P&S Telecon - February 16, 2016

From Federation of Earth Science Information Partners
Revision as of 22:00, February 16, 2016 by Sscott (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Agenda

  • Co-chair nominations
  • OGC Testbed 12 & 13 Update
  • Testbed website discussion
  • RFP discussion (minor governance update, discussion re: possible idea gathering methods)
  • 2015 FUNding Friday wrap-up (volunteer?)


Notes

Software Evaluation Resources and materials for BESSIG are currently hosted here: http://roomthily.github.io/technology-evaluation-research/

Discussed the option of the rotating, unofficial co-chairs.

  • Co-chair will not be involved in the proposal review process, ie not part of the TCB, not privy to the proposals, but may be involved in reviewing the RFP document for the request. Only the chair has access to the submitted proposals prior to convening the TCB.
  • Related, if there are ongoing concerns with an ESIP submitting a proposal while acting as co-chair, we can ask upfront and schedule the rotation to not coincide with the proposal review at all but do not expect issues to arise (P&S TCB has conflict of interest recusal at this time, the expectation is that if you are on the TCB and submitting a proposal, you recuse yourself regardless of status as rotating co-chair).
  • co-chair, as not an officially elected position by the P&S committee, will not be responsible for any official chair/co-chair responsibilities.
  • this will be consecutive rotations, ie one rotation per three month period, although if there is interest from multiple clusters for the same rotation, I do not want to discourage participation in P&S.

For reference, the ESIP bylaws are available here: http://wiki.esipfed.org/images/1/13/Bylaws_12_01_11_FINAL.pdf

With relevant entries IV.1.2, IV.1.3, IV.1.5 (I note that there is no verb in this bylaw and have passed that along to concerned parties but will assume that IV.1.3 applies). And also, should probably be for Standing Committees (Section V) which does not include the same discussion found in IV.1.2, IV.1.3.

Related, proposal privacy conversation started with Erin, currently considering unfunded proposals private and funded proposals public but need to refine “public”. Activity to be lead by Christine White as VP with input from P&S and Semantic Tech as the actively interested parties (committees with testbed and related RFP activities) and with input from ExCom and the community. She is also leading the effort to consider a standing rules document, or guidelines for committees to base their own standing rules document, for describing the proposal review process and TCB creation and governance. [Soren: I don’t expect this to change the P&S TCB for the April call at this time.]

Line raised the following concerns re: proposal privacy:

  • public to ESIPs on request (or to ESIPs only)
  • available to evaluators only
  • open to all sans budgets
  • only abstracts are public

Line asked if Mike Little should provide input, Annie B is open to following up if it’s an action item. [I would suggest that a quick survey of federal proposal guidelines here might be more in order as we consider the larger Testbed and Evaluation efforts beyond the AIST eval work.]

We would still like to consider providing an example of a successful proposal on the testbed website and possibly some example of a project receiving additional funding. This would be with the permission of the PI(s).

I’ll note that this privacy conversation doesn’t cover the evaluation process. We will want to consider access to the evaluation reports, the collaboration space and similar artifacts as well, although this might be a P&S/ESIP testbed-only task and one specific to the AIST evaluations.

ExCom is working on ESIP session proposals for International Data Week. Something evaluation-related is on the list but discussions still ongoing. No P&S action at this time (will keep everyone posted, see March telecon).

Action Items

  1. Nancy will follow up with the 2015 FUNding Friday task
  2. Annie B. attending the OGC 12 kickoff in early March and we will continue to discuss ESIP’s potential participation in 13 after.
  3. Soren contacting the committee and (larger) cluster chairs regarding the rotating co-chair “nominations”. Will put together a basic schedule with some indication of expected P&S activities to collect volunteers.
  4. RFP standing rules and privacy concerns taken up by the VP and will update the committee as necessary.
  5. Soren & Annie B. will sort out archiving and the testbed.esipfed.org usage (ongoing).
  6. Soren & Annie B. will determine if any information regarding time estimates from the initial AIST round can be used to help update the RFP text.
  1. update 1: provide some guidelines on what kind of Testbed project is expected to go through ESIP evaluation
  2. update 2: provide a rough estimate of the PI time required for evaluation participation
  3. update 3: include text asking that evaluation time be budgeted in the proposal if the project will be evaluated.

March Telecon

  • Annie B report from OGC Testbed 12 observation
  • Summer 2016 session proposals (pass along thoughts at any time before then)
  • RFP text review (see action items) for an April call (volunteers for that?)