Skip to content

06/02/2026

Agenda

  1. Review of Actions
  2. Durham HPC Days
  3. CAKE EDI-focused Retreat
  4. Mini Working Groups:
    1. Report back on mini working group leaders meeting
    2. Breakouts
  5. Any other business

Minutes

Actions

Collecting examples of hidden costs that hinder participation, forming a list to help clarify EDI-related expenses (like childcare or accessibility adjustments) that can be funded, aiming to create a resource that lowers barriers by guiding both projects and individuals on what costs are acceptable.

Durham HPC Days

Submitted an EDI-focused session: "We know what to do, so why aren’t we doing it? Closing the Implementation Gap: Lessons from EuroHPC, UKRI and Beyond"

Call for talks open until 13th of March: https://hpc-days.github.io/Durham-HPC-Days-2026/

CAKE EDI-focused Retreat

CAKE can host knowledge exchange retreates, focusing on a specific theme and aimed at breaking down siloes between communities. This could be an opportunity to come together for a hack day to create focused outputs. Retreats would be hybrid and could include expert/guest speakers.

  • Beneficial to co-locate
  • This shouldn't just be a hack day, but something impactful and focused on current issues. Potential to bring in those who can influence policy, so this opportunity should be used strategically.
  • Alternatively, bring the community together to learn what they have done wrong and right.

  • Option to do an online only.

  • Decision to re-visit this further along the line, where we can come together to have a more strategic input and invite those who can influence policy.

Mini Working Groups:

Given the size, goals, and intended outputs of the group, we will divide our efforts into smaller, topic-focused working groups: 1. Community outreach 2. Curation of topic-based guides 3. Measuring the impact of EDIA initiatives

Following the above discussions, this meeting used breakout rooms.

Report back on mini working group leaders meeting

The leader role does not mean steering the guidance of the group or taking on more work, it is more of a facilitation role, someone who can schedule additional meetings, keep everyone in contact with each other, take notes and then report back to the wider group.

We will be using the shared google drive to keep meeting notes, output development and a README style summary of each group so that new people can get onboarded quickly.

And we also decided to keep this format of using breakout groups within the main monthly meeting to initially make progress, then we can review in three months time to see how things are going and then decide on the need for additional meetings.

Community outreach

  • The group discussed how this work could add value given the amount of existing EDI material, identifying a key gap between knowing best practice and implementing it in real settings.
  • There was agreement that collecting qualitative experiences would help make challenges, urgency, and good practice more concrete and relatable.
  • Ethical considerations are essential, particularly around whether this counts as research and how the data may be used or shared.
  • A mixed approach was proposed: internal named case studies, alongside an anonymised external summary highlighting key themes.
  • The group noted the importance of understanding who the intended audience is and starting with a simple proof of concept.
  • It was agreed to check whether similar work already exists and how it has been presented, to inform next steps.

Curation of topic-based guides

  • The group discussed the first pilot topic and clarified the proposed scope for an initial guide.
  • There was agreement on the need to define clear success criteria for version 1, to ensure the guide is practical and deliverable.
  • Key roles were identified, including content curation, licensing checks, technical infrastructure, and community liaison.
  • It was proposed to apply a MoSCoW analysis (Must/Should/Could/Won’t) to prioritise content and features for the first release.

Measuring the impact of EDIA initiatives

  • The group discussed the need to define what “impact” means in the context of EDI and to clarify what this working group wants to capture in order to measure its own success.
  • It was agreed that impact may span multiple areas, including research outputs (where EDI considerations have shaped work), people’s experiences (e.g. economic and career uncertainty), organisational culture, and influence on policy and strategy.
  • There was recognition that EDI impact cannot always be measured quantitatively, and that qualitative or “soft” measures may be equally important.
  • The group highlighted the importance of developing guidance that balances numerical indicators with narrative and experiential evidence of change.

Any other business?

  • Response to UKRI Expense Review

Date of Next Meeting (DONM): 06/03/2026, 10am, Online via Teams

(please contact cake-management@mlist.is.ed.ac.uk for any queries about these minutes)