Interagency Data Stewardship/LifeCycle/Preservation Forum/TeleconNotes/2015-04-20meetingnotes

Meeting Agenda - DS Committee - 2015-04-20 2PM EDT

(Link to the Notes in Google Doc format )

Link to webex: https://esipfed.webex.com/mw0401lsp11/mywebex/default.do?siteurl=esipfed

Passcode: 23138372

Telecon: 1-877-668-4493 Access Code: 23138372

Attendees: Justin Goldstein, Sophie Hou, Rama Ramapriyan, Ge Peng, Robert Downs, Erin Robinson, Joe Hourcle, Denise Hills, Madison Langseth, Shannon Rauch, Steve Aulenbach, Matt Mayernik, Corinna Gries, Nancy Ritchey, Jason Cooper, Ruth Duerr, Soren Scott, Sarah Ramdeen, Steve Olding, Bob Groman, Heather Brown, Vicky Wolf, Phil

Action Items:

1) Lunch/dinner session at the ESIP Summer Meeting will be proposed “Data Management Training - The Next Steps". - Nancy H and Sophie

2) Please circulate session ideas over the esip-preserve listserve and add them to the commons - for those submitting sessions

Notes:

1. ExCom update (Justin)

a. The Foundation of Earth Science is introducing 2 new staff members.

i. Press release will be available shortly.

ii. New ESIP Community Manager Annie Burgess will be supporting the Data Stewardship Committee.

b. ESIP Summer Meeting theme:

i. ESIP in community and resilience: Coming together.

2. Presentation:

a. The Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center’s (SEDAC) experience with Trusted Digital Repositories (Bob Downs - rdowns AT ciesin DOT columbia DOT edu) - 20 mins + discussion

i. Link to the presentation: http://wiki.esipfed.org/images/6/6b/DownsChenAssessingSciDataCtrTrustworthyDigRepo20150420.pdf

ii. Bob Chen co-authored the presentation.

b. Using ISO 16363:2012 to assess Trustworthy Digital Repository.

i ISO 16919:2014 is used for the auditors to perform the audit.

c. Training sessions are being offered to allow people to become familiar with the ISO standards and to become auditors.

d. Accrediting is different for different countries, and no organization has yet to be accredited to-date.

e. By using the self-assessment template, rationales and justifications of how current practices are measured against the Trustworthy Digital Repository criteria can be recorded.

f. SEDAC was involved in an ISO 16363 test audit.

i. SEDAC is one of twelve Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAACs) in the NASA Earth Observing System Data and INformation System.

ii. SEDAC has been following and been involved with ISO 16363 since the beginning.

iii. Preparation for the test audit included: presentation to Primary Trustworthy Digital Repository Authorization Board (PTAB) and completion of the self assessment.

iv: Areas audited followed the structure of ISO 16363.

v. Results of the audit showed that SEDAC demonstrated commitment to archiving input data and had strong tradition of adding value to data.

1. However, additional areas for improvement were also identified. Highlights: preservation plans to include details of new procedures as they are adopted, procedures for recording the provenance and data integrity.

vi. An improvement plan was developed to address each of the areas for improvement, including creation of training modules, implementation of digital object identifiers, revision of the data dissemination process, and assessment of SEDAC community.

vii. Sample of Overall insights gained: increasing the preparation for an audit improves the quality of recommendations received for further improvement. Also, the assessment and improvement are an ongoing process. Increasing efficiency while increasing operational effectiveness is helpful as well. Finally, it would be crucial to plan to surpass the standard as both the repository and the standard continue to develop.

viii. Examples of benefits of ISO 16363 audit of SEDAC: provides independent evaluation, improves transparency, quality assurance, efficiency/effectiveness, data preservation capability, and recognizes responsibilities and achievements.

g. Q: Is there a cost associated with using the self-assessment template?

i. A: No; the template is free of charge to use.

h. Q: Would Bob recommend that a data center completes the self assessment?

i. A: Yes; the actual audit would be very benefit, but even the self assessment could help highlight various areas for improvement.

i Q: How to deal with sensitive data, such as financial data?

i. A: In the case of SEDAC, meetings with PTAB were conducted to communicate the concerns and identify methods to address these concerns. For example, the auditors might need to sign non-disclosure agreement.

3. ESIP Summer Meeting sessions - 10 mins Session Ideas: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1STQr_p-tO8oM-_qxQCBBP_2Aj2KyMng_qj_wIZFndZc/edit?usp=sharing

a. Activities report out and planning session

i. Data Management Training workshop

ii. A proposal is still needed.

iii. Data Maturity Matrix

b. No comments were provided on the proposals for the other sessions.

c. Sarah - iSamples is also interested in submitting a session at ESIP Summer Meeting.

i. Action Item for those submitting sessions: Please circulate the session idea over the esip-preserve listserve and add it to the commons.

4. Reports:

a. Data Citation (Matt Mayernik - mayernik AT ucar DOT edu)

i. http://www2.ametsoc.org/ams/index.cfm/publications/authors/journal-and-bams-authors/journal-and-bams-authors-guide/data-archiving-and-citation/ - 10 mins + discussion

ii. Data Archiving and Citation within AMS Journals: http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/2015MWR2222.1

iii. Amercan Geophysical Union - AGU Publications Data Policy, http://publications.agu.org/author-resource-center/publication-policies/data-policy/

b. The recommendation was written to reflect the current best practices. The recommendation also wanted to incorporate the feedback provided by the scientists to the previous citation guidelines.

c. AGU vs AMS:

i. AMS added clarification to some ambiguities observed in the AGU recommendations.

ii. AGU provided a specified timeline on how long authors could keep data (5 years); AMS did not include a timeline because the timeline is arbitrary and the actual enforcement is difficult.

iii. AMS provided specific examples of data citations, especially for common situations.

d. That of AMS is not a “policy” because it is not a mandate. Rather, it is a strong recommendation on how to provide data citation in order to support and promote best practices.

i. AMS is cognizant of submissions from different countries might have legal reasons that makes providing the full citation difficult.

e. Comment from Rama:

i. Specifying a duration for which cited data have to be kept is akin to specifying duration for cited papers. So it is good AMS is not specifying a duration.

5. Other business (only if time permitting):

a. Wiki Activities section update

6. Adjourn

Next Meeting: May 18 2 PM EDT. Kerstin Lehnert will present about the Coalition for Publishing Data in the Earth and Space Sciences