1 Proposal and Observation Handling Ravi Sankrit (User Support Scientist) SSSC May 11, 2011.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Preparation of the Self-Study and Documentation
Advertisements

Software Quality Assurance Plan
Work Flows of the Online Review System Copernicus Office Editor Copernicus Publications | April 2014.
How to Release a RFP/RFQ AT FIRST 5 LA February 2, 2010.
Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre April 1, 2010.
Merit Review and Proposal Preparation Mark Courtney Division of Environmental Biology
John Zammit-Haber National Grid
1 Universities Space Research Association SSC Meeting January, 2007 User Tools for Cycle 1 Phase I: Proposal Preparation and Submission R. Y. Shuping.
Chandra Users’ Committee, Oct 2006 Chandra Director’s Office Chandra Director’s Office Proposal Cycle 8  725 submitted proposals  *6.4 oversubscribed.
1 The Maintenance Process Steve Chenoweth CSSE 375, Rose-Hulman Based on Don Bagert’s 2006 Lecture.
Systems Analysis and Design in a Changing World, 6th Edition
Development plan and quality plan for your Project
REGIONAL PEER REVIEW PANELS (PRP) August Peer Review Panel: Background  As a requirement of the ESEA waiver, ODE must establish a process to ensure.
Release & Deployment ITIL Version 3
Contact Scientist Workflow Scott Schnee Dec 19, 2011.
3 Dec 2003Market Operations Standing Committee1 Market Rule and Change Management Consultation Process John MacKenzie / Darren Finkbeiner / Ella Kokotsis,
The Ten Most Common Mistakes in IRB Submissions (How to avoid “3-tylenol-days”)
Dewey Peer Review System Cal Collins and Shai Sachs Isovera Consulting Dec
Principals’ Council Meetings May  Given feedback from multiple stakeholders and after much deliberation, PDE has made the determination to classify.
S/W Project Management
Software Engineering Chapter 15 Construction Leads to Initial Operational Capability Fall 2001.
Transaction Processing Systems and System Development Life Cycle
ACSP Report – Review of Open Suggestions Nate Davis.
SSSC 02/18/2010 P. Marcum Science Utilization Policies SOFIA SCIENCE UTILIZATION POLICIES Pamela M. Marcum SOFIA Project Scientist SSSC Feb 19, 2010.
ALMA Operations and the North American ALMA Science Center Al Wootten NRAO.
1 Technical & Business Writing (ENG-315) Muhammad Bilal Bashir UIIT, Rawalpindi.
Module N° 8 – SSP implementation plan. SSP – A structured approach Module 2 Basic safety management concepts Module 2 Basic safety management concepts.
August 7, Market Participant Survey Action Plan Dale Goodman Director, Market Services.
Technology and Innovation Development Award (TIDA) Presenter Dr Michael Ryan SFI.
 Overview  Online Report Process ◦ Report process for Grantees/Look-Alike Site Visits ◦ Report Process for Look-Alike Applicant Site Visits  Report.
Cycle 1 Planning Process B-G Andersson (SOFIA Science Operations Manager) & Ravi Sankrit (User Support Scientist) SSSC, May 11, 2011 Mountain View.
Software Quality Assurance
User creates problem ticket on Web tool? User has Problem End user requests asst. via , phone, in person. No ticket created Helpdesk staff decides.
Systems Analysis and Design
On Site Review Process Office of Field Services Last Revised 8/15/2011.
GLAST Science Support CenterAugust 9, 2004 Users’ Committee Meeting GSSC USER SUPPORT David Band – GSSC.
Making it happen A6 - Web Site Redevelopment IWMW 2001: Organising Chaos.
SSC SI Data Processing Pipeline Plans Tom Stephens USRA Information Systems Development Manager SSSC Meeting – Sept 29, 2009.
GLAST Science Support CenterNovember, 2005 GSSC User Committee Meeting Tools for Mission and Observation Planning Robin Corbet, GSSC
Commission on Teacher Credentialing Ensuring Educator Excellence 1 Program Assessment Technical Assistance Meetings December 2009.
GLAST Science Support Center June 21, 2007 Getting Involved with GLAST GLAST Guest Investigator Program David Band, GSSC CRESST/GSFC/UMBC.
GLAST Science Support Center May 8, 2006 GUC Meeting Status of GLAST User Support David Band (GSSC/JCA-UMBC)
GLAST Science Support Center November 17, 2006 GUC Face-to-Face Meeting GLAST GI Program (with revised schedule) David Band, GSSC.
Fermi Science Support Center September 26, 2008 FUG Face-to-Face Meeting Fermi GI Program Update David Band, FSSC CRESST/GSFC/UMBC.
National Workshop on ANSN Capacity Building IT modules OAP, Thailand 25 th – 27 th June 2013 KUNJEER Sameer B Exercise on online nomination process & suggestions.
1 NJ Dept. of Health Decision Tree for eIRB Submission Revised: 01/25/2016 Is this research defined as: A systematic investigation which includes research.
NASA Herschel Science Center - page 1 PACS NHSC Cycle 1 Open Time Proposal Planning Workshop 3-4 June 2010 ESA AO and NASA Funding Call Phil Appleton and.
1 Universities Space Research Association Science Instrument Pipeline Requirements SSSC 2009 September 29 Erick Young Director SOFIA Science Mission Operat.
New Scientists and Project Plans Building a Plan for Success OSQR.
HSC Queue Mode Implementation Plan ~ Stage I, II, III ~ Tae-Soo Pyo Subaru Telescope /01/15.
Thomas Gutberlet HZB User Coordination NMI3-II Neutron scattering and Muon spectroscopy Integrated Initiative WP5 Integrated User Access.
OVERVIEW PRE AWARD From idea generation to study design Proposal development and support Proposal submission POST AWARD Account establishment Monitoring.
Process of Creating a Website By: Ryan Millevoi and Lauren Gallo.
For TC Handbook Subcommittee Chairs and Members January 24, 2016 Suzanne LeViseur Chris Ahne Training Leader Handbook Committee Chair Heather Kennedy Handbook.
Component D: Activity D.3: Surveys Department EU Twinning Project.
GLAST Science Support Center November 8, 2005 GUC Action Item #15 AI#15: Pre-Launch GI Proposal Tools David Band (GSSC/JCA-UMBC)
CHAPTER 2 SYSTEM PLANNING DFC4013 System Analysis & Design.
Decision Tree for eIRB Submission Revised: 01/25/2016
Software Configuration Management
Software Project Configuration Management
ASHRAE Handbook Training
Grid Code Development Forum – 6 September 2017
PERB SharePoint Voting Procedure
Decision Tree for eIRB Submission Revised: 01/25/2016
Standards Development: An Overview
MODULE B - PROCESS SUBMODULES B1. Organizational Structure
Proposed Review Cycle to
IEEE MEDIA INDEPENDENT HANDOVER DCN:
1915(c) WAIVER REDESIGN 2019 Brain Injury Summit
Data Quality 2 (DQ2) & Staff Reporting Webinar
Presentation transcript:

1 Proposal and Observation Handling Ravi Sankrit (User Support Scientist) SSSC May 11, 2011

2 GI Phase II Proposal Call Open TAC Review Phase II to Flights Flights SSSC May 11, 2011 User Support Activities: Timeline Before CfP

3 1. Update information on the Science website. 2. Prepare documents, such as the Observers’ Handbook. SSSC May 11, 2011

4 Proposal Call Open 1. Respond to proposers’ queries about SOFIA capabilities, use of Data Cycle System (DCS) tools, and procedures for submitting proposals. 3. Keep the webpages and documentation up to date based on instrument characterization, software development and other ongoing project activities. SSSC May 11, Based on these queries, and on other findings, work with the DCS group to fix software and enhance capabilities to help users.

5 Basic Science: Proposal Submission Rate SSSC May 11, 2011

6 Proposal Review 2. Staff scientists are assigned to carry out technical evaluations of all the proposals. These are edited and uploaded to the DCS, where they are available to the Peer Review Panel members. 1. The information from proposals is ingested into the Data Cycle System (DCS). Permissions need to be set such that only authorized personnel can view and edit proposal information. 3. Peer review panels are convened by the SMO Director and the panel meeting is organized at a nearby location. 4. After the Review Panel meeting, and the Director’s selection of accepted proposals, the DCS information is updated with the actual approved observation times. SSSC May 11, 2011

7 GI Phase II 2. User Support sends letters ( s) to the Principal Investigators of approved proposals outlining the Phase 2 preparation schedule and indicating who the assigned support scientist is. 1. One support scientist is assigned to each successful proposal. (During Basic Science, each scientist supported 3 to 5 proposals.) 3. Support scientists help the GIs prepare their Astronomical Observation Requests (AORs), which were then submitted via to a special account. For Basic Science, we did not have an AOR editor that interfaced with DCS. Therefore, FORCAST AORs were created using an MS Excel template, and GREAT AORs were created using an ASCII template. SSSC May 11, 2011

8 Between Phase II and Flights 1. Based on regularly updated knowledge about instrument capabilities and about best practise for different observing modes, the GI submitted AORs were updated. The GIs were consulted, but the AORs were edited, for the most part, by SMO scientists. 2. The support scientists needed to update the DCS Observing Plans by hand to make them consistent with the AORs. This was necessary for the Flight Planning software, which uses the information contained in DCS. 3. Flight plans for the FORCAST series (8 flights) were constructed using the DCS Observing Plans. Sets of flight plans were made based on objective prioritization (proposal rank) and on schedulibility. These were iterated on after feedback from the science group, and the Director. These were handled very carefully in order to avoid all potential conflicts of interest. SSSC May 11, 2011

9 Plans for Cycle I 2. Prepare the “Observers’ Handbook for Cycle I” by the CfP release date. 3. Respond to proposers’ questions, keep webpages and Handbook up-to-date. 4. We will have an AOR editor for Phase II submissions, so the scientists supporting proposals will spend most of their time and effort on scientific issues and concerns, and less on the mechanics of information management. 1. Provide input into the text of the Call for Proposals to help in the later stages.