Page Comparison

...

1. Debrief on EC meeting John Towns  

   1. RAMPS update had following item:

      1. ACCESS awardees and/or RPs may be interested in some metrics included in RAMPS annual report:

         1. Diversity (institutional; race; gender); inclusion index; allocations success rate; FoS; credits awarded/exchanged/used; allocations by resource; publications, etc.

         2. If interested, please contact Dave.

      2. Question: Yes, interested: can we request this for the ACO rather than having each of us asking Dave?

2. Prep for NSF Annual Review John Towns

   1. From ACO-NSF meeting on March 27, Tom mentioned that “Review: driven by pep and KPIs” -

      1. What implications does this have for our review prep?

   2. What should be our base outline/content covered for each of our areas?

3. ACCESS ACO Quarterly Report - Ready for Submission? John Towns

4. Review Action Items John Towns

...

3. Updates

• EAB Updates Shawn Strande

• Evaluation Update Lizanne DeStefano (Unlicensed)

• Communications UpdateDina Meek

• Community Engagement UpdateJay Alameda

  • Code of Conduct review:

    • Underway, initial thought was to clean up long code of conduct and add it as a “for further reading” fine print addendum to the EC-approved code of conduct

    • Remember that the CB&E team includes a member from each service area plus the ACO, which makes the review a bit awkward.

    • Immediate issues with long code of conduct

      • Mentions steering committee without definition

      • Reporting mechanism inconsistent with EC-approved code of conduct (and provides a non-anonymous ticket submission as the preferred means to report).

      • It it is too long (and has some redundancy), but the overall tone: positive.

      • Original attribution: US-RSE plus 4-5 other organizations

    • Questions about the ombudsperson mentioned in the EC-approved code of conduct:

      • Should this be someone separate from ACCESS?

      • Should it be an ACCESS PI or Co-PI?

      • If it is OK to be populated with ACCESS personnel, should it have representation from all awards?

      • What training should we provide for the ombudspersons? DEI training? What should the source of this training be?

  • Community Building And Engagement Plan: Draft in progress (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ClRorlMAIUa30f_Fhr_XhP7Q96SH-gY3inbL2yspBog/edit#heading=h.21ylrh1soxje ).

  • MS-CC annual meeting: Lizanne is invited, John is on the external advisory board, should we doing more (sending more people, having an ACCESS presence). Time is running short for quality participation this meeting.

  • Impact page from RAMPS: Dave Hart is soliciting input, gathering input from ACO at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1M2WsuKWP29Q6WM11QFxbBqlhDcMWrHWs60WKb3R2HtI/edit . The old page was tremendously valuable, we hopefully have an opportunity to make something even better.

  • Staff tool: Allocation Queries: Dave granted me access to https://xacct-admin.access-ci.org/allocations_queries, which is fantastic! I think I’m not the only one interested in this, can we consider staff access more broadly (across program areas + ACO)?

  • RP Forum Chair: RP Forum is looking for a chair, nominations have been short in coming. Request for some of us to consider this role, but appear to have a COI that strikes us out:

    • RP Forum Chair duties:

      • Term: Remainder of the calendar year; 

        • by then, there should be bylaws that specify a regular election period as well as roles and responsibilities.

      • Convene and run the biweekly meetings (including drumming up topics and presenters)

      • Oversee the creation of bylaws

      • Represent the RP Forum on the ACCESS External Advisory Board.

      • Oversee annual elections

       

      As a reminder, these were the recommendations from the RP Forum Charter committee: If the RP Forum accepts the provisional charter, we also suggest the following to appoint a RP Forum Chair

      • The SP Forum elects the Chair.  It may opt to define additional roles to be elected in the future (e.g. vice-Chair, etc.).

      • To avoid potential conflicts of interest, the SP Forum Chair should not be an individual who is an ACCESS Program awardee PI/Co-PI or lead any area of effort of an ACCESS program project.

      • In order to select an initial Chair, we recommend a simple majority of the voting members of the Forum with membership as defined in the provisional Charter. 

• Project Office & Tools Update Ron Payne

...