Draft Excom Minutes

Approval of September Minutes
- Denise motioned to approve Minutes as amended and Christine seconded. The minutes were approved by acclamation.

RDA
- In September 2016, the 8th RDA plenary in happening in conjunction with a Week of Data, which ESIP should become involved.
- RDA testbed discussions. ESIP could inform/share our experience with testbeds.

Comment on President’s Report:

(Ken) There are the beginnings of an EarthCube testbed that could be included in the discussion of an RDA testbed.
(Christine) How can we share testbed best practices?

Erin Robinson
- Call for IGNITE@AGU has been released.
- We have been offered a shared booth space with DataONE and SEEDnet at AGU.
- ESIP, in collaboration with USGS’s Community for Data Integration (CDI) submitted a ‘statement of interest’ to the CDI funding cycle on a training clearinghouse for data management training materials.
- Foundation board meeting tomorrow.
Annie
- AIST Technology evaluations have started.
- 8 total evaluators for 3 projects.
- The Technology Evaluation Framework is an informational portal, but there is still lots of email communication that needs to happen to keep things moving.
- Several editorial pieces coming out: Member Highlights and Interviews.

Peter
- Erin has produced a detailed budget for the foundation that has income and expenses.
- This is an introduction to the budget. An email will be sent out after this meeting regarding what input is being sought from ExCom related to the budget.
- The idea is to have a process around having a balanced budget on a ~yearly basis. This is important because money in the Federation flows to student fellows, ExCom travel, committees, so the budget document is meant to be more explicit in describing what the expense categories are. Including identifying programmatic elements.
- We are positioning ourselves for a more detailed budget discussion in November.
Erin
- When looking at the income, there are known commodities such as Raskin money, NASA, NOAA. Then there is registration fees, which is dependent on meeting attendance. Also potential for sponsorship income.

Comments on the budget:

(Justin) Is the fact that we are already into FY16 reflected in the budget?
(Erin) No, we aren’t prorating.
(Erin) The budget is balanced with registration, which is why the budget is balanced to < $1.
(Danie) What would sponsorship look like for one of the meetings?
(Erin) Sponsorship and registration can cover the meeting costs, then our sponsorship $ can be used to expand our programmatic capabilities, i.e. student fellows. Time for us to think about how we spend out money and where. Sponsorship opportunities could be sponsoring beer/wine at posters, funding Friday prize, student fellow travel.

Summer Meeting
- Down to three Summer Meeting locations: UNC Chapel Hill, Friday Center, University of New Hampshire, and University of Florida, Gainsville.
- U. of Florida is eager to have us, but they do not have the wifi.
- UNC is looking like best bet and can accommodate DataONE. Reasonably priced.
Future Summer Meeting locations
- 2017: Midwest is open.
- 2018: Boulder, Center Green is open.
Winter Meeting
- (Christine) Visioneers liked both modeling and big data. Lots of discussion around clarification of theme ideas. Another option is a shorter theme with an accompanying paragraph.
- The idea was also floated of a yearly theme that covers both meetings.
- (Denise) Visioneers really liked idea of a yearly theme related to Big Data and Earth Science. Also, there could be sub-themes for each meeting.
- (LuAnn) Really likes the idea of a year-long theme.
- (Ted) Likes the year-long theme with the potential of having a modeling and observation sub-theme.

Comments on Meeting Location:

Justin: Point of information, a strength of Monterey was the number of travel options. Was there a financial hit to ESIP that the fact the closest airport was small.
Erin: Monterey was an expensive meeting because of transport.

FiCom (Bill): Need to coordinate with Erin regarding getting announcing for requesting for budget submission out.
Partnership (Erin): No new member applications.
C&B (Ken): Had a good C&B meeting and came up with 3 recommendations, which is in this link (ADD).
Stewardship (Justin): ESIP is going to formally respond to GEO data management principles. Rama lead a very good discussion about citizen science during last DS meeting.
Education (LuAnn): Using drones as a theme for our next set of workshops. May tap ESIP community members to help with that. Margaret M. is getting people together around the launch of the next GOES-R .
Ethan (IT&I): Good Rand and Rave at the last call with Raj, who will be submitting a session to the winter meeting.
Nominations (Denise): Awards are due by the end of October.
Products and Services (Christine): Approved minor change in Toolmatch budget. Annie reviewed OSF Testbed Evaluation Framework. We will be releasing a new RFP for testbed.
Type I (Danie): Talk to Type 1s about Winter Meeting representation, how to leverage their participation. Maybe expand poster to poster-playground of showing repositories. Showing connectedness of repos within ESIP.

TOP guidelines are a set of guidelines about transparency in science and publishing. The Foundation for Earth Science has signed on and are putting it out to ExCom about adding ESIP.
Christine suggests a session about TOP at the Winter Meeting. Maybe put TOP guidelines onto the Monday Update.