Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  • Review the draft contribution model 

Discussion items

TimeItemWhoNotes
5 minRoll call and housekeepingRosalyn
  • Review action items from last meeting
45 min

Review of the draft model

 
  • Are we ok with a separate model for vendors?
  • All
    • What is our target number?
      • 1 FTE
      • Operating expenses
      • Buffer
    • What are the concerns for this model?
      • It's not flexible enough and doesn't take into consideration how we operate. Something like the Carnegie Classification or JSTOR Classification would be better
    • How can we address these concerns?
      • Remove FTE and include JSTOR classification
      • Expand the budget to have more bands
      • We discussed providing a discount, perhaps through reporting contributions. Folks could report if they want/need to.
    • Are we ok with a separate model for vendors?
      • Yes, but we'll cross that bridge later.
    5 minNext stepsRosalyn
    • Review action items
    • Identify agenda for next meeting


    Action items

    New

    •  Type your task here, using "@" to assign to a user and "//" to select a due dateRosalyn Metz: update the contribution model; put the amount each institution would pay into a spreadsheet
    •  Charlotte Nunes: identify a method for reporting contribution 

    Previous

    •   Rosalyn Metz: throw some dollar numbers on the bands, consider some of the conversation and items from above when updating those bands.