Present:
Linda Young (President), Carol Redmond (President-Elect), Tim Gregoire (Treasurer), Karen Bandeen-Roche (Secretary), Jane Pendergast (RAB Chair), Greg Campbell (RAB Chair-Designate), Kathy Hoskins (Executive Director), Barry Davis (RECOM), Walter Piegorsch (RECOM; Logo), Lisa LaVange (Biometric Bulletin Correspondent; Sponsors Committee Chair), Paula Roberson (Membership Committee Chair), Katherine Monti (Sponsors Committee), Joan Chmiel (Operations Manual), Beth Gladen, Elizabeth Margosches, Rob Tempelman

1. Introduction

   Linda Young opened the meeting at 5:00 pm, welcoming all in attendance.

2. Minutes

   Draft copies of the March, 2001 (Charlotte, NC Spring Meeting) Business Meeting minutes were distributed. Karen Bandeen-Roche drew attention to these and solicited a motion for approval. It was decided that the minutes be tentatively approved; those in attendance should examine the draft at their leisure; and anyone finding errors should notify Karen of needed modifications by e-mail. (No modifications were requested; therefore, they are considered approved.)

3. Treasurer's Report
   1. Overall status - Tim Gregoire introduced the financial status report he had prepared. He cited total assets of approximately $290,000 as of June 30, 2001. Directing attention to the report's overall financial status graph, he noted steadily increasing assets over recent years and suggested that current assets are sufficient to cover a bad year. He further noted that efforts to build our asset base must continue: expenditures during calendar year 2000 were approximately $241,000, and our asset goal is 150% of yearly expenditures.

   2. Meeting-related revenues - Net revenues from the 2001 Spring Meeting exceeded $33,000. These did not include short course or tutorial revenues; these netted approximately $43,000 and $10,000 respectively, for overall meeting revenue of approximately $94,000. Tim noted this as the first time in our history that short course revenues exceeded meeting revenues excluding continuing education. Turning to his report's graph on short courses and tutorials, Tim pointed out a substantial increase in short course revenues over the last several years. The tutorial revenue trend was flatter; Tim suggested that tutorial revenues are structured differently, and we expect them to be less, than short course revenues.

   3. Expected expenses over the coming year - Tim cited these in three areas: our website, providing LCD projectors for the Spring Meeting, and updating our contract with Drohan Management. He was unsure as to the last of these costs; he estimated the website and LCD costs at $5000 and $15,000, respectively.

4. Apology for meeting scheduling snafu

   It was noted that the timing of this (Atlanta) Business Meeting had been mistakenly listed in the meeting program, and regrets were offered to persons who had intended to be on time but missed part of the meeting as a result of the misprint. (After the meeting, Elizabeth Margosches offered to give ASA feedback about the program snafu.)

5. Report on Charlotte (2001) Spring Meeting

   Kathy Hoskins reported that 958 registrants participated in the 2001 Spring Meeting. There were 337 short course registrations and 327 tutorial registrations. Roundtables were nearly sold out. Kathy noted that the meeting had drawn the largest attendance to date. Linda Young reported that a Young Investigator's Workshop had been held and generated very positive feedback. She concluded by soliciting feedback on the meeting's short courses.

6. Report on Crystal City (2002) Spring Meeting
   1. General Information, Scientific Program - Carol Redmond reminded those in attendance that the 2002 Spring Meeting would be held March 17-20. She offered kudos to Kathy Hoskins. She and Kathy had spoken with Art Scanlon at the meeting hotel; the hotel looked like a great site and was convenient to public transportation. Carol further credited Joanna Shih (2002 Spring Meeting Program Chair) for developing an excellent program, suggesting that the sessions offered breadth, depth and balance. Topics to be covered ranged from statistical genetics to general methodology to biomedical areas. Sir Richard Peto was to be the Presidential Invited Speaker.

   2. Continuing Education - Carol reported that this part of the program was mostly completed. There would be a spectrum of offerings, including a statistical genetics course to be led by Robert Elston, a course on cluster-randomized studies, a course on Bayesian survival analysis, and others. Five tutorials were to be offered, with topics including multiple imputation and SAS implementation of gene expression analyses. Carol stated that she was still working on 1-2 more short courses, including one targeting those with environmental interests. (Ultimately five short courses were scheduled, four of which were day-long courses, and the last of which was a half-day course.) Approximately 10 roundtables had been finalized. (Ultimately 11 roundtables were scheduled.)

   3. Social Program - Carol reported that good ideas had been generated. The Planning Committee was to prioritize ideas the following day. Carol cited the issue at hand as best balancing appeal and cost, rather than any lack of ideas. She identified Kathryn Hirst (George Washington University) as the Local Arrangements Chair, summarized progress as being far along, and thanked Kathy Hoskins and others. Tim Gregoire asked whether Kathryn would attend the next day's Planning meeting; Carol replied affirmatively and noted that, unfortunately, Kathryn had been unable to attend the Business Meeting.

   Linda Young concluded the report by asserting that there would be both Young Investigators' and Diversity Workshops at the Spring Meeting, and that NIH funding was being sought to cover costs.

7. Report on Tampa (2003) Spring Meeting

   Kathy Hoskins reported that the Tampa site is on the water and convenient to a great diversity of restaurants. Airline access is easy, weather is usually great in March, and the city has established a nice Cable Car transportation system. Kathy hoped that the site would provide a good draw. She concluded by noting that Major League Baseball's Spring Training should be ongoing during the meeting, and that five teams have training sites in the area.

8. Report on ENAR JSM Participation
   1. 2001 - ENAR was the primary sponsor for 8 invited sessions, two of which had been won in competition. Linda Young conveyed a message from Francoise Seillier-Moiseiwitsch (ENAR Representative to 2001 JSM Organizing Committee): the Program Committee for the 2003 International Statistical Institute meeting, to be held in Berlin, was seeking sessions organized by guest societies. Francoise was on the committee and actively seeking ideas. It was noted that Francoise was to leave for Korea within about 10 days, so that anyone with ideas should see contact her quickly.

   2. 2002 - It was reported that Sati Mazumdar (ENAR Representative to 2002 JSM Organizing Committee) was far along in organizing ENAR's contribution to the program. September 23 was cited as the deadline for developing invited sessions. It was noted that there is no limit to the number of Topic Contributed Sessions that can be submitted. These comprise a semi-invited forum, allow five extra minutes per speaker, and offer a nice alternative to invited sessions.

9. IBS

   Linda Young outlined issues currently before ENAR:

   • Council Elections were upcoming; ideas for nominees were sought.

   • The 2006 IBS Meeting is supposed to be held in ENAR. Linda cited Geert Molenberghs (IBS General Secretary) as hoping that good proposals would be developed, and she noted that sites must offer both cheap housing (e.g. dormitory housing) and regular hotels. She urged anyone interested in putting forward a proposal to contact the Executive Committee.

   • Linda identified Lisa LaVange as our correspondent to the Biometric Bulletin. Lisa reported that she had already written about the Diversity Workshop but not the Young Investigators' Workshop. Her April article had recapped the Spring Meeting, her June article had previewed ENAR sessions to be held at the upcoming JSM, and she guessed that her December report would preview the next Spring Meeting. She solicited input for her September article, hoping to have a non-meeting-related topic. One idea she had was to write about someone in an academic department. She noted that Tom TenHave is the Bulletin editor and the journal has been seeking more ENAR input. Tim Gregoire suggested an article about Sam Greenhouse's contributions. Jane Pendergast suggested an article summarizing new statistics opportunities in the United States. Walt Piegorsch noted that anything related to "bioinformatics" seems to be a big draw these days and suggested an article highlighting relevant activities within ENAR. Jane added that we might highlight a more general range of hot statistics topics within ENAR.

10. COPSS

    Linda Young reported that there had been good COPSS discussions during the current meeting. An initiative to influence funding toward statistics had been developed; for instance, ASA had written a letter to NSF. Linda noted that mathematics has a great, paid presence in the Foundation, but that statistics has none. She envisioned that our discipline would eventually have a paid presence in NSF. As a second example, Linda noted that the Visiting Lecturer program had been revitalized, and she urged those in attendance to visit the COPSS website for more information.

11. RAB Report

    Jane Pendergast reported that recent efforts had been focused on improving procedures to ensure high-quality RAB input into the nominations process. She briefly recapped the current process: each RAB class has a "point person" who solicits and organizes input from members named to RAB in the same year as he or she was named. She concluded by noting that Greg Campbell has ideas to improve the process for the 2002 nominating cycle.

12. Logo Report

    Walt Piegorsch reviewed the history of ENAR's logo discussions: Scott Zeger (1996 ENAR President) put out a call for logo ideas during the Richmond meeting, but development went nowhere thereafter. After the Charlotte Spring Meeting, Walt took on the task. He envisioned incorporating the IBS logo together with large "ENAR" wording in our regional logo. He reported that work on the logo was nearly complete and resolved to pass on a completed draft to the incoming President. Walt concluded by thanking Linda Young for the opportunity to spearhead the effort.

13. Operations Manual

    Joan Chmiel reported having discussed the Operations Manual with Louise Ryan (Past-President, then in Australia) earlier that day. More discussions were needed; these were to follow. (The outcome of the discussions was for Louise to lead development of an online, calendar-format Manual with personnel support at Harvard; much progress has been made.)

14. Website

    Linda Young reported that there had been little LDAP (IBS Membership Directory/Search Engine) discussion in recent months (see Charlotte Minutes). She noted that the logo would be posted on the web. Moreover, the abstract submission system was being updated. Linda urged those present to observe that the November 15 deadline would be absolute, due to loss of flexibility resulting from the system update.

15. Committee Reports

    Linda Young reported that the By-laws Committee had nearly completed its work, and the Nominating Committee was continuing to work with RAB. Two other brief reports were given:

    1. Membership Committee - Paula Roberson reported that the Committee had met for the first time the previous day. She said that the Committee needed to prepare a charge for itself. Her plan was that a draft would be developed by one of the committee members; it would be circulated among the committee; and a finalized draft would presented in Crystal City. The Committee had discussed activities that it might pursue. Paula concluded by saying that notes from the meeting would be produced. Linda noted that ENAR's membership has decreased in recent years, paralleling a trend seen in other statistics societies, and stressed the importance of the committee's work.

    2. Named Sessions Committee - Linda recapped the need for the committee: our society's membership is aging, hence requests for named and special sessions are bound to increase, and guidelines for granting requests should be established proactively. She reminded those present that a committee had been established to study the issue, named the committee's members (Judith O'Fallon-Chair, Janet Wittes, Skip Woolson) and announced that the committee had submitted its draft report to the Executive Committee. Ideas were to be fed back to the Named Sessions Committee, and a finalized proposal was to be presented in Crystal City.

16. Update on Spring Meeting Changes Agreed Upon in Charlotte
    1. Policy changes - Linda Young reported that changes in fee structure and the new proposal for accommodating committees' space needs were being implemented.

    2. Sponsors Committee - Lisa LaVange reported on the activities of this newly created committee. Louise Ryan had put together a chart of the 1999-2000 sponsors. Lisa's plan was to send out letters and make contacts in the fall. She questioned what was the optimal number of sponsors, citing a tradeoff between revenue flow and dilution of impact for those sponsoring. She further noted that student awards were the most highly sought objects of sponsorship; many responded that this was a nice problem. Lisa reflected that perhaps the issue was merely the need to keep track of who sponsors what. Linda recalled that $13,000 was solicited in one week last year and thought it best to think proactively on what we might do with a large fund increase, e.g. increase awards to students.

    3. Education Advisory Committee - This group's work was proceeding.

    4. LCD Projectors - Linda reported that LCD projectors would be provided in Crystal City, and that registration for the meeting would be increased by $15 as a result.

17. Other Business

    Linda Young asked whether there was any old or new business. Joan Chmiel reported having heard that the old process of allocating fixed numbers of sessions to ASA Sections wasn't followed this year. Rather, she had heard that sessions were lumped into one pot, and the best 24 overall had been selected. Linda responded by stressing the value of participation by other societies, but confirming that fixed allocation was no longer in effect. Joan asked how credit for sessions would be listed? What if a given section (i.e. Biometrics) was not allocated any sessions? Linda responded that whoever proposed a presented session would be credited—for instance, the Section on Statistics and the Environment had some—and suggested that sections not allocated their own sessions might co-sponsor others' sessions. Jane Pendergast suggested that this year's process didn't encourage a broad-based program: she felt that choice by majority vote resulted in sessions with the most overlapping appeal rather than sessions of great interest to a subset. Linda responded that we may need to add sessions to next year's program: although there has not been fixed allocation for a couple of years, there has been a "diversity" review such that strong sessions not making the organizing committee's initial cut have been added post hoc. There was brief discussion on opportunities for session co-sponsorship, and clarification on post-hoc review was sought. Linda asked Joan and all present to review the list of sessions, identify gaps, and suggest fill-in choices. Joan suspected a need to better inform the Biometrics Section's program representative on the new process and said she would undertake to do so. Linda acknowledged that perhaps some didn't understand the new process, and she suggested that some better-developed proposals might have been selected over less-developed proposals on similar topics. Joan reminded the group that the Biometrics Section has a long history of participation in the ENAR Spring Meeting and felt the need to ensure that their desires are represented in the scientific program. Linda reiterated her request that all review the list of sessions and suggest needed additions. Beth Gladen stated that she also felt the session selection process had not been well communicated to her section's program chair, and she asked whether there was a document detailing the process. Linda replied that an extensive document exists as a resource for Program Chairs, but she conceded the need to better communicate the process. She further noted that Joanna Shih had reported having a hard time getting full participation in the process of ranking sessions, and she reiterated the value of others' participation in our meeting. Elizabeth Margosches suggested that a statement of philosophy and a concise description of policy would serve as a useful introduction to the Program Chair's Manual; she made the analogy to a map. Linda clarified that the manual was designed for Program Chairs' use and suggested that we need a separate policy and procedures document for others participating in the program development process. Tim Gregoire informed the group that Joanna had stated that a program diversity step would follow the first-cut ranking review. Joan acknowledged this but felt that ENAR needs to be sensitive in making changes to long-standing policy. Lisa LaVange voiced her liking for the array of invited sessions; she felt that the choices looked diverse. Carol Redmond stated a careful process had been followed in selecting sessions; Joan didn't doubt this and agreed that the program looked great, but had merely wanted to raise the procedure issue.

    No further business was raised.