Page Comparison

Agenda/Notes

1. Updates from NSF (30 minutes)

   1. NeurIPS booth - one stakeholder mentioned that we should revise our elevator pitch and logo.

   2. Our ACCESS statements should be from the customers point of view.

   3. We should focus on the persona based expression, what services we offer?  How? Not quite as pointedly,

   4. We should revisit the branding perhaps near the annual reviews.

   5. Comms and branding team will work with NSF from the outline phase for the yearly book this year. Address some of the questions like, how ACCESS plays with other OAC programs.

   6. We tend to struggle sometimes in the Booth, we provide talking points but people to do paraphrase them which tends to change the meaning.

   7. NAIRR Updates

      1. There is a tight timeframe for NAIRR - we are not taking away computational resources from ACCESS, we are using resources outside of resources for NAIRR. That's an important point to stress.
         The pilot launch has come from the executive order with a launch date of 29th.

      2. One potential question that might come up - Which one should I apply to ACCESS or NAIR? If the user is trying to get a larger allocation through ACCESS then maybe going with NAIRR would be a better idea.

      3. There is an executive order coming which clearly outlines what is in scope for NAIRR.

      4. OAC recognizes that it can be confusing for the users and the community and is working on creating a focus for this pilot.

   8.  Given the feedback that reviewers gave us in November and May about being proactive.

   9. Tom suggests that we should proactively think about how the ecosystem communicates with each other.
      

2. What have we heard from stakeholders? (5 minutes)

   1. JD connected with several folks at NeurIPS, nothing concrete determined yet.

3. Discuss changes to IPR (5 minutes)

   1. There is some duplication in sections and the ACO would like to propose changes in the next 1-2 days? Following which we request an extension to submit the IPR.

   2. NSF agrees to the timeline.
      

4. ACO comments to mid-year review (5 minutes)

   1. John has made a pass through the ACO comments

   2. ACO-NSF to have some discussions in the next week or so
      

5. Area updates (10+ minutes)

   1. ACO;

   2. Evaluation;

      1. Shawn shares that he took a course on IRB

      2. If you want to use the survey data for public consumption, then we need an IRB.

   3. Communications;

      1. With Community Engagement have kicked off the Conference Competitive Analysis

         1. Working to deliver what we have in Feb.

      2. Newsletters survey - will receive results tomorrow and determine next steps

      3. Websites - working on updating branding to incorporate NSF logo, language, etc.

   4. Community Engagement;

   5. Project Office;

      1. Planning for the next quarterly meeting

   6. EAB;
      

6. Misc:

   1. ACCESS Researcher Advisory Committee meeting rescheduled to Monday, Mar. 11 from 2 - 3:30 PM CT (originally scheduled for Monday, Feb. 26).

      1. This conflicts with the scheduled ACO-NSF meeting on this day.