Hi Team: I’d like to schedule a meeting of the Board Readiness small team on this Wednesday at the “usual time.” (Thanks Terri: can you send out the meeting notice?) There is some new news as we have heard from the Board on our request for participation (see below). On the agenda: * A review of the results of our interviews so far. The four interviews have been with me, Thomas, Marc, and Alan. If someone from staff could compile the notes in one place in the wiki (if they are not already) with a bit of time to spare prior to the meeting, I’ll go through and look for meaningful results. I encourage everyone here to do the same. * What are substantive results? * What did we learn to improve our interviewing process? * Moving forward with additional reviews: * Stephanie has been in touch and re-volunteered. * Sending out additional EPDP Phase 1 invitations * Sending out EPDP 2 invitations * Preparing SubPro information packets * Response to communication from the Board; I received this personally from staff and am sharing this with you now: * "The Board has requested that they receive the questions for the interviews ahead of time so that the Board may get consensus on any answers so that a consensus Board view is presented. (That is the entire communication record in an email from staff support.) * Proposed response for our discussion; an email from us (the small team) to the staff to be conveyed to the Board (cc the Council Chair, Leadership, or entire Council)” * First, the response mechanism is kind of awkward because of the way we received this input. What is appropriate * I suggest we draft an email and, with that draft in had, we discuss with staff how to best make those points to the Board * At what point should we inform the Council leadership of the received communication and the proposed response? * I think our response should include the following points; I am writing a full email so we can discuss tone as well as substance: Dear (staff): Thank you for this input from the Board. Our team believes that our request has been misinterpreted to a certain extent. This misinterpretation might well be due to vagueness in the wording in our initial request. The intent and methodology of our team is to gain knowledge of the PDP effectiveness by leaning of the individual experiences of the participants. From those individual perspectives, we plan to understand how to better create policy recommendations that will be approved by the Board. The Board (and the Council) can then take our recommendations, derived though the compilations and analysis of the individual perspectives. and create consensus positions on changes to the PDP. For example, the Phase 1 PDP on Registration Data Processing had two Board liaisons during its tenure. The interviews already conducted indicate each liaison took a different approach tot he role. In addition, one of the liaisons is no longer a Board members. A Board consensus position would lose the individual perspectives and obviate the opportunity to test the individual approaches against their effects on policy outcomes. The perspective of the past Board member would be lost. Put another way, our small team is not looking for positions and opinions of how PDPs (and the Board liaison roles) should be executed; we are looking for how they were executed from the viewpoint of a diverse set of participants. To be valuable in this effort, Board member input should be individual and independent of colleague influences. Our intent, with the Board’s acknowledgment, is to contact Board members who acted as liaisons or participated in PDP consideration discussions, and ask them to meet individually with the team. This is the same as the case with PDP participants and Chairs we have contacted to date. We have started more slowly than anticipated but are well into our interviewing process. Past and present Board member participation will still be timely and, we think, of critical importance to the project. Please relate this to the Board in a manner you see for and let us now if this addition information is helpful to the Board’s thinking on participation and if we can answer any questions. Sincerely, Us That’s it for now. Hope to talk to you Wednesday. Sorry for the long email. Best regards, Kurt