PVAT: Public Value Assessment Tool

8 views
Skip to first unread message

Stephen Buckley

unread,
Jun 4, 2011, 9:31:30 PM6/4/11
to opengov...@googlegroups.com
Dear All,

I'm picking up this discussion-thread from the OpenGovInitiative google-group (see below), concerning the Public Value Assessment Tool (PVAT), and starting it here.

If you have any information or comments about PVAT (see links, below), then please share it with us here.

vr,

Stephen Buckley, moderator
OpenGovMetrics google-group
http://www.opengovmetrics.com

You can also follow us on Twitter:
http://twitter.com/opengovmetrics

====================================


Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2011 19:02:59 -0400
To: opengovi...@googlegroups.com
From: Stephen Buckley <sbuc...@igc.org>
Subject: Re: Tool for evaluating fed/state/local open government initiatives
Bcc: Meghan Cook <MC...@ctg.albany.edu>,

Andrew,

I went to the website and read the CTG's conditions for downloading PVAT (i.e., for "non-governmental" use) and I was just about to click on "Agree" when I noticed some language where I can not write anything about the PVAT unless I send my writing to CTG for approval (and they can take 30 days to respond).

5. Publication.  USER agrees to submit to FOUNDATION (at the addresses in section 7 below) any proposed publication, report, presentation, or any other work product (collectively �Publication�) containing any information obtained through use of the Work, at least thirty (30) days prior to making the proposed Publication available to any third party or the public.

http://www.ctg.albany.edu/publications/online/pvat/?form=nongov

So I'm wondering if writing about PVAT, for example, on this listserv be seen by CTG as "publication"?  It very well could be.  But until CTG says otherwise, I would caution people from downloading PVAT and then writing about it online without getting CTG's approval.

On the positive side, I just received an email-reply from the CTG's Program Manager, Meghan Cook, responding to my question about online discussion, and she said that "we hope to become more a part of the open gov
conversations."

And so, because I expect the topic of "OpenGov Evaluation" will be resulting in many threads of conversation, the time seems ripe to invite people to a "sub-group" discussion (i.e., google-group) that I have set up called "OpenGov Metrics".  People who subscribe to this "sub-group" can then talk about "Evaluation" without clogging up this main listserv with message-threads that are not of general interest.

So, by copy of this email, I'm inviting Ms. Cook to reply to the question of whether CTG considers an online posting to be a "publication" requiring their prior approval.  I'll be sure that her reply is posted both here AND as a new discussion topic about "PVAT" at http://OpenGovMetrics.com.

Anyone interested in OpenGov Evaluation is invited to join the google-group by sending any message to opengovmetri...@googlegroups.com

BTW:  Anyone attending tomorrow's OpenGovNYC "unconference" should look for a session on "OpenGov Metrics" (or look around for me: the guy in the red shirt).

vr,
Stephen Buckley
24/7 voice:  (508) 348-9090
http://twitter.com/transpartisan
http://www.OpenGovMetrics.com

========================================

At 11:20 PM 6/3/2011, you wrote:
A further update-- CTG has now expanded and clarified access to the
PVAT tool-- check it out:

http://www.ctg.albany.edu/publications/online/pvat/

Kudos to them for being so responsive to the concerns of this group.
Now, let's make sure the tool gets used where it can be valuable.

Best,
Andrew

On May 21, 9:45 am, kevin curry <kmcu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is great!
>
> The article implies that anyone can use it under this license if not-for-profit.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Friday, May 20, 2011, Andrew Hoppin <andrew.hop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Ok folks,
>
> > CTG has posted an explanation / clarification regarding their
> > licensing of thePVATtool:
>
> > http://www.ctg.albany.edu/news/onlinenews_may_2011_pvat
>
> > Whether you agree or disagree with their approach, kudos to them for
> > accepting the feedback and writing openly about their intentions.
>
> > And one clarification at least for now-- local govt's CAN use it!  :)
>
> > Best,
> > Andrew
>
> > On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 4:38 PM, kevin curry <kmcu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Completely agree.
>
> >> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 4:38 PM, Andrew Hoppin <andrew.hop...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> CTG folks are great, and their intentions are good.  Let's give them a
> >>> chance to explain / correct.
>
> >>> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 2:15 PM, kevin curry <kmcu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> > The ToS says you can't send it and I can't receive it.
>
> >>> > On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 12:13 PM, noel hidalgo <n...@noneck.org> wrote:
>
> >>> >> yes. did anyone get my attachment?
>
> >>> >> On 17 May 2011, at 12:12, Sid Burgess wrote:
>
> >>> >> Ah the irony...
>
> >>> >> On May 17, 2011 10:51 AM, "Alissa Black" <ali...@codeforamerica.org>
> >>> >> wrote:
> >>> >> > I also sent an email request to gain access to it. The terms are very
> >>> >> > restrictive but I'd love to talk with them about their process and
> >>> >> > findings
> >>> >> > a long the way.
>
> >>> >> > The sait says they will only give access to people at State and
> >>> >> > Federal,
> >>> >> > I'll try to get a few federal friends to give us the DL.
>
> >>> >> > Alissa
>
> >>> > --
> >>> > Kevin Curry
> >>> > Virginia Beach, VA
> >>> > http://twitter.com/kmcurry
>
> >> --
> >> Kevin Curry
> >> Virginia Beach, VA
> >> http://twitter.com/kmcurry
>
> --
> Kevin Curry
> Virginia Beach, VAhttp://twitter.com/kmcurry

Stephen Buckley

unread,
Jun 10, 2011, 6:25:22 PM6/10/11
to opengov...@googlegroups.com, opengovi...@googlegroups.com
Dear Members of " OpenGovMetrics" google-group,

[Note:  This message cross-posted to "OpenGovInitiative" google-group.]

I am forwarding a message (see below) from Meghan Cook, the Program Manager for the University at Albany's Center for Technology in Government TG (developer of the OpenGov PVAT: Public Value Assessment Tool) in which she indicates that they are working to loosen a restriction in the PVAT's "Terms of Service" (TOS).

Ms. Cook is responding to my concern (see further below) that someone who downloads PVAT would be restricted, under the TOS, from publicly writing about PVAT without first getting CTG's permission.   The current TOS meaning of "publication" could include posting a message about PVAT as part of an Internet discussion (like this one).

Apparently, this was not their intention, and Ms. Cooks says she will inform us when they revise the TOS.  As a member of this (OpenGovMetrics) email-group, all she has to do is reply to this message.  (When she does tell us of the TOS change, I'll forward that message to others who may be interested (e.g., the general OpenGovInitiative group).

I'm really looking forward to downloading PVAT to see how it works.

vr,
Steve Buckley, moderator
OpenGovMetrics google-group


==================================

On Mon, June 6, 2011 at 2:39:34, Meghan Cook <mcoo..@ctg.albany.edu> wrote:

Hi all,
 
Thanks for making light of this point. The interpretation is certainly not what we meant and we are working on changing or possibly omitting that language.
 
We are continually learning in this process, so we appreciate your comments.   I'll send an email when the changes take place. 
 
thanks again!
Meghan

MegCook

unread,
Jul 6, 2011, 11:59:20 AM7/6/11
to OpenGov Metrics
HI all,

In regards to the PVAT, I wanted to let you know that we have made the
language more clear for the non governmental license. Thanks to your
insights, we changed some language and then added other language so
that more clearly presents our intents. Its always been our thinking
to make sure that no one was prohibited from talking about the tool or
any results of the tool ( in any form- which includes blogging). The
only thing the language does is try to protect the intellectual
property while still not making it hard for anyone to talk about their
use of it. Not an easy thing to do! but still i think we have done
it.

Since its release we have had numerous both governmental and non
governmental downloads. -- And an article in this month's Governing
Magazine. http://www.governing.com/columns/tech-talk/why-does-open-government-matter.html

Thanks for helping us shape this license language, as I said before we
are still learning about what works and what doesn't! and your
thoughts are always welcome!

Thanks
Meghan Cook
Center for technology in Government, University at Albany









On Jun 10, 6:25 pm, Stephen Buckley <sbuck...@igc.org> wrote:
> Dear Members of
> <http://www.opengovmetrics.com/>"<http://www.opengovmetrics.com/>OpenGovMetrics"
> google-group,
>
> [Note:  This message cross-posted to "OpenGovInitiative" google-group.]
>
> I am forwarding a message (see below) from Meghan Cook, the Program
> Manager for the University at Albany's
> <http://www.ctg.albany.edu/>Center for Technology in Government TG
> (developer of the
> <http://www.ctg.albany.edu/news/press_ogtool_20110421>OpenGov PVAT:
> Public Value Assessment Tool) in which she indicates that they are
> working to loosen a restriction in the PVAT's "Terms of Service" (TOS).
>
> Ms. Cook is responding to my concern (see further below) that someone
> who downloads PVAT would be restricted, under the TOS, from publicly
> writing about PVAT without first getting CTG's permission.   The
> current TOS meaning of "publication" could include posting a message
> about PVAT as part of an Internet discussion (like this one).
>
> Apparently, this was not their intention, and Ms. Cooks says she will
> inform us when they revise the TOS.  As a member of this
> (OpenGovMetrics) email-group, all she has to do is reply to this
> message.  (When she does tell us of the TOS change, I'll forward that
> message to others who may be interested (e.g., the general
> OpenGovInitiative group).
>
> I'm really looking forward to downloading PVAT to see how it works.
>
> vr,
> Steve Buckley, moderator
> <http://www.opengovmetrics.com/>OpenGovMetrics google-group
>
> ==================================
> >>From: Stephen Buckley <sbuck...@igc.org>
> >>Subject: Re: Tool for evaluating fed/state/local open government initiatives
> >>Bcc: Meghan Cook <MC...@ctg.albany.edu>,
>
> >>Andrew,
>
> >>I went to the website and read the CTG's conditions for downloading
> >>PVAT (i.e., for "non-governmental" use) and I was just about to
> >>click on "Agree" when I noticed some language where I can not write
> >>anything about the PVAT unless I send my writing to CTG for
> >>approval (and they can take 30 days to respond).
>
> >>>5. Publication.  USER agrees to submit to FOUNDATION (at the
> >>>addresses in section 7 below) any proposed publication, report,
> >>>presentation, or any other work product (collectively
> >>>"Publication") containing any information obtained through use of
> >>>the Work, at least thirty (30) days prior to making the proposed
> >>>Publication available to any third party or the public.
>
> >>http://www.ctg.albany.edu/publications/online/pvat/?form=nongov
>
> >>So I'm wondering if writing about PVAT, for example, on this
> >>listserv be seen by CTG as "publication"?  It very well could
> >>be.  But until CTG says otherwise, I would caution people from
> >>downloading PVAT and then writing about it online without getting
> >>CTG's approval.
>
> >>On the positive side, I just received an email-reply from the CTG's
> >>Program Manager,
> >><http://www.ctg.albany.edu/projects/projcontact?proj=opengov&sub=contact>Meghan
> >><http://www.ctg.albany.edu/projects/projcontact?proj=opengov&sub=contact>Cook,
> >>responding to my question about online discussion, and she said
> >>that "we hope to become more a part of the open gov
> >>conversations."
>
> >>And so, because I expect the topic of "OpenGov Evaluation" will be
> >>resulting in many threads of conversation, the time seems ripe to
> >>invite people to a "sub-group" discussion (i.e., google-group) that
> >>I have set up called "<http://www.opengovmetrics.com/>OpenGov
> >><http://www.opengovmetrics.com/>Metrics".  People who subscribe to
> >>this "sub-group" can then talk about "Evaluation" without clogging
> >>up this main listserv with message-threads that are not of general interest.
>
> >>So, by copy of this email, I'm inviting Ms. Cook to reply to the
> >>question of whether CTG considers an online posting to be a
> >>"publication" requiring their prior approval.  I'll be sure that
> >>her reply is posted both here AND as a new discussion topic about
> >>"PVAT" athttp://OpenGovMetrics.com.
>
> >>Anyone interested in OpenGov Evaluation is invited to join the
> >>google-group by sending any message to
> >><mailto:opengovmetri...@googlegroups.com>opengovmetri...@googlegroups.com
>
> >>BTW:  Anyone attending tomorrow's
> >><http://www.opengovnyc.org/>OpenGovNYC "unconference" should look
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages