Crafting a Proposal

Each year our World Service Organization (WSO) issues a Call for Proposals to all registered groups.  A Proposal is a vehicle for presenting an idea, issue, or concern to the entire fellowship. Once the WSO adds an analysis, a Ballot is sent with the proposals to all WSO registered groups to help determine what will be included on the agenda at the next ABC.

A Proposal may total no more than 500 words, and is formatted in three parts:

  • The Issue
  • The Background
  • An Argument in Favor

Proposals are best kept as specific and succinct as possible, addressing matters of concern to ACA as a whole.

If you have questions that aren’t answered here, or your group needs help putting your idea in the appropriate format, please contact the Ballot Preparation Committee at [email protected]


Examples of Past Proposals for Reference

  1. From 2016: This proposal was very well written. It addressed a specific issue, put it in context, and made a clear case as to why it should be addressed by the fellowship.

Issue: We propose that… The New Meeting Packet include different alternatives for a Meeting Format.

History: The present suggested format seems inadequate and even awkward. We realize it is an editable format, but it doesn’t have some of the essential elements many meetings use, including the Traditions and the reading of the day from the Meditation Book. It also doesn’t include some of the meeting format sample in the BRB that seem essential, such as the part about Fixing and that ACA is not therapy. Many meetings also do things in a different order, for instance, announcements come before sharing.

Argument in favor: We realize that this document can’t be all things to all people. We just would like to give people more choices that come from the experience, strength and hope of established meetings, rather than have new meetings reinvent the wheel, especially those started by newcomers in new areas. It’s about providing information they can choose from, not making decisions for groups. We hope to give each meeting the best start they can.


  1. From 2015: This proposal, like the previous example, addresses a specific issue, offers relevant background, and makes a logical argument.

Issue: We propose that copies of any material referenced in a ballot proposal be made available with the ballot or on the WSO website for groups to review before voting. (Exclusive of the 500 word limit.)

History/Reasoning: In the past ballot proposals have requested action regarding specific materials without making them available for review. There currently exists no codified standard vetting of ballot submissions. Proposals are placed on the ballot and presented to the fellowship largely as submitted, reviewed for form but not clarity of language or factual accuracy.

Argument in Favor: Materials could easily be attached to paper or electronic ballots, posted on the webpage, links or at least citations provided. However, without access to the material in question an informed group conscience is not possible. (Of course, we would gladly withdraw this proposal should any changes to the OPPM render it moot.)


  1. From 2018: Another well-written and succinct proposal. 

Issue: We propose that WSO look into adding intergroup and meeting group web links into the WSO website directory listings on

History/Reasoning: We would like to easily access other fellowships web links for additional information and resources. The current directory on does not contain web links.

Argument in Favor: This increases our ability to collaborate and share resources and new ideas as a fellowship. This will increase our healing opportunities with efficiency world wide. It's grass roots sharing. Web links will afford the different fellowship groups and abundance of opportunities.