the cost of some additional tracking, ICANN can enable a split of that support; a certain number receiving air reimbursement and a certain number receiving per diem support (where these could be different people). To belabor the point for clarity, if before there were ten total people supported for air and per diem, now perhaps five could receive both air and per diem, five could receive air only, and five per diem only.

Using this approach there will be a number of supported people, not a fund.

Then, each constituency would be allocated some number of supported travelers.

If we go by number of travelers, the variability is a budget variability that does not affect the constituency; it will just impact the accuracy of ICANN budgeting by the staff.