Old NAP Proposal - Revision history

Ali at 21:34, 6 July 2010

2010-07-06T21:34:43Z

Ali: categorized

2010-07-06T21:33:53Z

categorized

Rfs at 02:01, 18 March 2005

2005-03-18T02:01:22Z

Rfs at 21:11, 17 February 2005

2005-02-17T21:11:27Z

Rfs at 21:10, 17 February 2005

2005-02-17T21:10:36Z

Rfs at 16:58, 21 January 2005

2005-01-21T16:58:36Z

Rfs at 16:33, 21 January 2005

2005-01-21T16:33:30Z

New page

This proposal is a piece of Post-CollabTech cleanup.

Name: Nonprofit Access Point/ Nonprofit Assistance Program / Needs Analysis Program

Proposal: Revamp the hardware grants process to provide a single point
of access for nonprofits.

To begin with, the hardware grants group current method of interacting
with nonprofits is a good model for this. There is an email list, an RT
queue, and each grant gets an advocate. The downsides are: it takes as
much as a month to get an advocate, or even any response; nonprofits
need to understand what they need; it doesn't take care of anything but
hardware.

Let us create a new group, the NAP group, who shall be advocates. We
will eliminate the hardware grant request form, and replace it with a
nonprofit help form, which asks nonprofits to tell us about what they
do, and what they want to do, and what their technological limitations
are. These requests go to the NAP group, probably with an RT queue and
an email list. Anyone on that group can choose to 'Take' the ticket in
the Queue, and they then become the advocate/shepherd/nonprofitherd for
the nonprofit. Their job is to talk to the nonprofit and understand what
they need, or if it's clear from the email, to take the appropriate
actions to make it happen (make an internal grant request for hardware,
ask Tech Support questions, ask education about the possibility of a
class, or find a list of contractors who could answer the problem, most
likely).

The Hardware Grants group stops receiving outside requests, which will
cut down on the people requesting diskless terminals and no server, or
whatever other nonsensical requests. People get immediate responses and
immedate advocates. And we create a group who can take care of
nonprofits needs, and also be a central point of discovery for what
nonprofits need and what we should charge for.

Let us also direct the NAP as its first priority to determine the following things:

# Are there classes that we should be offering?
# Does the NAP need a staff coordinator?
# What pieces of software need to exist/be understood to help convert nonprofits?

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:34, 6 July 2010
Line 20:		Line 20:
	# What pieces of software need to exist/be understood to help convert nonprofits?		# What pieces of software need to exist/be understood to help convert nonprofits?

−	[[Category: ~~PPS~~]]	+	[[Category: Program Planning Sheets]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:33, 6 July 2010
Line 19:		Line 19:
	# Does the NAP need a staff coordinator?		# Does the NAP need a staff coordinator?
	# What pieces of software need to exist/be understood to help convert nonprofits?		# What pieces of software need to exist/be understood to help convert nonprofits?
		+
		+	[[Category: PPS]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:01, 18 March 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	''(NOTE: This proposal has been withdrawn as of the Council Meeting on February 16, 2005. It remains here for reference.) See [[The Future of Collab]] proposal.''	+	''(NOTE: This proposal has been withdrawn as of the Council Meeting on February 16, 2005. It remains here for reference.) See [[Nonprofit Assistance Program Proposal\|The Future of Collab]] proposal.''

	This proposal is a piece of Post-CollabTech cleanup.		This proposal is a piece of Post-CollabTech cleanup.

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:11, 17 February 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	''(NOTE: This proposal has been withdrawn as of the Council Meeting on February 16, 2005. It remains here for reference.)''	+	''(NOTE: This proposal has been withdrawn as of the Council Meeting on February 16, 2005. It remains here for reference.) See [[The Future of Collab]] proposal.''

	This proposal is a piece of Post-CollabTech cleanup.		This proposal is a piece of Post-CollabTech cleanup.

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:10, 17 February 2005
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	''(NOTE: This proposal has been withdrawn as of the Council Meeting on February 16, 2005. It remains here for reference.)''
		+
	This proposal is a piece of Post-CollabTech cleanup.		This proposal is a piece of Post-CollabTech cleanup.

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 Name: Nonprofit Access Point/ Nonprofit Assistance Program / Needs Analysis Program
-Proposal: Revamp the hardware grants process to provide a single point
+Proposal: Revamp the hardware grants process to provide a single point of access for nonprofits.
-To begin with, the hardware grants group current method of interacting
+To begin with, the hardware grants group current method of interacting with nonprofits is a good model for this. There is an email list, an RT queue, and each grant gets an advocate. The downsides are: it takes as much as a month to get an advocate, or even any response; nonprofits need to understand what they need; it doesn't take care of anything but hardware.
-Let us create a new group, the NAP group, who shall be advocates. We
+Let us create a new group, the NAP group, who shall be advocates. We will eliminate the hardware grant request form, and replace it with a nonprofit help form, which asks nonprofits to tell us about what they do, and what they want to do, and what their technological limitations are. These requests go to the NAP group, probably with an RT queue and an email list. Anyone on that group can choose to 'Take' the ticket in the Queue, and they then become the advocate/shepherd/nonprofitherd for the nonprofit. Their job is to talk to the nonprofit and understand what
-will eliminate the hardware grant request form, and replace it with a
+they need, or if it's clear from the email, to take the appropriate actions to make it happen (make an internal grant request for hardware, ask Tech Support questions, ask education about the possibility of a class, or find a list of contractors who could answer the problem, most likely).
-The Hardware Grants group stops receiving outside requests, which will
+The Hardware Grants group stops receiving outside requests, which will cut down on the people requesting diskless terminals and no server, or whatever other nonsensical requests. People get immediate responses and immedate advocates. And we create a group who can take care of nonprofits needs, and also be a central point of discovery for what nonprofits need and what we should charge for.
 Let us also direct the NAP as its first priority to determine the following things: