Minutes of APARSEN General Assembly Meeting, Thursday 5 December 2013


See signed attendance sheet.

FTK delegated their representation to Ruben Riestra (Inmark), and Globit to Andreas Hundsdörfer (ICT).

The meeting was chaired by Simon Lambert (STFC).

1. Minutes of previous meeting

The minutes of the previous meeting were approved and accepted as an accurate record.

Motion proposed: David Giaretta
Motion seconded: René van Horik

2. Coordinators' report

Simon Lambert circulated a report to the project members prior to the meeting and went through the points detailed in this document.

He reported that at the second review all the deliverables were accepted except for three. These were revised and resubmitted over the summer and will be reconsidered by the Reviewers in the next review. Two deliverables have been submitted since then and we have 9 more which are due at Month 36, which must be sent to the EC no later than the 31 December. Several are updates but there are some that represent completely new work.

Many of the work packages have come to an end or will shortly do so. Those that continue are the common vision/VCoE, the "spreading excellence" WPs (Stream 4), WP13, WP16 and WP22. Everyone has effort in WP11 and Stream 4 work packages. The formal deliverables are due at Month 36 and then again at the end of the project.

Contract Amendment No. 2 was a consequence of the first review, refocussing some of the work and realigning some of the deliverables. The amendment was approved by the EC in May 2013. IKI-RAS continued as a member in Year 3 without booking any effort or receiving any reimbursement and they will formally withdraw in Amendment No. 3. This will give us the opportunity to include some other changes, though they will of course require approval of the Project Officer.

The forthcoming review meeting is now confirmed on the 13 February 2014, with thanks to Sabine Schrimpf for agreeing to host the meeting in Frankfurt. All the PMB will be represented plus three other work package leaders to present significant results over the third year. We will also need to talk about the prospects of the VCoE.

A draft of the Periodic Report must be available by 27 January for the Reviewers, which will need contributions, effort figures, cost figures and WP reports from the individual work packages.

We also need to decide whether to look at possible redistribution of effort in the fourth year. Ruben Riestra advised to be careful about looking at only person-months. Moving funds to different partners needs the consent of the GA and this can be done internally. David Giaretta said we will only have a clear picture of the situation when we have the Form Cs available for the third year, showing exactly how much money each partner has remaining.

With regard to the second year payments, Simon Lambert has asked to be informed by the EC when the payment is made to STFC.

3. Contract amendment

The formal trigger is the withdrawal of one of the partners, IKI-RAS, but it is also an opportunity to make some other amendments the partners feel are necessary, though of course it also needs the approval of the PO. The PMB is asking for support to focus on the work in the fourth year and support a possible reallocation of resources. Any reorientation should be aimed at strengthening the cretaion of the VCoE.

David Giaretta will shortly provide detailed plans for a soft launch of the VCoE in the spring of 2014. We intend to have the hard launch at the APA conference in October and will name a small team to create the plans.

Hildelies Balk finds the idea of "training pills" very interesting and asked if there are any resources available to have these translated into different languages. David explained that the way these are being planned is to have a Powerpoint presentation with a recorded audio approximately 10-15 minutes in length. Once we see the financial figures, it may be sensible to do this translation work.

There was a discussion on how to select priorities for reallocation of resources in Year 4. David argued for the importance of a market research exercise to assist with creation of the VCoE; such an exercise could be done by Inmark, and indeed Ruben Riestra has prepared a proposal, which was circulated during the meeting. However other partners might also wish to make proposals.

After discussion, the following motions were proposed and passed:

The GA agrees that the remaining budget of Airbus, less a reasonable allowance for Y3 and Y4, should be made available for redistribution to other partners. The Coordinator will inform Airbus of this decision.

Motion proposed: David Giaretta
Motion seconded: Maite Braud

The GA agrees the following timetable: proposals for reallocation of budget shall be made to (or by) the PMB by 10 Jan 2014, organised and coordinated and circulated by the PMB by 24 Jan, and voted by the GA by 31 Jan.

Motion proposed: Sabine Schrimpf
Motion seconded: Yannis Tzitzikas

4. Status of creation of the VCoE

There are two deliverables at M36 for the Common Vision and VCoE. The Common Vision underpins the VCoE in that it ensures consistency and is a unique feature, being a consistent basis for the whole spectrum of digital preservation.

For the VCoE, the soft launch will take place in early 2014 and we need to plan how this will be implemented. The hard launch will take place at the APA Conference in Brussels on 22-23 October 2014. Yannis Tzitzikas asked about the soft launch and how this will be implemented. David explained that, for the purposes of the VCoE, the soft launch allows us to gradually introduce services and see how this ties in with the market research to ensure we are offering something that there is a demand for. We must also have something in the training portals that is consistent. A checklist of preparation for the soft and hard launches could be added to the VCoE Business Plan.

5. Preparation for the next review meeting

The review will be completed in one day and the review panel is unchanged. APARSEN attendees will be the PMB members plus three others. The review agenda is agreed with the Project Officer and is on the wiki.

Simon Lambert asked for any comments on the recommendations from the previous review. These had already been discussed at the All Hands Meeting, and no other comments were made.

6. Date of next meeting

The next meeting should take place after the third review. Silvio Salza will investigate the possibility of hosting the meeting in Rome.

Any other business


-- SimonLambert - 2013-12-20

Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r2 < r1 | Backlinks | Raw View | Raw edit | More topic actions
Topic revision: r2 - 2013-12-21 - KrystinaGiaretta
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright © 2008-2019 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback