GPN CI Advisory Committee 2010

From GPNWiki

The Great Plains Network approved a plan to form a CI Advisory Committee made up of a diverse cross-section of individuals representing the GPN membership. The advisory committee is responsible for formulating a cyberinfrastructure plan to make it possible to achieve GPN strategic objectives and distinguish the role of GPN from that of campus and state members and national organizations, and to partner with these organizations in ways that compliment and advance the mission of GPN members. This plan will then be presented to the Executive Council for consideration.

Status Report

Minutes

• January 25, 2010, CI Advisory Committee Minutes

• March 1, 2010, CI Advisory Committee Minutes

• March 8, 2010, CI Advisory Committee Minutes

• March 22, 2010, CI Advisory Committee Minutes

• April 5, 2010, CI Advisory Committee Minutes

• April 12, 2010, CI Advisory Committee Minutes

Next meeting is Monday, April 19, 2010, at 4PM Central

Committee Members

• Mike Abbiatti, AREON
• Gary Allen, University of Missouri System, MU, GPN Executive Council
• Guy Almes, Director, Academy for Advanced Telecommunications and Learning Technologies, Texas A & M,
• James Deaton, ONENET & GPN Executive Council
• Claude Garelik, SD Board of Regents & GPN Executive Council Chair
• Del Johnson, SDSU & GPN Representative Council
• Myron Lowe, UMN & GPN Representative Council
• Rick McMullen, KU
• Henry Neeman, OU
• James Rice, SDSU, SD EPSCoR Director
• Gordon Springer, MU
• David Swanson, UNL & Holland Computing Center

Tentative Milestones for Advisory Committee

1. First teleconference held to review plan, responsibilities, and elect chair (see above), January 22
2. Feedback received from AC on stakeholder groups, individuals to involve and matrix of potential services, January 29
3. Focus groups completed, February 12
4. Survey sent out, February 19
5. Survey results compiled, February 26
6. Initial draft report developed, March 10
7. Final draft report completed and submitted to GPN EC, March 24
8. Presentation of report at GPN Annual Meeting by chair of Advisory Committee, June 3

Method of Work

1. Review December 2008 CI Summit Results
2. Review and revise the draft GPN CI Service table to provide a comprehensive set of potential CI Services
3. Conduct focus groups (teleconferences/visits) and online surveys with the following to determine appropriate GPN role in each cell of the matrix:
   • Representative Council
   • Executive Council
   • Research Advisory Board
   • Collaborative CI Group
   • State networks
   • GPN Member researchers -- approximately 10/member (each GPN institutional representative will identify individuals to participate))
   • Relevant membership organizations (e.g., CASC, SURA)
   • State EPSCoR Directors
   • Others, as necessary (e.g., Tribal Colleges, primarily undergraduate institutions)
4. Advisory Committee drafts final set of recommendations
5. Obtain Executive Council Approval

GPN CI Service Table (Matrix)

The CI Advisory Committee will revise and expand the table as needed and complete the cells of the table, to reflect GPN’s role(s) in the interaction between the CI Service and the Intended Audience.

 *Appropriate role(s) for GPN?
 *Any associated cost?
 *Priority?

Recommendations for changes:

• Synchronization and information sharing for hpc centers in the region.
• Inventorying of capabilities and abilities: Communication of CI changes via web, newsletter; We need to actively update the information.
• Clarification of repositories: Data, Software other
• Look at Research box in matrix and flesh that out
  • Collaboration
    • CI Knowledgebase/Clearinghouse (people, tools, applications, resources)
    • Software Tools (e.g., IdM, Shibboleth)
    • Hardware
    • Groups
    • Federated IdM
  • Research Infrastructure
    • Facility
    • Hardware (e.g., computation)
    • Shared Hardware
  • Novel Research CI Implementation
    • Prototyping
    • Development
    • Deployment
    • Publicizing (e.g., campus to campus, campus to regional/national,national to regional/campus)

Possible Roles for GPN to Play (Interior cells of the matrix)

Roles could include:

• Communication (e.g. information conduit from national CI groups and initiatives to regional/campus groups and vice versa),

• Facilitation (e.g. host special interest group listservs and teleconferences/webinars)

• Referral (e.g. putting researchers with similar interest in touch with each other, regionally and nationally)

• Doing (e.g. hosting workshops, conferences, operating shared services, providing co-location facilities)

• No Role

Plan of Work

Meetings

4 – 6 Teleconferences with an initial teleconference in January. Perhaps, do a face to face to draft the written report in conjunction with an EC face to face meeting, usually held in March in KC.

Committee Membership Responsibilities

1. Validate the process we are using to assess GPN CI involvement
   • Are we covering all the bases on what we might be doing as far as CI?
     1. Have we identified the stakeholder groups?
     2. Do we have key people involved for focus groups?
     3. Do we have key people involved for the survey?
2. Participate in at least two focus group calls with constituencies the member represents

Staff Responsibilities

Staff and will carry out the work of the committee

• Arranging meetings
• Sending reminders
• Creating survey
• Developing an intitial set of candidates to participate in survey and focus groups
• Sending out survey and survey reminders
• Arranging focus calls among stakeholder groups
• Posting information at the GPN wiki to keep members updated.

Related Documents

• 2009 GPN Strategic Plan
• GPN CI Priorities Plan