230 likes | 367 Views
RTI Update. PI Meeting February 17-18, 2010. Agenda. Activities since last PI meeting User Statistics Updates to infrastructure – New Home Page Phase II Planning. Activities. Participated in Belmont Workshop
E N D
RTI Update PI MeetingFebruary 17-18, 2010
Agenda • Activities since last PI meeting • User Statistics • Updates to infrastructure – New Home Page • Phase II Planning
Activities Participated in Belmont Workshop Poster at RTI Fellows Symposium – Integrating Basic and Applied Research: High Performance Cyberinfrastructures Phase II Discussions Procedure Change USC Confidentiality Agreement to be included with the PCC Dataset Request MOA Portal Updates Implementing security changes Upgrading portal framework New home page 2
Compliance Activities • Certification & Accreditation • IV&V findings implemented, final report drafted • Updated SSP, IR Plan, other documentation • 2010 Annual Assessment - Key Controls identified and undergoing verification • Security • Implement DHS SSL certificate • IV&V High Risk vulnerabilities remedied • Implement DotNetNuke version 5.0 for enhanced security • Planning • Submitted Request for Change for Version 4.0
Organizations Eligible • Academia 43 • Government 9 • Private Sector 37 Ineligible • International 8
Dataset Utilization 1 LBNL Does not currently participate in PREDICT.
Updates to infrastructure – New Home Page Version 4.0 http://predictbeta.rti.org alternate 8
Phase II Issues • Impact on Researchers • Impact on Data Hosts/Data Providers • Impact on ARB and PRB • Impact on Advisory Board • Impact on Process • Impact on Documentation • Unresolved Issues
Data Provider changes Contact with Researchers Foreign researchers from approved institutions Matchmaking between providers and researchers (special MOA) Public Metadata plus more Application review and the ARB Required anonymization PRB review Advisory board interaction with privacy community USC confidentiality agreement More institution MOAs versus individual researcher MOAs Restrict SCA data if to government entities New datasets Impact on Process
Contact with Researchers • More information from Researchers • Collect more contact information on the Sponsorship Letter • Require more details for dataset requests • Attachment B: USC confidentiality agreement • System automation for MOA, expiration & data destruction processes • More frequent/different interaction with Researchers • Proactive emails • Matchmaking
Public Access to Metadata More info in metadata? Metadata from hosts
Application Review • Expand ARB? • Urge member participation • Adjust size of ARB for each review • How long to serve? • Response time • Privacy issues
Publication Review • Review Process for PRB • Data Provider • PCC • Anyone else? • Requirements for Researchers
Remaining Issues • Advisory Board roles and responsibilities • More institution MOAs versus individual researcher MOAs • Restrict Stored Communications Act (SCA) data if government entities
Impact on Data Hosts / Data Providers • Give data to PREDICT • Eliminates need to manage expiration of access • New Datasets • Non-anonymized data • Expand metadata • Provider Testing • Public Provider Data
Documents Affected • PIA • Sponsorship Letter • Revised: Researcher, Data Host, Data Provider • New: PCC and Foreign Country • MOAs • Revised: Researcher, Data Host, Data Provider • New: PCC and Foreign Country • Internal PCC docs • ARB, PRB, Advisory Board docs
Unresolved Issues • Providers distributing data outside of PREDICT • Periodic verification of access to data • ARB approval process – no response