LhARA Executive Board 13Nov24; 16:00 GMT

Present: R.Amos, A.Giacca, R.Gray, T.Greenshaw, C.Jamieson, K.Long, JPar, W.Shields, C.Whyte

Notes

1. Notes and actions: All
   Status of actions:
   
   • KL/RB: Liaise to make sure wiki has list of upcoming conferences to target.
     • Stands.
   • KL: Follow up on pitch for students during bridging period.
     • Stands.

2. ITRF/LhARA BP1 update: KL, All
   

Information relating to the MRC review of the application submitted by KL and M.Noro was discussed. The principal issue, that the UKRI Infrastructure Fund office is unwilling to support the Bridging Period beyond May25 was noted. No formal communication from UKRI had been received.

An extended discussion of the collaboration's response to the possible curtailment of the bridging period ensued. We noted that, since we are now in Nov25, the bridging period is already underway and that therefore, formally, the grant extensions would have to be clawed back, an unprecedented step for a funding agency to take. The repetitional damage from such an outcome would be substantial. The weaknesses of the IF as presently conceived in terms of supporting best practice in the project management of long-term projects were discussed. Issues to do with peer review and oversight of IF project were noted.

Several steps had been taken to try and address the issue. Meetings had taken place between LhARA collaboration management and senior management in STFC. Contacts had been made with the management in some partner organisations with a view to seeking advice and laying the ground work for letters of support. International colleagues in France, Spain and Germany have been contact as has our lead industrial partner. Through R.Amos, contacts have been/will be made with UK and international professional bodies to solicit letters of support in the programme.

C.Pugh has initiate the collation of a benefits map and a documentation of contributions in kind, during the Preliminary Activity and projected for the bridging period. This information will be used in a letter to be sent on behalf of the EB by AG and KL. The goal is to have the letter ready by the end of the week.

The case was made that the delivery of PoPLaR must be prioritised in any compromise scenario as the recovery of the bridging resource was negotiated. There was unanimous agreement.

The need to inform the collaboration was discussed. It was agreed that KL would draft an email to be sent on behalf of the EB to the collaboration outlining the situation and the steps that are being taken to try to address them. The email would announce a meeting at 14:00 on Friday 15Nov24 online to discuss the situation and to review the collaboration's response.

3. LhARA/ITRF BP1 bridging project plan: CP, CW
   Bridging-period document is essentially complete. It needs an overall Gantt chart and some revisions to the milestone definitions.

Moving forward with the bridging activity, CW is encouraging the WPs to bring the various tasks together regularly (monthly) to address overlap/interface issues and to foster better mutual understanding.

Preparation of PoPLaR going well. Supply issues and delays in the PMQ delivery are conspiring to push back the start of experimentation. Presently seems likely that the beam-time for biology will need to be pushed back to March. JPar emphasised that to get the data we need will require a series of experiments rather than a single beam time. This was noted.

4. CDR preparation: All
   WP5 contribution now being filled in, WP4 can be based on 18 month report, and a draft of the WP3 contribution exists. Author list coming together slowly. Return to developing the CDR when issues of resource noted above have been addressed.

5. IB update: TG, YP
   No report this time.

6. Collaboration meeting dates: All
   • 07-08 April 2025, UCL
   • Sep25, TBD ; ?? Swansea

7. DONM
   27Nov24 -- 16:00 GMT

8. AoB
   

RB noted that deadlines for LPAW and IPAC were coming up. He would try and get a talk at both.

RA Note the possibility of publishing in Tech.Innov.Canc.Res.&.Treatment. Perhaps a place for aspects of the CDR to be published.

WS has drafted 50% of the SPARK proposal; costings being done. Taking the "four-nation approach". Exchanged info on possible exhibitions to target. Liverpool science festival details will be provided by TG.

PP Need to follow up once more with MRC about peer-group meeting.

---