[foundation-board] Funding proposal to Technology Strategy Board

Rufus Pollock rufus.pollock at okfn.org
Wed Oct 27 11:31:42 UTC 2010

On 27 October 2010 12:07, Jo Walsh <metazool at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 27/10/2010 11:35, Rufus Pollock wrote:
>> <http://www.innovateuk.org/content/competition/harnessing-large-and-diverse-sources-of-data.ashx>
>> The proposal involves a partnership between OpenlyLocal and the OKF to
>> work on an "Open Data Platform for Public Sector Business
>> Intelligence".
> Sounds fascinating. Wishing the call had appeared on my radar.
> Well done for putting it together in a short time.

Sorry, i thought this had been posted to coord but now realize that
was this other TSB project:


>> I would note that the EoI does *not* commit us to proceeding with the
>> bid so this proposal in no way commits the OKF -- if it had I would
>> obviously have notified the board in advance of any action (normally I
>> would have notified the board in any case but this was done in a bit
>> of a last-minute rush before last Thursday's deadline ...).
>> If we do get selected to go through to the 'next round' I will notify
>> the board and we can all review the proposal (though of course any
>> feedback right now would be useful).
> Forgive me for sounding like a cracked record; but this doesn't sit very
> well with the desire, collectively expressed at the summer Board meeting, to
> make the Board's role in decision-making arms-length, focusing on the
> financial and legal health of the organisation.

I think the Board still needs some overview/sign-off where the
Foundation is being legally committed (e.g. signing up to do some

> I'm sure there's a much bigger group of people who would all have useful
> comments on the proposal. Do you see any disadvantage to working on it in
> public? Not with a fanfare of blogs and tweets, just somewhere where
> interested parties outside of the Board can review?

Yes, I see that (though I'm a bit dubious as to how much general input
one would get from the community - it takes some degree of dedication
to wade through a CFP and the draft!).

I think we do want to move this direction though I think this is still
a challenge in that a) these things are competitive (and some things
like discussion over finances tend to be confidential) b) we're
working here again with a partner (OpenlyLocal) though I imagine that
Chris might well be up for putting this stuff in the open.

(I note, for example, that I see very few public JISC proposals :) --
though you may be pioneering in this field ...)


More information about the foundation-board mailing list