Page Comparison

Agenda/Notes

1. Updates from NSF (5 minutes)

   1. Question from Sharon (inquired by NSF Comms): We’re looking for recent ACCESS projects that are related to environmental resilience, or other environmental topics. Dina - do you have anything relevant she’s been working on for comms purposes? (April is the month for the environment)

      1. Here are a few from interim reports - from Tom

         1. Waves On the Rocks - Access (access-ci.org)

         2. Insights Into Tiny Marine Life - Access (access-ci.org)

         3. Healing Snakes With Supercomputers - Access (access-ci.org)

         4. Using Deep Learning to Understand Permafrost Thaw - Access (access-ci.org)

      2. On our website - from Dina

         1. https://access-ci.org/tag/environment/

         2. Kim writes most of our science stories - otherwise Meghan from NCSA also assists

      3. Can query XDMOD as a last idea

   2. 4th Quarter report is a precursor of what will be in the Annual Review - they will send some input from the report which might be able to help us with the review

   3. 3rd quarter IPR - will we send back a corrected PEP?

      1. need to do the PEP as an updated form only for the 3rd quarter IPR

         1. does new PEP have info that the DeStefano role is moved to Shawn - but will this be the final decision on how to cover this role? - yes

         2. new PEP - includes notes of what rebudgeting will do

            1. what level do they want? how detailed?

               1. They want to start getting personnel level, supplies, all general levels - how many supported, who is supported, …

               2. can add level of effort - but staff may change - do we need names?

               3. Can PEP just be level of effort and put names in the IPR? - yes this is OK - they want to start year 3 with that level of detail so they can base the funding for Year 4 on that detail - the aggregation already implemented does not give enough detail

               4. Use 1030 level detail for every WBS? this is lots of effort - Tom asks us to sketch it out before and give it to them to see if it would meet their needs

               5. In each IPR - we need to add a list of funded staff

         3. Will provide them access to the PEP document so they can comment directly in the document
            

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

   1. Many NAIRR proposals include looking at ACCESS opportunities (see 4.a.ii below)
      

3. Project Execution Plan revisions (10 minutes)

4. Area updates (10+ minutes)

   1. ACO

      1. Facilitator identified to discuss DEI and related issues with PIs. Process is under way.

      2. Multiple NAIRR PIlot Pilot proposals were directed toward ACCESS Explore allocations

         1. how to maintain distinction and branding between NAIRR and ACCESS?

         2. Dina can help when time is right

      3. Will be speaking at the EC Meeting tomorrow about agenda committee for next Quarterly Meeting

   2. Evaluation

      1. SGX3 should be releasing preliminary info soon

   3. Communications

      1. Sharon was at a meeting - about 50 people - and only 2 people had not heard of ACCESS

   4. Project Office

      1. Provided an update on transition of ACO tasks into Jira vs. Confluence

   5. EAB
      

5. Misc:

   1. Tom - discussion about NSF helping tracks understand exactly what the role of the ACO should be

      1. we will know more about this after reviewing Lisa’s report this year

   2. Review To Do Tasks for NSF Meetings