Content Comparison

C.S - STRENGTHS                                                                            

C.S.1 - Membership diversity can bring talent

C.S.2 - In-house knowledge of budgetary requirements within At-Large

C.S.3 - Improved consultation among the RALOs and their representatives on ALAC

C.S.4 - Cost-effective actions

C.S.5 - Experience sharing among RALOs  

C.S.6 - A bottom-up budget structure for At-Large      

ADD ALS CONTRIBUTIONS HERE

C.W - WEAKNESSES                                                                   

C.W.1 - Lack of established feedback loop from ICANN

C.W.2 - Communication problems ICANN finance

C.W.3 - No possibility of ROI figure - "investing in At Large is like investing in R&D"

C.W.4 - ICANN currently only source of funds for At Large

C.W.5 - Lack of clear funding schedule/calendar with regards to face to face general assemblies introduces uncertainty

C.W.6 - We need to improve our interaction with the staff during the budget planning process. 

ADD ALS CONTRIBUTIONS HERE

C.O - OPPORTUNITIES                                                                         

C.O.1 - ALAC/At-Large could provide information regarding At-Large budgetary needs in a more timely manner and in the required format

ADD ALS CONTRIBUTIONS HERE

C.T - THREATS                                                                            

C.T.1 - Limiting ALAC's budget could:

    1.  Directly and severely affect outreach capability

    2.  Allow for fewer or no face-to-face meetings (including but not limited to GAs, ICANN meetings, Summits, RALO meetings, other "inreach" efforts, etc.) 

         a.  Possible consequences could include ALSes' abandoning At-Large, reducing At-Large's usefulness and legitimacy

ADD ALS CONTRIBUTIONS HERE