Action Table

Cross Cutting Issues
		What processes have been established for implementing and overseeing recommendations of the review teams?	What did ICANN learn?	What worked well? What did not work well? What adjustments had to be made?	What improvements were made in the subsequent review processes?	How did staff and Board ensure that public interest was addressed after the implementation was completed?	What Metrics or success criteria was established? How processes can be verified in an accountable and transparent way?	What review methods for continual assessment have been considered and adopted/ applied?	How has efficiency, effectiveness and legitimacy been factored into the review processes	To what extend has transparency been factored in as a default condition?	How ICANN can be effective and efficient while improving full multi-stakeholder participation, accountability and transparency?
	Key Issues
1	Looking at the recommendations of the three other groups – ICANN’s interpretation of review team recommendations – ICANN’s implementation of the recommendations. Asking the question: “Does it satisfy the standard outlined in the affirmation?”
2	Review the Board and staff process used to review, implement and oversee recommendations of review teams.
3	Review actions of the Board and staff in ensuring public interest
4	Accountability + Transparency = Legitimacy towards Governments and the larger Internet. How is ICANN outreach doing? Where it going?

ATRT