2020-05-14 AG Agenda and Notes

draft next-gen ARK resolver funding proposal

identifying partners

JH: Mellon will be interested in sustainability, should be community based
BM: same here
SC: what you shared is a prospectus, useful for getting interest and next, funder would want more detail
JH: agreed
BM: last few fed grants have been pretty reasonable; another question, F&A cut taken off the top
SC: 0-15% F&A
JH: might be useful to have another institution doing dev work
KE: only senior architect knowledge has to come from CDL
KW: would one option be to have a AITO org do the work? otherwise what's the incentive to participate?
KE: no problem if an AITO org wants to do the work
KW: what if an org had a person we wanted to work on it
SC: have active Mellon grant; I know Josh G very well
SC: JHU started an open source office which may be useful in this; you may need an open source community manager/management strategy; Josh is very interested; lyrasis might be a good partner
KE: we've been told that funders prefer discrete, well-defined work proposals
SC: I'd be happy to take this forward
BM: when University of Utah goes to foundations, we have to go through channels; UU would have latency of some months
KW: our situation is similar to JHU, not talking about in kind, but it needs to solve an org problem
SC: Moore foundation might be good
MP: we could definitely help out, but our experience is with the feds, eg, IMLS; I could run the prospectus by them
SC: we need to be aware of cycle deadlines
JH: the EOSC (European Open Science Cloud) has an architecture working group with a PID policy open for comments: https://zenodo.org/record/3780423#.Xr1SNBP0lHQ