Summary

2. Summary • Attendance was strong, comparable to TG’09 • 431 participants • 77 registered for tutorials • Strong participation by students and Campus Champions • 50 campus champions, 98 students • General feedback that the program was very good and that most people enjoyed the conference • Finances – preliminary, but confident we will end up in the black • In addition, the participants’ costs for the conference (e.g. hotel rooms/airfare) were low

3. Improvements Needed • Hotel networking was inadequate (BW total 10 Mbps) • Need to have networking included explicitly in hotel RFI, negotiations • Hotel filled up and we needed overflow rooms • Balancing the room guarantee is tricky – and we under-estimated the Sunday evening attendance with students and Campus Champions programs • Meanwhile other conferences came to town and filled the city hotels • Hotel was isolated and overflow rooms were not convenient • Hotel overbooking – some people w/ reservations were walked • Inexcusable on hotel’s part • We protected people in room block, but people who made reservations outside the TG’10 room block weren’t identified • A lot of activities Monday (tutorials, Campus Champions program, student program) competed w/ each other – should we restructure? • General consensus is to structure CC and student program such that they would be encouraged to attend half-day tutorials (except high-school students) • Working groups tough during lunch • At minimum, have lunch served in the WG meeting rooms • Consider Thursday afternoon WGs, but attendance inevitably an issue • Web site was a challenge prior to the meeting – LifeRay, etc. • Would like more participation from NSF and other agencies

4. TeraGrid’10 ConferenceAttendee Survey

5. Response demographic Seventy-five responses were received. Students had an incentive—they received a gift card if they completed the student survey. Most completed both surveys.

6. Please rate overall quality of TeraGrid’10 Only one person rated the conference as “Poor” and did not provide any feedback.

7. What did you like the most? • The food! It got better each day! • The Cruise! • Champion program • Well organized conference • Hotel great location • I loved the Petaflops! • Social interaction with others in my field! • Technology presentations—a good mix of talks • A diverse group of presenters. • Keynote talks, TeraGrid Champion meetings, talks on Science Gateways • Tutorials were well organized. • Discussions during breaks! • BoF’s • Poster Sessions • Student program was well organized!

8. What would you improve? • Choose a place with adequate network. Abysmal! Awful! MISERABLE! Slower than dial-up! • The food! More vegetarian options. • The Cruise! Too long and food was bad. • Hotel (overbooked—rude staff—extra charges—AC was noisy) • Session rooms were too long and narrow. • Tutorials and Champions Day should not be on the same day • Longer panel discussions • Chairs were painful • Better pre-conference communication needed. • Lunch meetings are a bad idea—you lose some of the program • Public transportation to the area was bad! Sparse taxi service and the shuttle from airport was • expensive. • Everything was great—nothing needed improvement!

9. Assess the keynotes Ranked in order based on comments: Wilhelmson, Killeen, and then Allen.

10. Financial Summary Expenses (preliminary) Hotel $156,215 Catering $112,215 AV $ 40,000 Other $ 4,000 Social Event $12,247 Communications $12,000 Plenary speakers $ 2,000 • Processing Fees $ 5,000 Other $ 3,000 Total $190,462 Revenue Registrations $156,215 Normal $101,895 Campus Champions $ 17,570 Student Grant $ 36,750 Sponsorships $54,500 GIG Support $15,000 GIG – plenary spkrs $ 2,000 Total $227,715 (~$10K higher than budgeted due to more late registrations) Priorities for any excess funds: Cover student grant costs, reduce GIG/Campus Champions contributions (Scott/Matt can arm-wrestle) carry-forward to next year, including site visits (Denver, Salt Lake, Tahiti)

11. Thanks to the Conference Committee! Conference Co-Chairs Dan Katz (UC/ANL), Richard Moore (SDSC) Program Chair Shawn Brown (PSC) Conference Deputy Chair Warren Froelich (SDSC) Science Track Phil Blood (PSC), Amit Majumdar (SDSC) Technology Track J. P. Navarro (UC/ANL), Michael Pflugmacher (NCSA) EOT Track Diane Baxter (SDSC), PallaviIshwad (PSC) Gateways Track Maytal Dahan (TACC), Nancy Wilkins-Diehr (SDSC) Birds of a Feather Sergiu Sanielevici (PSC) Posters Honggao Lui (LSU) Visualizations Eric Wernert (IU) Tutorials Mark Fahey (NICS), Patricia Kovatch (NICS) Student Program Laura McGinnis (PSC) Campus Champions Kay Hunt (Purdue) Communications Elizabeth Leake (UC/ANL), Jan Zverina (SDSC) NSF Liaison Lisa Joy Zgorski (NSF/OLPA) Proceedings Bill Bell (NCSA), Pat Sudac (PSC) Awards Shawn Brown (PSC), DiglioSimoni (RTI) Outreach Scott Lathrop (UC/ANL), Dan Stanzione (TACC) TG Working Groups Matt Heinzel (ANL), Jeff Koerner (ANL) Logistics Lucille Jarzynka (PSC), Elvira Prologo (PSC)

12. Thanks to many others that helped! • More than 40 additional paper reviewers • Our local PSC support • Vivian Benton, Steve Cunningham, Ken Goodwin, Joe Lappa, David Moses, Shandra Williams • Communications Team working with Communications Chairs Elizabeth Leake and Jan Zverina • Trish Barker (NCSA), Tim Dudek (UC/ANL), Daphne Seifert-Herron (IU), Faith Singer-Villalobos (TACC),Ben Tolo (SDSC), Shandra Williams (PSC) • The “banker” Sonia Nayak (SDSC) • People that recruited our sponsors (in addition to Richard & Dan) – John Towns, Phil Andrews/Patricia Kovatch, Tom Hutton, Jan Zverina • This process consumed a lot of time – while we got $54K, the ROI was low • Other volunteers • Carolyn Peters (UC/ANL), Lorna Christensen • All the student participants, including volunteers • And NSF for their support of the TeraGrid, as well as the grant that enabled nearly 100 students to attend this conference!

13. SILVER BRONZE Sponsors! GOLD