Third review meeting, 13 February 2014

Formal review report and covering letter

Summary of the Meeting

Available here

The third review meeting took place on Thursday 13 February at the DNB in Frankfurt, with two days of preparation on Tuesday 11 and Wednesday 12 at the same location.

Practical matters

The review location is: German National Library, Adickesallee 1, D-60322 Frankfurt am Main. The review meeting and the rehearsal will take part in room no. 404 on the 4th floor of the DNB building. The room will be signposted from the reception desk.

Link to DNB location on OpenStreetMap:

Getting there by public transport or car

Using public transportation

From the main railroad station (lower level) U5 (underground) towards Preungesheim to "Deutsche Nationalbibliothek" station. Travel time approximately 10 minutes.

From the airport (local railroad station) S8 or S9 towards Hanau or Offenbach Ost to "Konstablerwache". Change to U5 (underground) towards Preungesheim to "Deutsche Nationalbibliothek" station. Travel time approximately 30 minutes.

The no. 32 bus goes to the stop "Deutsche Nationalbibliothek".

By car

Autobahn A 66 to the end of the Autobahn at Miquelallee; follow signs for Fulda/Hanau; turn right at the third traffic light onto Eckenheimer Landstraße towards the city center; signs point to the entrance to the underground parking area (liable for costs).

Autobahn A 661 up to the exit Eckenheim. Get into the lane for Innenstadt (City centre) / Eckenheim and drive straight on up to the third big junction with traffic lights. Cross this junction, the building on your right is the library. After about 100 m turn right into the underground parking area.


A list of hotels is provided here. Note that DNB does not get any discount rates.

Agenda for review meeting

The following agenda for the review meeting has been agreed with the Project Officer.

ALERT! Stream 1 now moved to beginning, after coordinators' overview - this has been approved by the PO.

Time Topic
08:30-09:00 Private pre-meeting between PO and reviewers
09:00-09:15 Welcome, outline of day
09:15-10:00 Coordinators' overview (including management summary and response to previous review recommendations) - slides
10:00-11:30 Stream 1: DG: VCOE and Common Vision v5, Matthias Hemmje with Q&A
11:30-12:30 Stream 2 achievements and future plans, with Q&A - slides
12:30-13:30 Lunch
13:30-14:30 Stream 3 achievements and future plans, with Q&A - slides
14:30-15:30 Stream 4 achievements and future plans, with Q&A - slided
15:30-16:30 PO and reviewers' private meeting
16:30-17:00 Report back

Who will attend?

PMB members:

  • Simon Lambert
  • David Giaretta
  • Matthias Hemmje
  • Maurizio Lunghi
  • Sabine Schrimpf
  • Ruben Riestra

Additional persons to report on particular WPs (decided at GA meeting in Dec 2103):

  • Heikki Helin (WP35)
  • Orit Edelstein (WP27)
  • Manuela Holzmayer (WP44)

# Partner Person Arrival Departure Dinner? Hotel Notes
1 APA/STFC David Giaretta 21:50 at FRA, 10 Feb 10:55 from FRA, 14 Feb Y Hotel Alleenhof  

Agenda for rehearsal

A proposed structure allowing plenty of time for rehearsing each of the sessions at the review itself.

Tuesday 11 February
Time Topic Leader/presenter
09:00-10:00 Arrival, overview of agenda, identification of major issues  
10:00-12:00 Rehearsal of Coordinators' overview (including management summary and response to previous review recommendations) Simon Lambert, David Giaretta
12:00-15:00 Rehearsal of Stream 1 including VCoE and common vision with Q&A
With break for lunch
David Giaretta, Matthias Hemmje
15:00-16:00 Rehearsal of Stream 2 achievements and future plans, with Q&A
With break for lunch
Maurizio Lunghi
16:00- Contingency for e.g. revision of slides  
Wednesday 12 February
09:00-11:00 Rehearsal of Stream 3 achievements and future plans, with Q&A Sabine Schrimpf
11:00-13:00 Rehearsal of Stream 4 achievements and future plans, with Q&A Ruben Riestra
13:00-14:00 Lunch  
14:00-16:00 Overall assessment, identification of strengths and weaknesses  
16:00- Contingency for e.g. revision of slides  

Awkward questions

A list of questions/observations that might be raised and to which we should have instant answers.

General questions

  • How many APARSEN partners who are not already members of APA will join the VCoE? How many have promised to join?
    • ANS around half are already members. Difficult to obtain an answer about other partners until the offerings of the VCoE are clear.

Stream 1

  • There are some weaknesses in public visibility of outputs - the standards database is not yet publicly available.
    • ANS We need these in place for the soft launch end March
  • The DoW gave specific measures for defragmentation, which we have not attempted to assess.
    • ANS True but the re-evaluation of digital preservation research and our advancing the common vision mean that this is a better way of measuring de-fragmentation ?????
  • How common is the common vision among partners?
  • How much penetration does the vision have within the partner organisations beyond the project workers?
    • Simon has shown the common vision to his Division Head who thought it looked broadly sensible. Simon should mention this in his overview.
    • ANS There has been a considerable amount of discussion and inputs from partners. The question is now deep the commonality goes. In small organisations there have been good opportunities for discussion; the issues is with large organisations. Certainly there has been discussion in some (STFC.....), but certainly not all.
  • D11.3 acknowledges that it contains "a base of raw material on which subsequent versions will work" - what will the next steps be to produce something that is really coherent?
    • ANS What we have seems coherent now - but clearly there will be improvements, and integration of the comments we receive as we expose the common vision further.
  • How credible is the VCoE business plan?
    • ANS At the moment it is a best-guess. The important point is that we will be testing and revising the plan this year rather than leaving things to the end of the project. Experience from other centres which have been set up in a similar way show that this is common.
  • The VCoE business plan includes sales predictions where income from training courses forms over half of all sales income. Are these predictions realistic? Table 3 in D11.4 shows that 18 training courses are to offerred - is this feasible?
    • ANS We believe that we have the effort available in WP11 and WP43 to produce the material.
  • The VCoE business plan shows operating costs including salaries which seem quite high compared to say, membership fee income. What happens if sales predictions are lower than expected, will the VCoE be running at a loss? Are operating costs including salaries variable or fixed? If fixed there may be a risk that sales cannot cover these costs.
    • ANS The VCoE must have adequate income to match outgoings so if income is inadequate then outgoings, principally salaries will be cut.
  • Has the VCoE business plan been compared to other centres of excellence?
    • ANS Yes, in particular the IMPACT centre. However in this case we are informed that the plans had to be radically revised. Similarly we believe that the plans for PRESTO had to be changed (source: D Terrugi at review 2)
  • Has a task force been set up to plan the launch of the VCoE as per Recommendation 3 of the last review?
    • ANS Yes - will need to be more active after the review.

Stream 2

  • Some deliverables lack contributions from key partners who would be expected to contribute (nothing from CERN on storage solutions).
  • What will WP22 leave behind in terms of software? *What services based on the WP22 results will the VCoE offer?
  • How will all the various parts of Stream 2 contribute to the VCoE and the Common Vision
  • Has there been cooperation with COPTR in the scope of WP21 (or elsewhere)? If not, why not?
    • ANS There were some initial discussions however the principal person behind COPTR wanted us to cease our work and join COPTR. The issue was that our concern was in the evidence base to inform our offerings whereas COPTR was more interested in simply collecting general information about tools. We will use COPTR and other such lists to identify such tools.

Stream 3

  • What value is assigned to digital holdings in D32.x - it is not clear - yet Value, Business Cases and Business Models form the major part of the Common Vision diagram.
    • ANS: WP32's remit was to anlayse cost models currently available and to carry out testing. From the analysis it is clear that cost models focus purely on costs of specific activities related to the DP lifecycle. Value, business cases and business models are not intrinsic to cost models. Rather cost models provide input to business cases and business models i.e. cost models are a subset of business cases/models. Value could certainly be considered within business cases and business models. Value in terms of those published cost models analysed are not considered together except in the KRDS model which looks at benefits and value impact - and therefore provides a valuable tool.
  • What training material will there be?
    • ANS: For WP32 - we have already provided training material and presented at two training events this year. We provided analysis of cost models currently available and focussed on a couple which may be useful in a practical sense. Generally, there aren't many user friendly and adaptable models available at present. More research and development of cost models is needed although there is some value in looking at what is already available on open access. Future training will focus on practical examples and uses where possible.
  • How applicable are the inputs from the libraries to other domains e.g. D32.x, D36.x.
    • ANS for WP32 - we provide recommendations on which cost models would be useful to which sectors not just focused on libraries.
  • How will all the various parts of Stream 3 contribute to the VCoE and the Common Vision ANS see stream 3 slides

Stream 4

  • How are the stakeholders being contacted? Is there a contacts list?
    • ANS Yes but not public
  • How much training material is ready at the moment?
    • ANS not as much as we would like but the focus is on producing the training "pills" and the more detailed material.
  • How much will be ready by the end of the project?
    • ANS We will be guided by the market research. We must produce at least what there is a demand for.
  • The Business plan shows that Training is expected to generate a great deal of income - will enough training material be available in time?
    • ANS There must be - that is why we are focusing on the training material

-- SimonLambert - 2013-10-25

Topic attachments
I Attachment History Action Size Date Who Comment
PowerPointpptx 20140131-Review3-stream-pres-Lunghi-13Feb2014Wp.pptx r1 manage 2223.6 K 2014-02-04 - 10:53 DianaPasquariello  
PowerPointpptx 20140205-Review3-stream-pres-Lunghi-13Feb2014Wp.pptx r1 manage 2198.0 K 2014-02-05 - 10:04 DianaPasquariello  
PDFpdf APARSEN_Year_3__review_cover_letter_report.pdf r1 manage 111.9 K 2014-04-01 - 07:11 SimonLambert  
PDFpdf APARSEN_Year_3_review_consolidated_report.pdf r1 manage 190.6 K 2014-04-01 - 07:11 SimonLambert  
PowerPointpptx Review3-CoordOverview-V05.pptx r1 manage 3236.7 K 2014-02-12 - 15:03 SimonLambert  
PowerPointpptx Review3-VCoE-and-CommonVision-V01.pptx r1 manage 3462.5 K 2014-01-30 - 05:16 DavidGiaretta Ideas for VCoE and COmmon Vision - not discussed with Matthias
PowerPointpptx Review3-VCoE-and-CommonVision-V02.pptx r1 manage 5910.6 K 2014-02-09 - 14:29 DavidGiaretta Stream 1 - VCoE and Common Vision
PowerPointpptx Review3-VCoE-and-CommonVision-V03.pptx r1 manage 5910.4 K 2014-02-11 - 08:03 DavidGiaretta Stream 1 - VCOE and COmmon Vision v3
PowerPointpptx Review3-VCoE-and-CommonVision-V04.pptx r3 r2 r1 manage 4622.9 K 2014-02-12 - 12:10 DavidGiaretta Stream 1 - VCOE and Common Vision v4
PowerPointpptx Review3-VCoE-and-CommonVision-V05.pptx r2 r1 manage 5670.9 K 2014-02-13 - 05:55 DavidGiaretta Stream 1 - VCOE and Common Vision v5
PowerPointpptx Review3-stream-pres-Lunghi-13Feb2014.pptx r1 manage 2248.0 K 2014-01-30 - 10:29 SimonLambert  
PowerPointpptx Review3-stream-pres-Lunghi-13Feb2014Wp23.pptx r1 manage 2190.7 K 2014-01-31 - 11:30 DianaPasquariello  
PowerPointpptx Review3-stream2-13Feb2014.pptx r6 r5 r4 r3 r2 manage 3818.4 K 2014-02-12 - 15:10 OritEdelstein  
PowerPointpptx Review3-stream2-Lunghi-13Feb2014.pptx r3 r2 r1 manage 2845.0 K 2014-02-05 - 14:39 MaurizioLunghi  
PowerPointpptx Review3-stream2-WP22-13Feb2014.pptx r1 manage 406.0 K 2014-02-05 - 14:43 MaurizioLunghi  
PowerPointpptx Review3-stream2-WP27-20140131.pptx r1 manage 135.9 K 2014-01-31 - 10:23 OritEdelstein  
PowerPointpptx Review3-stream2_WP25_long_2014_01_30.pptx r1 manage 1102.2 K 2014-01-29 - 23:24 YannisTzitzikas  
PowerPointpptx Review3-stream2_WP25_medium_2014_02_04.pptx r1 manage 2427.8 K 2014-02-04 - 12:30 YannisTzitzikas  
PowerPointpptx Review3-stream2_WP25_short_2014_01_30.pptx r1 manage 2294.1 K 2014-01-29 - 23:26 YannisTzitzikas  
PowerPointpptx Review3-stream3-1.pptx r6 r5 r4 r3 r2 manage 3913.0 K 2014-02-12 - 15:04 SabineSchrimpf  
PowerPointpptx Review3-stream3.pptx r2 r1 manage 2660.2 K 2014-02-07 - 13:34 SabineSchrimpf  
PowerPointpptx Review3-stream4_20140212_v1.0_final.pptx r2 r1 manage 9366.4 K 2014-02-12 - 14:21 ManuelaHolzmayer Stream4
Microsoft Word filedoc hotelliste_frankfurt-1-englisch.doc r1 manage 37.0 K 2014-01-15 - 17:31 SimonLambert  
Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r58 < r57 < r56 < r55 < r54 | Backlinks | Raw View | Raw edit | More topic actions
Topic revision: r58 - 2014-04-01 - SimonLambert
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright © 2008-2017 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback