InCommon Steering Committee Meeting - Sept. 13, 2021

Agenda

1. Moving the InCommon Steering Committee and the Trust and Identity Program Advisory Group, together (Kevin: 25 min)
   1. August 2019 presentation to Steering (analysis of the state of the relationship between InCommon and Internet2)
   2. Guidelines for Program Advisory Groups at Internet2
   3. Slides to guide the discussion
2. Approval of Robert Wood Johnson as a Incommon eligible research organization, consider changing the criteria for a research organization   (Kevin, Ann, John: 25 min)

   1. Approval of Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) as an eligible Research Organization:

      RWJF awards about $600M annually, including to HEI's. Here is their "portal" of awardees: https://www.rwjf.org/en/how-we-work/grants-explorer.html

      The most recent, similar request for such an approval was in July of 2019, when Steering approved Howard Hughes Medical Institute as a Research Organization under similar circumstances.  The current criteria for the current participation classes (higher education, research organization, sponsored partner)  is documented in the Federation Operating Practices and Policies (FOPP -https://incommon.org/federation/fopp/).
      
      

   2. Steering Approval of a Change to the Research Organization Eligibility Criteria

      Propose to change the definition of Research Organization to allow InCommon to welcome a wider range of Research Organizations

      Proposed Definition:
      "A Research Organization is defined as a lab, facility, or organization whose mission incorporates research as determined and approved by InCommon."

      Current definition in the FOPP:
      4.1.1. (2) Research Organizations paragraph.
      "... A Research organization is defined as a lab, facility, or center related to a particular federal research agency and listed on an official publicly available government listing to InCommon’s satisfaction. ..."
      
      

3. New Committee Member recruitment  (Kevin: 5 min)
4. Marketing/communication/value proposition project update 5 min (Kevin: 5min)
   1. Dan Gerding will be conducting one on one interviews

Minutes

• Attending: Brad Christ, Dave Robinson, Marc Wallman, Ann West, Jeremy Livingston, Michael Berman, Ted Hanss, Chris Misra, Laura Paglione, Kristi Holmes, Christine Miki, Chris Sedore 
• With: Kevin Morooney, Steve Zoppi, Keith Wessel, Albert Wu, John Krienke, Elaine Alejo, Rob Carter, David Bantz,
• Regrets: Von Welch

Moving PAG and InCommon Steering together

• Kevin discussed the bringing together of the two groups with some extra explanation of the expectations and context  for each, including the following:
  • Desire to bring all PAGS closer- as of right now PAG reps meet quarterly
  • T&I PAG established in 2017,  made up of equal representation from TIER Community Investor Council and Steering
  • 2019 InCommon fee increase combined federation and software services - bringing software solutions into the purview of Steering
  • Recent changes: Steering committed to 4, 2 hr retreats this year and T&I PAG moved to bi-monthly meetings in 2021
• The Proposal is as follows
  • The group of people that serve on InCommon Steering will also serve on the T&I PAG
  • The T&I PAG would meet quarterly for 1-2 hour meetings
  • The T&I PAG would have members that are not Steering Committee members but all Steering Committee members would be PAG members
  • Steering Committee continues to meet monthly as it has for ~20 years, fulfilling its obligations in its charter
• Comments: 
  • DaveR asked if the idea was to reduce impact on the executive committee? basically the execs will still have the same commitment with 6 hours less.  
  • LauraP in favor and noted that it will help with repeated content in both meetings that we see now
  • JeremeyL. has no objections
  • Christine Miki is in favor
  • BradC feels it will help with representation with the PAG
  • MichaelB asked if it matters if there are folks that aren't representative of InCommon, Non I2 member voice is a good thing
• Next steps- We will give folks time to think about it and Kevin will follow up with an email heading in the direction that he proposed, if no objection he will start to operationalize it.

Consideration of Robert Wood Johnson Foundation as a research organization

• John Krienke went through the criteria of a research organization and there was a discussion about definition and the decision to accept the application.
  • DaveR didn't notice anything that was controversial and asked if anyone else had seen anything.  Several folks had worked with them before including LauraP, and JeremyL and had no concerns.  ChrisS mentioned that they are a well known and respected foundation. 
  • John explained the Fopp which was developed by Steeering and that wording has been added  as a way to honor research as a special partner,  the definition of higher Ed has changed also since the beginning.   The idea is to provide clear requirements around research.  The one addition is that they could sponsor others that might not fit. LauraP asked if organizations understand that they are able to sponsor others? and the implications that come along with that?  AnnW reminded us that NIH has talked about sponsoring folks but they would  also need a letter to join that could make it more difficult.  ChristineM also noted that it still will need review by Steering and could be denied if we felt the intent wasn't right.
  • Chris Sedore-I think this is a logical and good extension/expansion for InCommon.  It may require additional diligence of sponsored entities in the future, but presents an opportunity to grow the community.  
  • LauraP- difficult to define the term researcher funder, so difficult to say anyone that provides research funding would fit in this category

Vote Results

Michael Berman made a motion to accept the application

Jeremy Livingston seconded the motion

The vote to include RWJF as a research organization passed unanimously.

The group decided to continue this conversation in the Oct meeting where Kevin, Ann, and John will come back with a refined definition. The discussion that followed the vote was around concerns that the proposed wording was too general and did not provide clear operational guidance for InCommon staff to be able to interpret the new guideline,  thoughts from the group were as follows:

• • What are the risks, could start to include non profit, trying to find out how much operational parameters Steering wants to control.
  • Brad- dont think non profit should be a criteria 
  • Laura P- is there an additional step to clarify what the definition is?-  it becomes a judgement if we don't have clear criteria  and could cause communication problems if not clear
  • Christine Miki- suggested -what if we had language to allow them to conditionally join so that they can get on board and then classification of whether they can sponsor is then discussed by the Steering Committee-  John mentioned that there is a difference in fees

Next steps- continuing the conversation in Oct. around the refined definition.  Kevin, Ann, and John to come back with clearer definition at next meeting.

Next Planning Session

• The next quarterly Steering planning session is Friday, Oct 22 , 12-2 pm. ET.

Next standing committee meeting

• Oct 04, 2021 - 4 pm ET / 3 pm CT / 2 pm MT / 1 pm PT