Page Comparison

Agenda/Notes

1. Updates from NSF (5 minutes)

   1. Received quarterly reports, he's making a pass through it and made some comments and sent to John
      

2. NeurIPS https://neurips.cc/Exhibitors/exhibitorinfo

   1. John to submit a supplemental funding request with SPA with a justification

   2. Once that is complete and we have it approved by SPA, Lavanya to submit an RTP

   3. Tom suggests we should target the Bronze tier

   4. But it doesn’t offer a monitor,

   5. Lavanya to figure out the costs for a monitor and any costs related to electricity
      

3. Draft agenda for mid-year review

   1. Generally speaking Tom agrees to keep it targeted, and focused narrowly as possible

   2. Section 2 and Section 3 are good, cover successes from top to bottom as the topics were raised by the reviewers.

   3. Instead of having a separate section towards the end, what if we have a “more to come” after each topic.

   4. Basically remove section 4

   5. In the eval working group, the reviewers acknowledge Lisa's work and the feedback gathered.

   6. One of the upcoming reviewers said, how the ACO is asking for feedback?  Is the ACO asking for feedback from the teams, EAB etc. This will be a potential question during the upcoming review.

   7. The reviewers will ask questions as we go, so basically they can close out topics.

   8. Lunch is a little early, maybe after Session 3. Break at 11:30 pm and then Lunch at 1:00 pm

   9. At the beginning, take a couple minutes to note the nature of ACO's role, enable and facilitate

   10. If you think there's a different sequence in which to present, then take the liberty to change the sequence.

   11. There will be some people from the prior panel and some new people.

   12. If we run out of time, we will continue the conversations and then address the questions asynchronously, (if necessary)

   13. ACO to revise the agenda outline as per the feedback receivedReviewed agenda and received feedback

   14. ACO to recreate the agenda
       

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

   1. RAC meeting will be happening soon

   2. Shawn will be representing the ACO
      

5. Area updates (10+ minutes)

   1. ACO

      1. Will participate in today’s RAC meeting

      2. Preparing for mid-year review

   2. Evaluation

      1. Eval WG met last week. Deep discussion about winnowing down the program wide metrics. Clear steps ahead.

   3. Communications;

      1. Continued work on SC23

         1. Comms plan management

         2. Finalizing Highlights book for print

         3. Finalizing details for ACCESS the Experts

      2. Working with Stephen Deems on adjusting our Comms plan to be more WG-focused

      3. Dina showed the highlights book and it is going to be printed soon

   4. Community Engagement;

      1. Planning events beyond SC23

      2. Coordinating tracking of contacts from each event

   5. Project Office;

      1. Continued work on SC23

         1. SC catering order

         2. SC Booth payments

      2. Planning for mid year review

   6. EAB

   7. Misc Topic

      1. How is one metric different than other metric in terms of context, and ensuring they are not just a number.

         1. For instance, ticket response time, some may take a longer duration and some may be fast

         2. Institutional diversity in terms of Goal 5, which is an easy on

         3. Shawn put together a consolidated spreadsheet from all the breakout sessions during the Program Wide Goals session, all these metrics are relevant in terms of context

      2. Katie is really interested in resource capacity, at some point it will be quantified, Joe and Deems are working on it and what are the ceilings.

         1. Then the follow up will be - How is ACCESS doing with over bookings?

• item

• item

• NSF Dashboard topic - will be covered next time