Member-Driven Activities Resources Working Group Stakeholder Information Briefing Tom Duerr January 2017

Purpose of Resource Working Group (RWG) Approach Stakeholder Survey Outline Purpose of Resource Working Group (RWG) Approach Stakeholder Survey Next Steps Additional information Current budgeting process RWG member details

Purpose of Resources Working Group Chartered by James Maser, AIAA President, under Governance Transition efforts Purpose: clean-sheet budgeting process design Enable funding of innovative, strategic activities beyond traditional items Develop a process and guidelines to budget, allocate, and manage expenditures Scope: Member-Driven Activities Technical Activities Committee (TAC) Region and Section Activities Committee (RSAC) Aerospace Interests Committee (AIC) Communities of Interest (COI) Output: Recommendations Process and guidelines draft document Summary briefing to BoT Example Traditional Expenses TAC Meals A/V support at meetings TC/PC initiatives RSAC Social events STEM activities Define new, enabling funding process for TAC, RSAC, AIC, & COI

Approach – Assessment of Alternatives Review legacy budgeting and monitoring processes Develop statements of objectives in three areas Why fund member-driven activities? How should the budgeting process work? How should the expenditure management process work? Research and generate process alternatives Assess alternatives with respect to objectives What activities to fund – prioritized to support “why” objectives Budgeting and expenditure management – ranked by support for “how” objectives Develop a recommendation – why, what, how

Stakeholder Survey – Step 2 RWG drafted objectives in all three areas in Step 2 Requesting input from Member-Driven Activities stakeholders: TAC and RSAC Directors and Deputy Directors, and TC, PC, and Section Chairs, in consultation with their committees Rate importance of each draft objective Add objectives we may have missed Your objectives ratings will weight the objectives to support the assessment of process alternatives Survey will be emailed after SciTech – return requested by 3 March Example Objective and Rating Options Objective Definition Strongly Disagree Somewhat Disagree No Opinion Somewhat Agree Strongly Agree Maximize strategic value to the Institute Strategic value as expressed in the Strategic Imperatives in the AIAA Strategic Plan. Your input will help shape the future process

Prioritize objectives March Next Steps Prioritize objectives March Develop preliminary process recommendations April Obtain stakeholder feedback May Test and refine draft process July Develop final recommendations August April May June July August March September Prioritize Objectives Preliminary Recommendations Stakeholder Feedback Test Events Final Reco’s BoT @ SPACE

Additional Information January 2017

RWG Members (1 of 2) Name Employer & Location Region AIAA Experience Andy Amram Associate Fellow Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Los Angeles, CA VI Lifetime member (1995-present) Management TC- Chair and Vice Chair Led Programs subcommittee Various roles from 2002 to 2015 Troy Downen Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation Savannah, GA II Chair, General Aviation Technical Committee, 2014-16 General Chair, 2010 Region V Student Paper Conference, April 2010 Deputy Director, Region V Technical Activities, 2006-2010 Chair, Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Technical Committee, 2005-2007 Chair, Wichita Section, 2005-2006 Chair, Student Chapter @ University of Kansas, 1993 Tom Duerr (RWG Chair) The Aerospace Corporation Chantilly, VA I Lifetime member (1995–present) Deputy VP, Technical Activities (2011–2016) TAC Public Policy Coordinator (2008–2011) AIAA and National Security Space Office (NSSO) ITAR Working Group (2009) Technical Director, Space and Missiles Group (SMG) (2005–2008) Deputy Director, SMG and TAC New Initiatives Subcommittee (2000–2005) Missile Systems Technical Committee (1997–2000) David Elrod Jacobs Technology Tullahoma, TN Management TC (Vice Chair, Chair, led Membership subcommittee, etc) various roles from 2002 to 2016 Jeff Laube

RWG Members (2 of 2) Name Employer & Location Region AIAA Experience David Levy Associate Fellow Sierra Nevada Corporation Andover, KS V Sandy Magnus Executive Director, AIAA AIAA Reston, VA I Andrew Neely University of New South Wales Australian Defence Force Academy Canberra, Australia VII Shamim Rahman NASA Johnson Space Center Houston, TX IV Student chapter at Texas A&M Univ. in early 80s. Professional chapter activities (Los Angeles, New Orleans, Houston) Conferences - Joint Propulsion Conferences, Space Conference, Sci Tech Other - Two Terms at the Board of Directors (Director at Large, for International) Jayant Ramakrishnan Bastion Technologies, Inc.

Institute Operations Budget AIAA has three “colors” of money – Operations, Portfolio, and Foundation BoT authorization is required for transfers between Operations and Portfolio BoT may authorize donation to Foundation, may not pull funds out of Foundation Operations budget and expenditure “rules” Institute Operations should be self-sustaining The Institute Portfolio will not be used to meet any annual Operations shortfalls Operations revenue and expenditures must balance every year Starts at $0, ends at $0 No carryover (loss or gains) from fiscal year to fiscal year Once Operations budget approved, no changes permitted Expenditure and revenue variances from the budget are highlighted and explained Provide financial status to Board of Trustees every meeting (three times per year) Report to Finance Committee six times per year January, February, May, July/August (Budget), August/September, December

Overview – Legacy Budgeting Process RSAC allocations Rebate based on membership numbers Further sub-divided by RSAC TAC allocations 1 meal per TC/PC and audio/video support at face-to-face meetings at Forums Comparatively small TAC discretionary fund Process origins and rationale undocumented

Region and Section Rebate Calculation For FY17: RSAC Rebate Budget = $214,644 Based on 17,887 prof members assigned @ $12.00 per member Category II: Section Awards $28,000 Category III: Regional Directors Funds $20,000 Category IV/V: VP Member Services $4,000 YP Section Event Funds $2,000 Category I: Section Funds $160,644 Total $214,644

FY17 TAC/TC Committee Budget FY17 Budget FY16 Budget FY15 Actuals FY14 Actuals FY13 Actuals TAC Discretionary Funding $20,000 0* $14,236 Audio/video $34,000 $48,000 $34,780 $31,599 $42,408 Food $184,400 $160,200 $141,299 $157,484 $239,662 Total $238,400 $228,200 $176,079 $189,083 $296,306 Food budget is based on attendance trend in TC meeting requests and charges at meeting venue In FY17, we have budgeted for 1,820 meals to cover one meal for TCs, PCs, Group Directors and the TAC meetings * No TAC discretionary funding allocation in FY14 and FY15