Page Comparison

1. DEI Plan discussion (Agbeli Ameko) (20 mins)

   1. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1NDQ_pAbLJ6SLU5HvrxeEzGgwAj-7qj8WKOgq49GSQ8E/edit#heading=h.pmnz3h4z1yin

   2. People have been making comments already

   3. Looking for feedback

   4. Working group transitioning into a standing committee

      1. Tom G - when this happens - is there a way to help those who are implementing it to know is this affordable and is it able to be done? Should everyone be expected to get it done? How to help people to commit to contributing without over promising

      2. The team scoped and scaled to they would not be overambitious - they have actionable items set up over time period - and they will break down some task details as a next step (set up in Task Details table in the doc)

      3. Don’t try to do every thing for every body all the time - make sure to have spread out

   5. Democratization Plan is now the new naming

   6. Have internal and external goals

   7. Input and recommendations from IBIS review (in excel table) were used to feed the plan and goals

   8. Report shared by IBIS is in the excel table - Leslie just shared the report itself with the EC

   9. Subgoal 2 and 5 - should they be combined? please evaluate - at least put them closer together in the list

   10. There is some over lap with program wide goals - and how we address those - we should probably note which ones are already part of the program wide goals

   11. There is a general philosophical background by naming this a democratization plan - and implies are we moving away from DEI - are we comfortable with this naming? to some external folks DEI still has a lot of relevance

   12. We do have an external access wide goal in this doc that pretty much matches an already existing goal - should we just replace the verbiage

   13. From the perspective of looking at the plan itself - this is a DEI Plan … not a Democratization Plan - it should be discussed and promoted as such - if it was a Demo… - the goals would be worded differently

   14. We need to word it so it can be used in states like Texas - we don’t want to force someone to leave ACCESS because they are not able to participate in an org that has DEI in supporting documents and how they interpret it

   15. It is within our right to call it a DEI plan - and we can define what we aim toward as part of a DEI plan

   16. Pieces are here in the right order - comments in doc are around 20 actions in the table and whether the group could prioritize them (feasibility?) condense it and build a backlog and start with the primary ones - focus action

   17. We need a way to characterize if something is effective - so we can pivot - need to see for any task a way to measure if it is worth our time - is something effective embedded into the goals

   18. In Defense of Democratization - NSF has been promoting

   19. Why are the internal and external goals in the same document? Possibly move this to two documents for ease of use

   20. Metrics - eval group was also stumped for metrics on these topics as well

   21. If you go to some websites - they have a very distinct summary of DEI with a few goals listed with notable metrics - can be communicated into a simple report that can be compared year over year - it would be nice to do this so we are not trying to do too much

   22. Feeling from EC - it is on the right track - more updates needed based on comments above and in the document

2. Approval of summaries from prior EC meeting John Towns (5 mins)

   1. 2024-07-02 ACCESS EC Meeting Agenda & Summary

3. Program Milestone CheckJohn Towns (5 mins)

4. Risk discussion as future topic? (Shawn Strande) (5 mins)

   1. ACO received feedback during review - surfacing program wide risks in EC meeting would be a useful thing to do - risks that have a program wide impact that can impact the project itself

   2. should this be a more formal part of our meeting on a regular basis? How often?

   3. We should dedicate some time for this discussion - might need some people (a group) to coalesce things out of the risk register - where are we all picking similar risk issues

   4. Tom G - would be nice to hear from teams in a report to this group - we closed these risks last month could be a great discussion

5. Finalize EAB agenda (Shawn Strande) (10 mins)

   1. 2024-07-18 ACCESS EAB Meeting Agenda & Summary

   2. meeting is next week

   3. make sure to review some of the slated items

      1. Stephen - resource catalog, resource mapper - could you give some quick updates? - yes, willing to lead session

      2. Revision of Charter may also be put on the agenda

6. Informational Items (10 mins)

   1. RP Forum Jeremy Fischer

   2. Allocations Stephen Deems

      1. While PEARC24 is on our mind, do we have any other conferences on the horizon in which we’d like to exhibit? E.g TAPIA in September. Allocations has program income (from XRAS) that can be deployed, but time is ticking.

         1. https://cmd-it.org/tapia-conference/

         2. Follow up on this in ACO meeting

   3. MATCH Shelley Knuth/Alana

      1. can we set aside 8 to 10 mins at beginning of this meeting to discuss resource selector tools - special meeting or week after PEARC or an Ad Hoc PI meeting - Alana/Tim will schedule

      2. Shelley will not be at PEARC

   4. CONECT Tim Boerner/Leslie

      1. Tim and Leslie will be at PEARC next week

   5. MMS Tom Furlani

      1. releasing next version of XDMOD - probably after PEARC

   6. OpenCI John Towns

      1. EAB Meeting

      2. September in-person meeting planning

      3. PEARC planning - (in San Diego)

         1. Discussion: PEARC Talking Points to be given to people who attend so they can be informed and consistent on what is shared about ACCESS

            1. Dina and team are working on this - you may get a request from her to give 3 or 4 talking points

      4. Next week’s EC meeting: Web SC will attend EC to brief on Personas web effort
         

Misc Topics: