OPEG Meeting Minutes

Minutes for meeting of OPEG Board of Trustees 9-5-08 Conference Call - Rob Fischer, Nancy Hood, Karen Shaner, Jan Upton, Shon Bunkley, Rachel Holbert, Julianne Manchester, and Chip Partridge. Absent: Shiloh Turner and Marsha Zabecki.

Review of Minutes - Jan Upton: There were no changes to the July minutes. Jan noted that she is behind on posting minutes onto the web page. She will post April, May, and July within the week.

Treasurer's Report - Karen Shaner:

Review of August Financial Statement - The year-to-date revenue is $18,155 (consists of membership = $5,703, conference fees = $12,374, and interest = $78). This is the end-of-fiscal-year statement for 2007-2008, and the revenue is 94 percent of what was projected. Total expenses were $13,808, which is 71 percent of the projection. Renee Belbeck's invoice was only $90. Renee helped clean up the Excel files in preparation for the March mailing. Since it is a modest expense, we will include it under Administrative Services in the September statement. The Program Committee's total expense was $10,950, which is 68 percent of the projection. The total spent on Communications was $2,041, 9 percent higher than what was projected. The web management cost of $1,328 was 23 percent above the projection. Chip mentioned that he thought that the web page cost $900 per year. Based on invoices, it appears that the fixed part of the web page charge was $89.95/month. We get 4-5 hours per month that are part of the fixed cost. For hours beyond that, we are charged at an hourly rate. In the next budget, we can eliminate lines that we are not using. Karen will eliminate the Nominating category and two line items in the Executive Committee (Consultation and Retreat).

Nancy noted that the printing/mailing in the Membership Committee ($759) was for the Spring Exchange mailing, so the purpose was also relevant for the Program Committee. There was group discussion about the need to break out costs by event (Fall Workshop and Spring Exchange) in the 2008-2009 budget. Nancy is going to review this and talk with Karen about what categories need to be included and how they should be ordered.

Karen noted that the Beginning August Balance of $9724.52 might be an error. She is going to review and will correct if needed. The balance in the checking is $13,418 and the CD has a value of $7,396, resulting in a total of $20,814. Rob thought that this total should be higher given that the net profit is $4,347. Karen will review this with Randy.

Review of 5-year Budget - The 5-year budget provides some context for thinking ahead to the 2008-2009 budget. It reminds us that we had 90 attendees at each event this past year, which in the aggregate is about the same as the previous year. We increased the number of dues paying members from 129 to 146 this year. Our revenue projections are based on 140 members, so we did a little better than projected. Our revenue has been approximately $20,000 for the past 4 years. This past year, our expenses were less, so we had over $4,000 net "profit." Our expenses were less this year due to savings on programming due to paying less in speakers' fees.

Rachel noted that it is interesting to see how much membership has fluctuated. Rob pointed out that we hit rock bottom prior to 2004-had only 50 members at one point. Since 2004, membership has ranged from 90 to 170. One thing we should think about is our target membership and enhancements that could meet the needs of a larger membership. Karen said that she pulled up the membership number for 2003, and it was only 41. It is amazing how it grew in only three years-went from 41 to 170.

Review of 2008-2009 Proposed Budget - We should make changes in categories that would make the new budget more useful. Karen used last year's estimates on the revenue side as a guide. Rob noted that we were a little off with respect to our total estimated conference fees. We were at 181 participants on conference attendance, but we budgeted for 200. It is also likely that not everyone paid $75 (some would have been students). There was a consensus to reduce expected conference attendance to 180 ($13,500 revenue). We also didn't do as well on interest, so the estimate should be reduced to $80.

On the Executive Committee, we are going to eliminate the first lines (both have $0 budgeted). The only question is an appropriate amount for Administrative Services, which is for assistance with the mailing. We recommended that we keep general Administrative Services category but reduce the budget to $500. The group also agreed with the suggestion to move each of the event mailings under this category, but they should retain detailed labeling. For example, add two lines for Postage (Fall Workshop and Spring Exchange) and Printing (Fall Workshop and Spring Exchange) under Administrative Services. We should also move the Communications categories to under the Executive Committee. These include the web page and conference calling. We recommended eliminating the Communications section. The only issue will be making historical comparisons since we are reassigning some of the expense categories.

At this time, the Membership Committee does not have a budget. The Membership Committee envisions most of their activities being their own labor or via the web page. Chip pointed out that if we move forward on changes to the web page that will cover many of the things that the Membership Committee wants to pursue. Right now, cost is not an issue for the Membership Committee. We will keep this open and the board can vote on any expenses that may arise in the future. We're going to keep the Membership Committee budget line at zero, but we will still fund requests for such lines as needed.

Rob recommended that Karen talk with Jan and Nancy to verify appropriate estimates and budget lines. With respect to the Program Committee, Nancy will send details to Karen. [UPDATE: After meeting, Jan e-mailed the board a recommended estimated budget for event mailing/printing to be $800, or a total of $1,600.] Rob made the motion to approve the 2008-09 budget via e-mail so it will be ready by next board meeting. Chip seconded the motion.

Rob thanked Karen for preparing all the budgetary materials.

Program Committee Report - Nancy Hood:

Fall Workshop (November 14, 2008) - The next Program Committee meeting is scheduled for next week, so we haven't yet discussed the draft program, which she e-mailed to the board prior to the meeting. Presenters have been selected with attention to the idea of the "Evaluators' Toolbox," which she had discussed at the 7/11/08 board meeting. We have two parallel tracks during the day and a mixture of basic, intermediate, and special topics throughout the day. Nancy noted that there might be a logistical problem with having 90 people. She expressed concern about having 45 in one session, since it is training, this would be too many. She is going to check on reserving another room. We have two rooms, and one is very large, so it may be possible to split that into two rooms. We would then have three sessions at one time. This would reduce the number of participants in each session to approximately 30. This may result in some speakers repeating their presentation. The draft schedule includes some good topics and presenters. Jan noted that she has posted a preliminary description about the Fall Workshop on the web page. She asked that the board review the announcement.

Spring Exchange (May 15, 2009) - We're going to talk about this next week at the Program Committee meeting. Nancy would like us to line up a big name keynote speaker for this. Jan recommended that board members attending the November AEA Conference in Denver be on the lookout for potential speakers.

Membership Committee Report - Rachel Holbert and Shon Bunkley: They had a meeting on 9/4/08 and shared their minutes with the board. It seems that their main task is to keep track of current members and determine why those who are no longer members left OPEG. Some of the assignments in the by-laws have now been taken over by technology. It is not that we don't do them, but they are already being accommodated. We would like to do more to develop regional chapters, bring more college students into OPEG, and have contact with other groups. We need to determine what we should be doing and we need to grow our committee. We talked about creating an e-mail, like AEA does, that says these are the committees and we need more than three members. One idea is to make members more aware of OPEG committees and needs for volunteers. Jan mentioned that she has already done this with the Service Page http://www.opeg.org/service.php. We have been avoiding sending member attachments, but Chip and Jan have been regularly sending out e-mails that include links to the web page. We try to put as much information on the web page as possible. Jan usually writes the e-mails. Chip then sends these out to members and non-members. Rachel said that if we did this like the AEA, this could be formatted more like a newsletter. Chip can do an extract of the membership list and share e-mail addresses with the Membership Committee. The main need is to determine the board's priorities for the Membership Committee.

Rob pointed out that whatever we are doing is working, but we do have this churning of membership-members not renewing while new people come into OPEG. The fact that the Membership Committee is freed up from the "have to do" to the "want to do" may be an opportunity to systematically talk to some long-term members about the benefits as well as explore the reasons for leaving with those who have left OPEG. Although we have a PowerPoint and handout explaining OPEG benefits, maybe we need to understand these issues further as we move forward. Phone calls and interviews would probably be very revealing. We especially need to explore retention and engagement. Chip can do an extract on the members/non-member contact list for the Membership Committee. Karen also mentioned that Tucker Handley offered to help with attendance certificates at the Fall Workshop. She will talk with him about serving on the Membership Committee.

Shon raised the question of whether or not we have a target membership number. We use 140 as our goal for the budget. Rob noted that when we grew to 170, we were not ready for it and were somewhat overwhelmed. He thinks we would like to expand to this number, as we now have more capacity and should be able to manage more members.

Web site development/enhancement proposal - Chip: It looks like the web site cost is going to be constant, but it seems like the fee we paying for what we are getting is a bit higher than the market rate. We have a static web site. Although it looks great for it is, the web site is outdated. One path that he thinks will increase the value to members would be to have a truly online directory of members and consultants. The problem is that we do not have a dynamic web site. If Randal is no longer available, no one is going to be able to take on the web site. It would have to be recreated. Rachel noted that although she does not know if updating the web site will increase our value to members, new members are likely put off by the outdated web site. Chip recommends that we pay approximately $3,000 upfront for web site development with an Open Source web site content management (e.g., Drupel). He explained that AEA appears to be moving in a similar direction, but they are going with a vendor, which is expensive. Drupel, on the other hand, is free. The web site can be dynamic and non-technical people can edit using MSWord. There is no reason to pay a webmaster to manage a system. Other benefits: on-line registrations, payment of member dues with PayPal (extra fee), membership database will have feedback loop such that you can update your information when you log-on, and the membership system is self-sustaining. Chip got a $2,250 estimate for the original proposal. If we set this up, we will have control of the web site and updates. He suggested that each OPEG committee be responsible for their own area. It would be as simple as editing a MSWord document. Jan already does this, but then she has to send all documents to Randal (the webmaster), so there is a delay, and if he makes a mistake or misses a change, there is another delay. Chip also pointed out that an additional benefit is that we could raise revenue by offering this web site tool to our members.

Nancy wants to get more information about AEA's web site plans, as it is possible that we will learn that we can something free through them. Chip recommends that we proceed with the upcoming Fall Workshop as usual. Assigning web site responsibilities is part of the discussion in determining each committee's task. Karen asked about discussion boards, and Chip confirmed that blogs and other tools are part Drupel. Rob thanked Chip for bringing information to the board, which is important for OPEG's future. Chip will get an updated estimate. He is writing a detailed memo that he will share with the board. The web page proposal is on hold for now, but we will discuss further at the next board meeting.

Other Business: Rob was not elected to the AEA. He may volunteer for an AEA committee.

Next Meeting: Friday, December 5th at 10:00 a.m. - 12 p.m. conference call.

Summary of Needed Follow-up: Karen - 1) Review "Beginning August Balance" and year-end profit. 2) Revise 2008-2009 budget. Confer with Nancy and Jan. E-mail updated budget to board for approval. [UPDATE: Karen submitted updated documents, which were discussed at 12/5/08 meeting.]

Submitted by: Jan Upton