|
1. It was agreed that future minutes would note actions agreed by members during the monthly virtual board meetings, which would inform members who missed the meeting and could be matters arising for future BIN items. |
|
1. It was agreed that future minutes would note actions agreed by members during the monthly virtual board meetings, which would inform members who missed the meeting and could be matters arising for future BIN items. |
|
2. It was also agreed that minute taking would rotate among members at each meeting. KN agreed to take the first minutes under this new arrangement. |
|
2. It was also agreed that minute taking would rotate among members at each meeting. KN agreed to take the first minutes under this new arrangement. |
|
1. OSonOS in USA will be held on November 7 & 8, 2004 at the Carlton Hotel in Oak Park, just outside Chicago for practitioners and interested people with a sliding fee from $50 to $150 and any excess over direct costs to go into a pot to fund projects from the event, etc. |
|
1. OSonOS in USA will be held on November 7 & 8, 2004 at the Carlton Hotel in Oak Park, just outside Chicago for practitioners and interested people with a sliding fee from $50 to $150 and any excess over direct costs to go into a pot to fund projects from the event, etc. |
|
2. Prosper Ndabishuriye requested $2,500 to fully fund an event in Bujumbura on August 14 & 15, 2004 for 100 participants. |
|
2. Prosper Ndabishuriye requested $2,500 to fully fund an event in Bujumbura on August 14 & 15, 2004 for 100 participants. |
|
1. PH & JE would draft a response from the Board that kept open discussions for future support, but explained how OSI US worked (our funding criteria) and our need to hear more about Prosper's future plans and impact of an event to expand OST training and/or lead to further events. 2. The proposal underscored the need to look at criteria for funding events, by addressing such questions as should the Board fund events? Would it start a precedent? Do we need special criteria. such as knowledge of the facilitator(s) track record? For example, while some Board members had met and were impressed by Prosper at the PoP? event, nobody could confirm Mike Seymour's credibility as a facilitator. Also, JE raised the sensitivities of events in the Third World, noting that more harm than good could be done. 3. KN raised the need to discuss a balance between the Board's priorities for a programme it initiated and responding to external requests. For example, if funded, LH noted that Prosper's proposal would absorb one third of the Board's cash resources. |
|
1. PH & JE would draft a response from the Board that kept open discussions for future support, but explained how OSI US worked (our funding criteria) and our need to hear more about Prosper's future plans and impact of an event to expand OST training and/or lead to further events. 2. The proposal underscored the need to look at criteria for funding events, by addressing such questions as should the Board fund events? Would it start a precedent? Do we need special criteria. such as knowledge of the facilitator(s) track record? For example, while some Board members had met and were impressed by Prosper at the PoP? event, nobody could confirm Mike Seymour's credibility as a facilitator. Also, JE raised the sensitivities of events in the Third World, noting that more harm than good could be done. 3. KN raised the need to discuss a balance between the Board's priorities for a programme it initiated and responding to external requests. For example, if funded, LH noted that Prosper's proposal would absorb one third of the Board's cash resources. |
|
5.2 Leveraged efforts that reach multiple people, especially in training or other sustainings sort of way. (KN asks if worth clarifying by adding "raising awareness, promoting understanding of and making new applications for OST?") 5.3 Situations wherein other groups or individuals have already made investments so that OSI-USA can augment rather than initiate projects (KN asks does this matching funds concept need clarification as to percentages and recognition of in-kind contributions?) 5.4 Project sponsors and facilitators who will do good work and bring the story back to the larger OS community (are sponsor and facilitator credibility a new criteria for funding?) |
|
5.2 Leveraged efforts that reach multiple people, especially in training or other sustainings sort of way. (KN asks if worth clarifying by adding "raising awareness, promoting understanding of and making new applications for OST?") 5.3 Situations wherein other groups or individuals have already made investments so that OSI-USA can augment rather than initiate projects (KN asks does this matching funds concept need clarification as to percentages and recognition of in-kind contributions?) 5.4 Project sponsors and facilitators who will do good work and bring the story back to the larger OS community (are sponsor and facilitator credibility a new criteria for funding?) |
|
7. How to handle OSI US income earned from provision of fiduciary responsibilities (see 4.22.04 proceedings: items B,C & D raised by PH) |
|
7. How to handle OSI US income earned from provision of fiduciary responsibilities (see 4.22.04 proceedings: items B,C & D raised by PH) |