Versions Compared
Key
- This line was added.
- This line was removed.
- Formatting was changed.
Attendees:
John Towns, Dina Meek, Tom Gulbransen, Lavanya Podila, Shawn Strande, Cindy Wong, Sharon Geva, Kim Mann Bruch, Shannon Bradley
Decisions made during the meeting:
- Future IPRs will contain lists of funded staff
Use Decision Macro
Agenda/Notes
Updates from NSF (5 minutes)
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)
Here are a few from interim reports - from Tom
On our website - from Dina
Kim writes most of our science stories - otherwise Meghan from NCSA also assists
From Kim
Florida A & M is an R2 and an HBCU that we featured on the ACCESS and SDSC websites in November 2023 regarding their environmental-friendly work that utilized ACCESS resources:
https://www.sdsc.edu/News%20Items/PR20231129_FAMU_materials.html
https://access-ci.org/modeling-catalyst-surface-reactions/
This was also featured on the HPCwire:
Can query XDMOD as a last idea
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
3rd quarter IPR - will we send back a corrected PEP?
need to do the PEP as an updated form only for the 3rd quarter IPR
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
new PEP - includes notes of what rebudgeting will do
what level do they want? how detailed?
They want to start getting personnel level, supplies, all general levels - how many supported, who is supported, …
can add level of effort - but staff may change - do we need names?
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
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
In each IPR - we need to add a list of funded staff
Will provide them access to the PEP document so they can comment directly in the document
What have we heard from stakeholders? (5 minutes)
Many NAIRR proposals include looking at ACCESS opportunities (see 4.a.ii below)
Project Execution Plan revisions (10 minutes)
Area updates (10+ minutes)
ACO
Facilitator identified to discuss DEI and related issues with PIs. Process is under way.
Multiple NAIRR Pilot proposals were directed toward ACCESS Explore allocations
how to maintain distinction and branding between NAIRR and ACCESS?
Dina can help when time is right
Will be speaking at the EC Meeting tomorrow about agenda committee for next Quarterly Meeting
Evaluation
SGX3 should be releasing preliminary info soon
Communications
Sharon was at a meeting - about 50 people - and only 2 people had not heard of ACCESS
Project Office
Provided an update on transition of ACO tasks into Jira vs. Confluence
EAB
Misc:
Tom - discussion about NSF helping tracks understand exactly what the role of the ACO should be
we will know more about this after reviewing Lisa’s report this year
Review To Do Tasks for NSF Meetings
Task report | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Info |
---|
Parking Lot |
Next Meeting: 22nd April 2024
Action Tracker:
Use Action Item Macro to track assigned To Do Items - check the box when it is complete
- John Towns - sketch out budget reporting outline changes for Tom and Sharon to review to see if it meets their needs before we generate the numbers -