Allocations Report

1. December, 2009 Kent Milfeld, TG Allocations Coordinator Allocations Report

2. Allocation – Stats • Dec. 2009 TRAC Meeting 307M SUs Available 49% Allocation/Requested 60% Allocation/Available

3. Allocation – Stats • Startups:

4. Allocation Stats • Request and Allocation Trends

5. Oversubscription,RAAR Report

6. Outline RAAR Report– (Recommended and Available Allocations Reconciliation) • Recommended Procedures for Handling Oversubscription • General Background • Recommendations • Solving the legacy MRAC/LRAC Cycle Problems • Review Process / Reconciliation • Defined Process to Adjust Recommended Allocations for Oversubscription

7. General • Allocation award totals have traditionally been 60-70% of the Request totals. • Sept. TRAC Meeting: Requests = 810M, Available = 300M. Ouch! • Large differences in Recommended and Available Allocations require a mechanism to reduce Recommended Allocations to accommodate the available SUs (remove potential oversubscription).

8. General • Legacy Large and “Medium” request cycles persist (MRAC/LRAC quarterly and ½-yr cycles ) • There is no simple way to normalize reductions across quarters (available and recommended allocations have to be reconciled at each meeting). • Request totals are difficultto predict. (From Oct. 2008 to July 2009 oscillations seemed to dampen.)

9. Procedures for Oversubscription • Eliminate MRAC/LRAC waves • 90% of the Requests are “MRAC” size • 10% of the Requests are “LRAC” size • Recommend: Pro-actively re-distribute LRAC-type requests • By extension (1 quarter) or by early renewal (1 quarter) • TG staff contact specific users and ask them to switch cycles

10. Procedures for Oversubscription • Keep Merit Review Process separate from Oversubscription adjustments • Let reviewers do what reviewers do best–> Provide Recommend Allocations based on merit: • Appropriateness of Methods • Efficient use of systems • Appropriateness of Computational Research Plan • Usage of previous allocations, publications • Allocations Officers take care of applying adjustments for oversubscription– a TeraGrid Problem

11. TRAC Review Procedure Changes • Reviewers are not apprised of Oversubscription during Review period. (Provides more consistent reviews of merit.) • Reviewers can use Funding to determine PI ability to manage and apply appropriate support to accomplish work in the Computational Research Plan. Reviewer should be blind to funding agency. (Encourages PIs to report ALL funding.) • For non-funded requests, science is reviewed by TRAC (no change from previous process)

12. Benefits • Recommended Allocations – i.e. merit-reviewed demand - can be reported to NSF and the community. • Reconciling availability limitations is removed from merit review process – no double jeopardy.

13. Adjusting Recommended Allocations • NSF will no longer apply restrictions on requests with NIH funding. • Funding Categories are: NSF and non-NSF {NSF} and {NIH, DOE, DoD, Labs, Commercial, Inst., etc.} • Adjustments will be applied across all requests, by a “uniform” process to eliminate oversubscription. • NSF Funded Requests have “priority” when Recommended Allocations have to be adjusted for oversubscription. • Smaller requests are to be reduced less than large requests.

14. Adjusting Recommended Allocations • Factors for adjusting recommended allocations to availability • Across-the-board reductions (X factor, set by oversubscription) • Funding source (preference given to NSF-funded research, Y factor) • Size of award (preference given to small awards, Z Scaling Factor) • The details of how these factors will be applied are still being developed – and will be confirmed with NSF

15. Formula Fractional Parts of Recommended Allocation: 1*R = (FN + FO)*R = RN + RO Where FN + FO are the fractions of NSF and non-NSF Funding, and R=Recommended Allocation. R = RN + RO Recommended Alloc. Adjustment by (1-X) (no priority) (1 - X) * (1 - X)* Rx = RN + RO (1 - X) * (1- Y*X) * Rxy = RN + RO Adjustment for non-NSF (Other) by Y. Adjust for size, linear scale. Allocated, A = Rxyz = Size Scale * Rxy R - Rmin 1 - Z * A=Rxyz = * Rxy Rmax

16. POPSMeeting Procedures

17. Allocations Processing • Plenary Session for “top 10” requests. • Parallel Sessions for Others • Two Sessions, A Chair for each session • Minimal Overlap (no need to attend both sessions) • PHY/AST/ATM/CFD/ASC • CHE/MCB/DMS/DMR • Awards entered into common spreadsheet • Google Doc • Private document, accessible only by invitation. • Considerable Time Savings

18. Allocations Processing • Parallel Sessions • Sept. 2009 TRAC Meeting • PHY/AST/ATM/CFD/ASC FOS Session • 35 Requests; 105M SUs Requested • CHE/MCB/DMS/DMR FOS Session • 39 Requests; 105M SUs requested • Dec. 2009 TRAC Meeting • PHY/AST/ATM/CFD/ASC FOS Session • 33 Requests; 102M SUs Requested • CHE/MCB/DMS/DMR FOS Session • 38 Requests; 103M SUs requested

19. Allocations Interfaces * RequiredForms POPS development team is always improving, and maintaining interface.

20. Allocations Interfaces • Recent improvements • Auto-fill • Supporting Grants and Co-PI Information is now automatically “refilled” on renewal requests (supplements and justifications, too). • Confirmation of auto-fill now required Update PI Information Add/remove CoPIs Add/remove new/expire grants Modify Supporting percentage

21. Allocations Interfaces • Document Upload improvements (in progress) • Single upload interface for all required docs • (Simple) Selection of Document type • Main Document, Progress Report, CV, co-PI CV, TG-related Publications, References, • Uses Submit button below entry form (no more confusion with “Save to Date”) • Upload date now appears in document list(no more confusion about revisions)

22. Allocations Interfaces • System Selection (in redesign phase) • Present entry form is cumbersome(must scroll through pages of entry form or use index at top) • Re-evaluate necessity of collected data • Redesign input fields (& include comma notation in numbers)