2025-04-22 ACCESS EC Meeting Agenda & Summary

(v) indicates a voting member

Decisions made during the meeting:

Agenda

Additional Agenda Items

2. March Quarterly Survey Results (15 mins - All)

   1. https://docs.google.com/document/d/10h4XAFXNvjU9hR1uB1gDf2meIfdkG2t-oJA80MNx4_E/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.ae1n0yi1kxfq

      1. Please review as a group (AI summary below)

      2. Needed chart labels updated to know what the responses mean - those were updated during the meeting

AI-assisted Summary of Open-Ended Questions
🔹 Agenda Suggestions & Content Focus

1. Conferences Update: People are interested in knowing what conferences the program is attending or has attended. It’s a good way to show external engagement and relevance.

2. Real Planning over Recap: Multiple comments point out that “PY4 Plans” didn’t feel forward-looking. People want actionable plans, clear goals, and vision—not just a retrospective.

   1. Make sure to share these with more info in the June Quarterly

3. RP Involvement:

   • Invite Resource Providers to share updates on services/resources. (tools)

   • Suggestions include a dedicated 30-60 minute session or embedding RP input into existing segments.

4. Workflow Impacts: A specific ask to show how developments affect other tracks—helping teams adapt proactively.

5. SWOT Analysis: A SWOT for the project might help align on strengths, challenges, and priorities.

   1. ACCESS is 3 years in - what do we see in a SWOT?

🖥️ Virtual Meeting Feedback

• Zoom Fatigue: (expected this response since we had to cancel the in person meeting at the last moment)

  • 2 long (5-6 hour) Zoom days were too draining.

  • 2-hour sessions with no breaks didn’t work well.

  • Suggestion to spread virtual meetings over several shorter days.

• Better Use of Format:

  • Focus on info-sharing over discussion—Zoom isn’t ideal for deep conversation.

  • Info segments should be short (≤30 minutes) to maintain attention.

  • Consider breaking up long presentation blocks with breaks or transitions.

• Interactivity & Engagement:

  • Zoom discourages discussion; very few people speak up.

  • Suggestions: polls, quizzes, structured brainstorming to boost interaction.

    • Balance this with the fact that the planning committee is already doing a lot that is over their regular duties

  • Try new strategies to draw out quieter voices.

✅ What Went Well

• Quick adaptation/pivoting was noticed and appreciated.

• Value in the online session was acknowledged, even if it’s not as impactful as in-person meetings.

❌ What Didn’t Go Well

1. Many sessions didn’t follow the stated purpose or format (e.g., "What Everyone is Developing" turned into a recap).

2. There’s frustration that not following the intended structure diminishes the session quality.
   
   
   

3. June Quarterly Meeting (10 mins) - All

   1. Recommended Sessions:

      1. PY4 plans

         1. since we will have completed the joint review - should we share highlights the review as well?

         2. Provide a very specific structure on how to share this - make sure it is more streamlined

            1. maybe a 3 or 5 point list and ask for discussion rather than giving a 20 point list

            2.  since they’re quarterlies, maybe we take a lesson from business and don’t look TOO far in the future and maybe concentrate on what we think we’ll happen this quarter

            3. Maybe meta-goals with the intent of making future management across tracks easier?

      2. What is everyone doing? - this seems to be very popular

      3. RPs present? - Jeremy will ask at the forum and see if anyone is interested - so far it has not come up

   2. We won’t be able to please everyone
      
      

4. Review Milestones and Tasks To Do (5 mins) - Shannon
   Overdue

Open

Open

6. Collective Discussion about ACCESS - All/NSF

   1. “After all the five separate ACCESS awardee sessions have been held, NSF will convene a session with the five ACCESS award PIs for a collective discussion about overlapping ACCESS activities between awards and/or overall ACCESS gaps that were made visible in the separate discussions about PY4 plans.”

   2. Should we look to set a date for this meeting?

      1. Cannot be before Mid May - look to there

      2. Tim will be out most of May. Could we consider May 27?

      3. Stephen traveling 13/14

      4. Shelley on vacation May 27

      5. John flying on May 20

      6. What about June 3? This works for everyone - add this to the Agenda for Discussion

         1. An hour is not enough

         2. Book for 2 hours
            
            

7. Change Management Process - Jeremy (5 mins)

   1. This means change in operating infrastructure - that crosses all tracks

   2. Is there an official process and should there be one? Doubt it is unified

   3. GitLab to follow?

   4. Comments should be going out thru Affinity Group - Jeremy hasn’t seen any

   5. It does have to be posted to the Outages - and then it goes to Affinities Group

   6. On the one on Amy - there should have been an alert - Stephen will go over as a post mortem to see what happened

   7. People have to subscribe to the Affinity group

   8. Should we not have multiple lists and just one spot?

   9. System Status News | Operations

   10. Is there a consistent plan that everyone follows?
       
       From Stephen for Jeremy

       Open

       

       
       
       

8. Updates on NSF Priorities (10 mins) - John

   1. https://www.nsf.gov/updates-on-priorities

      1. this has now been updated

         1. Broadening participation needs to be all Americans

         2. Need to close the loop on Democratization SC - it was suspended - should we shut it down or continue under new priorities

      2. Shelley thinks it is worthwhile to repurpose the group to something more Outreach related

      3. May be a way to address the lack of a CB&E group - and focus it as building communities as a whole

      4. Each award including RPs - all have contributions for Outreach - would be good to corral all of them so we know what is going on

      5. Comms group is Communications and Outreach - we should pair and leverage this

         1. Comms should be able to focus on Communications and supporting Outreach

      6. Would be nice to have a group that is specifically thinking about the whole community

      7. the Democratization committee should discuss this - needs to connect with the EC more regularly

"(1) Increased economic competitiveness of the United States.
"(2) Development of a globally competitive STEM workforce.
"(3) Increased participation of women and underrepresented minorities in STEM.
"(4) Increased partnerships between academia and industry.
"(5) Improved pre-K–12 STEM education and teacher development.
"(6) Improved undergraduate STEM education.
"(7) Increased public scientific literacy.
"(8) Increased national security."

Misc Topics:

Next EC Meeting: 29th April 2025

Reference:

Risk Register: https://access-ci.atlassian.net/jira/core/projects/RR/board

Project Change Request: https://access-ci.atlassian.net/jira/core/projects/PCR/board