Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (TAP)
Joint Committee Face to Face Minutes
June 25 - 27, 2007
Denver, Colorado
Day 2 - Tuesday, June 26, 2007

Day 2 - Monday, June 26, 2007

Designated Federal Official
Bernie Coston, TAP Director

Members Present
J. T. Wright, TAP Chair
Robert Meyers, TAP Vice-chair
Bill Bly, Chair, Burden Reduction
Paul Duquette, Chair, VITA
Tom Karwin, Chair, Communication
Merijane (M J) Lee, Chair, Ad Hoc
Howard Margulies, Area 1
Maryann Motza, Chair, Area 6
Ferd Schneider, Chair, Area 4
Max Scott, Chair, Notices Committee
Lynwood Sinnamon, Chair, Area 2
Wayne Whitehead, Chair, Area 7
Jerry Fireman, Chair, TAC Committee

Members Absent
Dorothy Havey, Chair, Area 1
Hank Mosler, Chair, Area 3
Stanley Wernz, Chair, EITC
Ken Wright, Chair, Area 5

Staff Present
Barbara Foley, Program Analyst
Patti Robb, Note Taker
Kayla Walker, Acting TAP Manager
Nancy Ferree, TAP Manager
Judi Nicholas, TAP Manager

Coston said the Effective Member Subcommittee looked at defining an effective member.  Some members are active in their area committee and not their issue committee or vice versa.  The committees need to self police themselves, using peer pressure and involving both the chair and vice chair.  Schneider thinks you need to be careful evaluating a member versus measuring the committee’s effectiveness.  Each member adds their different strengths to make an effective team.  Area 4 has one area member who participates about 70 percent during meetings but 110 percent doing outreaches.  How do you make a checklist that measures the different contributions?
 
The Effective Member Subcommittee is made up of Duquette, Allena Kaplan, Audrey Jenkins, Nancy Ferree and Susan Gilbert.  They brainstormed and came up with some outlines and formats to determine the proper way to provide feedback to panel members.  They developed some good ideas on how to provide positive feedback.  Coston said the staff struggled with the various aspects of being a TAP member and making sure it is a pleasurable experience for members and staff.  There was dialog about how to total the hours of membership; how effective they are; are they engaged; what do they bring to the table; do they participate in area and issue committee; are they effective in one committee and not another.  With this information in hand, we tried to set up some parameters.  How do we look at effective ways of getting participation and keeping it up?  How do we discuss that with them?  How do we get the best out of both sides?

Ferree said the first task was to determine who was or wasn’t effective.  The subcommittee found most committees are very good at policing themselves; chairs and vice chairs are very good about talking to non-participating members.  You don’t want to lose members; you want to help them.  What can we do to bring them up to speed?  Everyone has value although not everyone is a 100 percent good fit.  Schneider said an effective chair can pull the strengths from each committee member.  It is the chair’s responsibility to learn and use the various skills of the members Ferree said program managers learned how to partner with the chair and vice chair and by putting our heads together decide what the best path to take is.  Meyers said life happens and there are members who do not attend meetings and aren’t on conference calls but the responsible thing is to communicate and let staff, the chair and vice-chair know when they are unable to make the meeting. 

Mosler calls the Area 3 members who are unable to be on the call immediately after the call just to touch base to see if there is a problem.  The result has been very positive on the committee’s attendance.  Chairs need to guide members into taking ownership of their position in TAP.  If they take ownership of their membership, they become more interested and involved in meetings and activities.  Duquette noted someone can be mediocre in the area committee but do an exceptional job on the issue committee.  Also some are very involved in some aspects of TAP and not so much in others, such as writing recommendations but not voicing their opinions at the meetings.  Karwin suggested defining participation into different aspects:  writing, research, outreach, leadership, dialog or debate.  Members may excel at some and hold back in other areas.  Ferree said TAP needs to be upfront about attendance during orientation and needs to realize we are dealing with differing personalities and temperaments.  J.T. Wright said member effectiveness is the responsibility of the chair and vice chair.  TAP needs to define participation and responsibilities at the annual meeting.  It is the chair’s responsibility to address these issues―what went wrong and how can we help you be a better participant?  Volunteers should not be treated as paid employees; however, they need to realize they have responsibility.  One suggestion is to have each member sign a compact at the annual meeting that describes what they need to do--attend meetings and take active role in subcommittees.  Members who don’t attend meetings may effect quorum so attending members can’t proceed and if you are not doing you share of the work another member has to take on your responsibilities. 

TAP’s experience is that often no one wants the chair or vice-chair responsibility.  It is difficult for those who are working to make the commitment.  It needs to be made clear that new members should be encouraged to take on leadership roles by becoming aware of its responsibilities.  Potential leaders should attend Joint Committee calls and demonstrate and practice leadership by taking lead of a subcommittee.  Bill Bly said that the legacy he would like to leave is to have the national director assign an individual to track responses to recommendations.  His suggestion for improving chair effectiveness is to make sure new members take lead on subcommittees.  Schneider proposed that vice chairs attend the October meeting.  There followed a discussion on whether or not the assumption should be that the vice-chair will become chair the following year.  Meyers agrees that TAP needs to groom leaders.  But, last year there was a proposal to have elections of chairs prior to the annual meeting and he is opposed to that.  There have been experienced members who took over chair role and were ineffective and in his area a first year member who is very effective.  He likes the idea about grooming a chair but TAP needs to keep the door open to new members.  TAP needs to communicate the positive impact of the leadership experience.  Nicholas said the training of new TAP members has improved but you can’t put all the emphasis on the training, you have to let the members get into the game and stumble and make their mistakes for them to really learn.  Motza said it’s important to build teamwork in the group honing in on particular skill sets people have and encouraging them to get involved.  Give them a pat on the back for what they do.  There is value in being a TAP member and a TAP chair; it has been the most rewarding experience in my life.  The chair cannot force people to do things but you can build teamwork.  From a general standpoint, my legacy will be that TAPSpace will be a viable tool.

J.T. Wright said that the chairs need to understand they are responsible for the participation of the group and this should to be explained at the annual meeting.  The outline for what is expected of each member and the procedures for what happens if members don’t participate should also be given.   

Lee suggested giving members an option to change issue committees; sometimes it’s a matter of a bad fit.  Coston responded that we try to.  The biggest problem with that is balance; we try to have at least one member from all areas on each issue committee. 

Lee said when the Ad Hoc Committee first started meeting, we met every other month and sometimes did not have quorum.  She called the missing members and discussed fairness.  It was not fair to the members who really wanted to do business not to have quorum.  That helped.

Whitehead said to measure effectiveness, you have to have measures. 

J.T. Wright said regardless of experience or background, TAP needs the best person we can get as chair.  Electing a chair and vice chair at the annual meeting means you don’t even know what you are getting into.  Duquette asked what he could do as a chair when a member does not participate.  Coston said if a member is not participating, talk to the committee’s program manager.  The manager will talk to the manager for the member’s other committee.  After getting a picture of both sides, the managers will discuss strategies on getting more participation.  As a last resort, Coston will have a conversation with the non-participating member and they will get one last opportunity to improve or they will no longer be a member.

Meyers asked if someone is dead weight on an issues committee but participates in the area committee (or vice versa), what do you do?  Coston replied that staff looks at the options; and could consider moving them to another issue committee. 

Coston told the chairs to use their judgment.  Call the member after they miss a conference call and talk to them and see if that helps the effectiveness.  Motza suggested opening a dialog with the manager before you encounter a serious problem.  It may be a non issue but if it’s an issue, nip it in the bud early.  Coston suggested that when chairs have conversations with managers about the meeting agenda, it should include a discussion of problem members.  Don’t wait until it is a full raging fire.

Meyers suggested this process be included in chair training. 

Continuity of Chair and Vice-Chair Flipchart

• Attend October meeting
• Recruit future chairs / assign duties
• Have chairs attend chair training
• Stress importance of outreach
• Share responsibilities
• Give early consideration to grooming new leaders but be cautious
• Meet every month
• Make everyone part of the team
• Communicate a positive impact
• Communicate program owner responsibility
• Build the teamwork of the group
• TAPSpace will be a more valuable tool
• Look at ways to change issue committee
• Be a good role model
• Look at balance in issue committees
• Appoint good subcommittee chairs
• Promote fairness to get better participation

Member Effectiveness Flip Chart

• Value members’ different contributions
• Learn and use members’ skills
• Communicate with non attendees
• Take ownership
• Define participation
• Be on the calls ***

Wright noted the reason for doing outreach is to understand your customers’ needs. Ferree added the best time to start the outreach discussion with members is during the annual meeting.  Areas 2 and 3 have been very active in ensuring each member knows what outreach is and then securing a personal outreach commitment from each. 

Why do outreach:

• Get public input
• Raise the awareness of TAP among taxpayers
• Find future applicants
• Justify our budget and existence

Whitehead said the feedback from new members was they felt excluded from the advanced outreach seminar and thought they were missing a valuable lesson.  This sentiment was seconded by other members and staff will consider changing the name.  Schneider said outreach is great, but TAP is limited in the number of people it can touch.  The IRS is not, however.  IRS had a big effort to get the information out about the Earned Income Tax Credit and asked if there is a potential of IRS partnering with someone to get TAP information out.  Nicholas replied that the IRS cannot use appropriated funds for advertising and does not have funds for advertising so we have to rely on public service announcements (IRS received a special appropriation for marketing EITC).  Sinnamon reported that the external communications committee is looking at ways of getting TAP materials sent out with other IRS information (bills, notices, etc).

Duquette said he is uncomfortable doing outreach.  He never felt that TAP had a strategic plan and feels that the plan is to let the members go out willy-nilly.  Where is the plan?  Ferree answered it is in the capturing, reporting and then sharing of the outreach.  Motza said Area 6 has outreach as an agenda item on their monthly calls. It’s treated as something to share and not as a competition.  It has been effective and the proof of that is Area 6 is constantly getting new issues and the majority of them are as a result of outreach.  Karwin said the Communication Committee is working on a strategic goal for outreach.  The first step is the outreach toolkit.  The Committee is working on systematic contact with partnerships and is in the process of developing a contact program as well as developing a list of press contacts.  The Committee is also looking at improvements of improveirs.org site and an electronic press kit. The town hall meetings are a form of outreach and the release of the annual report is another. 

Duquette said he does outreach as he prepares VITA returns and gathers issues for the VITA committee.  He doesn’t necessarily speak about TAP but is gathering information.  Meyers noted there is such a wide description of outreach.  There are one-on-ones; then there are also covert outreaches.  For example, he takes a pen with TAP information on it when he goes to get a haircut.  The pen disappears so it is technically an outreach, but a covert one.

Motza pointed out that state, county, and city governments often will partner with you for outreach.  Explain to them that TAP is a public service and many are willing to share their space for an outreach.  She didn’t feel outreach was highlighted enough when she became a new member.  It was never explained that a one-on-one was an outreach.

Members can use the tracking form provided on TAPSpace, can send the staff an email message, or report the outreach at a meeting.  Any way is fine just as long as it is reported.  If there is an expense involved, the members need prior approval. 

Sinnamon expressed surprise how many people have never made a cold call or introduced themselves to someone prior to TAP.  Area 2 members committed to a total number of outreaches as a group.  Some members perform more outreach than others but feel it is important to meet the goal as a group.  The vice chair tracks the outreach by individual but reports only the totals to the full committee.  Outreach helps gather grass roots issues which is important. 

Motza said Coffman will send out a reminder with their outreach reporting sheet each month to Area 6 members.  He then compiles all the information into the outreach database.  Some outreaches are highlighted during Area 6’s monthly meeting.  Duquette thinks Area 6’s reminder is a best practice.  If you sent me an email, it is easy to respond.  Right now I have reminder stickees all over my desk lamp but I don’t send the information.  Karwin said Area 7 tracks outreach on a graph.  A large outreach is not always better than a small one.  It’s not how many people you reach, it’s how much you get back from them.  Think in terms of productivity.

Ferree noted that recruitment is part of this; we get new members from doing outreaches.  Areas may want to designate someone to be your outreach coordinator. 

Motza feels printouts of the PowerPoint outreach work better than using the PowerPoint itself.  Coston reminded everyone there is a small outreach budget for each office.  If your outreach will entail some travel costs, don’t just say no.  Ask your manager.  Coston reminded everyone that TAP does not have a budget for refreshments but encouraged everyone to be creative.  Hal Gadon had an outreach meeting at the local library in Cranston and he talked a local sandwich store and a doughnut shop into donating refreshments.  It went very well.  Lee asked if panel members can have access to rooms in the IRS buildings.  Ferree responded that some offices do have this ability and work with staff to act as your liaison to set things up. Sinnamon said it is critical if you have comments from the outreach training from last year, get them to Gil Yanuck.  Work is starting on the new classes for the annual meeting.

Outreach Flip Chart

• Define advanced outreach session
• No overall strategic plan for Outreach

When a response comes back from the IRS, a copy goes to committee chair, the staff, the manager, etc.  The response is placed on the committee’s next meeting agenda.  The Committee reviews the response and makes a decision on whether they will accept the response and close the issue.  If the Committee accepts the response and closes the issue, the chair reports the decision on the next Monthly Committee Report (MCR) indicating the date the decision was made, and if IRS fully accepted, partially accepted, or rejected the recommendation.  The response is then put on the Joint Committee agenda for a discussion of the response and the committee’s decision. 

If the Committee plans to do a rebuttal, this is also reported on the MCR with the date the Committee expects to have the response completed.  After a rebuttal is prepared, the response is attached to the MCR and placed on the next Joint Committee agenda for approval. 

There is a section in the Recommendation Status Summary report on TAPSpace in the Elevated Recommendation folder in the Reading Room.  Area Chairs and staff need to look at this report periodically to ensure all responses have been processed properly by their committee.  That report is run quarterly so might not have the current information especially toward the end of the quarter. 

The TAP Member Handbook was recently posted on TAPSpace.  The subcommittee that worked on it welcomes your comments and input. 

The communication function of TAP has blossomed into a large list of strategies and actions.  The Communication Committee collected all this information and organized it.  They were organized under external and internal communication.  Part of the project was to set priorities and determine which activities were the responsibility of the Communication Committee and which involved other committees.  The current version will be loaded to TAPSpace.  It assigns a frequency, priority level, target completion date and true completion date.  The actions will be the responsibility of the committee to which they are assigned.  Each committee with responsibilities will be responsible for developing an implementation plan.  The bulk of actions is assigned to the Communication Committee.  The Committee has a standing objective of improving the flow of information between taxpayers and TAP as well as within TAP itself.  There is a third subcommittee called Measures which is concerned with ways progress can be measured.  This Communication Measures subcommittee differs from the TAP Measures team because it is designing and measuring only the Communication actions.  The staff maintains databases on outreach and of all contacts coming into TAP, and the committee is trying to build on that information to measure communication efforts.  The Measures Subcommittee wants to determine if TAP is achieving its communication goals?  Are we getting the most yield for our efforts?  We want to come up with a work plan and will pick out what the committees find appealing.  TAP should intelligently choose not to do things that it doesn’t do well. 

The next question is will the Joint Committee accept responsibility to the strategies and actions assigned to them?  J.T. Wright suggested that the members review the communication strategy document and discuss it at a later date.  Nicholas said the strategy has been before the Joint Committee for over a year and is not any closer to a work plan.  She suggested reviewing the actions and either accepting them or not, and then setting a priority level for each.  Scott suggested appointing a subcommittee to review this document and report back to the full committee.  J.T. Wright said he doesn’t understand some of the objectives and doesn’t want to give a blanket approval without that understanding.  The implementation and utilization of the strategy should yield results and suggested placing the strategy on the agenda for the Chicago meeting.  Scott said if we table this, nothing will get done until October.  Karwin offered to work with the subcommittee to review the document. 
DECISION:  Communication Strategy subcommittee formed to review the strategy; make suggestions on which strategies and actions should be assigned to the Joint Committee and set suggest priority levels.  The subcommittee is Tom Karwin, lead, MJ Lee, Paul Duquette and Judi Nicholas.
ACTION:  The Communication Strategy subcommittee will prepare a report and lead the discussion regarding the strategy during the Joint Committee meeting in Chicago in October.
Duquette pointed out that TAP is currently doing some of these strategies and those should be a top priority.  Schneider said he would vote against this strategy to him it is busy work and why does it have to be codified in a separate document.  Why do we need it?
ACTION:  Karwin should check with the Joint Committee members not at this meeting with the option of working on this strategy document.  Meyers will check with Ken Wright as he is a returning member.

Motza demonstrated the new look of TAPSpace.

Comments:

• The main communication within TAP is done through TAPSpace. 
• News will be on the front page for 30 days.
• Ferree said she works with four different committees and doesn’t want to get 60 notifications a week.  Can a name be taken off?  Nicholas told her to talk to Berkey to have her name removed. 
• Every twelve months on January 31 files will be archived in mass.  Staff can archive and “unarchive” single documents. 
• Notifications tend to be ambiguous.  Part of the problem will be resolved after the posting and filing standards are adopted and in place. 
• Sizzle is the same as home page and the term will be dropped. 
• Lotus Notes which the contractor, LMI, uses was used to create the calendar.  TAP is stuck with a calendar running from Monday through Sunday versus Sunday though Saturday.
• Because of limited funds, it was determined that having the archive feature was more important than changing the calendar. 
• Updates to TAPSpace on a yearly basis will probably not happen and suggestions for improvement need to be looked at on an as needed basis.

ACTION:  Motza will check on whether documents will post to the current meeting folder as well as the calendar.

• To print the calendar you have to go to print, change the margins to .25 and then in printing preferences change to landscape orientation.  This should become the default and not have to be reset each time.
• Motza said they feel they are meeting the needs as determined from the comments sent in by members at 90 percent.
• The committee also developed standards for posting materials to TAPSpace.  This should make it easier to locate items on TAPSpace and make it easier to use.  No matter what issue or area committee folder you are in, the materials will be in the same standard folder. The staff will be trained on these standards and then will have about two weeks to arrange their folders.
• TAPSpace is scheduled to go online on August 13, 2007.
• During the week TAPSpace is being reconfigured, TAPSpeak will no longer be available and you will need to use the TAPSpace URL address.
• Schneider asked if the AOL issue has been alleviated.   Motza responded they are hoping it won’t be as severe as it used to be but the contractor was unable to fix all the problems.
• Duquette asked if will we be able to go into a folder and download everything at once or will we have to open each document separately and download it.

ACTION:  Motza will check to find out if multiple files can be downloaded from TAPSpace on in one action or if each has to be downloaded separately.
ACTION:  Motza will add that documents posted to TAPSpace that don’t have to be updated should be posted in PDF format to facilitate downloading.
ACTION:  Motza will check whether or not you can choose to search both regular and archived folders? 

• The posting standards will be finalized by July 13.
• As members leave TAP, bios will disappear.  The vendor will save these files and will be able to resurrect upon request.
• Staff will have the ability to update members’ biographies and this area is easier to use as members can now use copy and paste to complete or just attach their existing biography. 
• Each subcommittee will have a separate folder under the main committee folder.
• Foley felt it was cumbersome to have both a current year and previous year folder and suggested listing current year materials in the main folder and then have a previous year folder.  This would save an additional click. 

ACTION:  Anyone with suggested changes to TAPSpace should email MaryAnn Motza NO LATER THAN JULY 10.

This is a resubmission of a referral; it was revised according to comments received from the quality review team and the Joint Committee.  This letter is sent to taxpayers who have made an overpayment on their Social Security taxes and did not claim the credit on their tax return.  If the refund of the overpayment includes interest, the interest is taxable in the year it is received.  The Area is recommending IRS strengthen the language in warning taxpayers to report the interest.  Suggestions for improving the wording were made.
DECISION:  Reached consensus to elevate Area 1 #4050, Excess Social Security Notice Clarity.
ACTION:  Foley will make the minor wording changes to #4050, Excess Social Security Notice Clarity. 

This issue was discussed at the last Joint Committee meeting and Area 7 was asked to revise because it was too long.  Sue Sottile and Bob Erickson were on the conference call and indicated they were in favor of it and mentioned that IRS had a poster that might be appropriate. 
DECISION:  Reached consensus to elevate #4091, Forms and Publication Information, subject to review by the quality review team.

This issue has a potential cost savings for IRS and a significant burden reduction to taxpayers.  Area 7 is proposing a return free tax system for those who would otherwise submit Form 1040EZ, Income Tax Return for Single Filers and Joint filers With No Dependents.  The Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (RRA98) directed the IRS to develop a return free system.  Approximately ten million people file the Form 1040EZ.  It would save taxpayers over $2 billion and more than 200 million hours in tax preparation for these returns.  IRS would complete the Form 1040 EZ based on the last year’s filing and current year income and send to taxpayers to check for accuracy and signature.  How IRS obtains the current year income information is a logistical issue and something the Committee felt IRS should figure out how to do.  IRS would need to work with the Social Security Administration to get wage income information earlier.  A return free system was test piloted very successfully by the State of California and will be implemented this year.  Margulies asked how much will it cost the IRS to implement this.  The IRS already will complete a 1040EZ after the taxpayer completes a portion of it so this would require computer programming to fill in the remainder.  Sinnamon said he saw a Government Accounting Office (GAO) report that said the IRS could not do tax programming as easily or cheaply as outsourcing.  What would happen if a taxpayer signs the document and then gets a Form 1099 for additional income?  Bly has had a lot of interaction with taxpayers who file Form 1040 EZs and they historically want their refund as quickly as possible.  Karwin said people who used this system in California have a 90 percent repeat.  A side benefit of this program is to allow low income filers to avoid predatory loan products.  Duquette said part of our duty is to help the taxpayer.  Sinnamon stated that only about 3 million of the ten million, who file the Form 1040EZ, file it electronically.  Wouldn’t it be cheaper to put the additional money in expanding the volunteer return preparation program?  Duquette said implementing this would be very difficult.  Scott thinks the IRS will reject it but wants to see how it is reconciled with the law.  Fireman said the strongest sellable argument is the example of California – how it works in timeliness and suggested putting that information in the research.  Use examples and show it really works.  Karwin replied that it is alluded to and is reluctant to summarize the report as it is available online.  Schneider agrees if in fact, California taxes the same things that the IRS taxes, IRS should be able to implement.  Motza reminded everyone that Sue Sottile said she wanted to see any Form 1040 EZ issues TAP is working.  It was agreed that Area 7 shuld add more information regarding the California program. 
ACTION:  Tom Karwin will make the suggested additions to the Area 7 #3959, Filing by IRS proposal and resubmit to Foley.
DECISION:  Reached consensus to elevate Area 7 #3959, Filing by IRS; the subcommittee will add the California footnotes and send to Foley to elevate.

This issue came from a person who did not trust the US Postal Service (USPS).  He used a private delivery service but that service required a telephone number for the addressee.  The number could not be located.  It was further found that IRS only accepts deliveries from only certain private delivery services.  The approved private delivery services are found on page 15 of the Form 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return instructions.  Area 4 is proposing the information for the three approved services be added on the back page of the instructions where the addressed for mailing through the USPS is found. 
DECISION:  Reached consensus to elevate #4037, Private Delivery Services Addresses after Foley adds the form name and makes the other grammatical changes.

Duquette asked if Coston was going to ask all the current chairs to attend the annual meeting.  Coston replied that it would depend on what role they played, for example, if the chairs are used to teach a course.  The TAP Chair and Vice-chair will definitely be invited.  Duquette recalled that the issue chairs attended to discuss the choice of issue committees with the new members.  Nicholas replied that for last year and this year, the issue committee selections were made prior to the annual meeting so this was no longer necessary.  The preliminary discussion of the agenda for the Annual meeting will take place at the TAP staff training session so we should have the answer soon regarding the role chairs will play. 

There was some discussion about adding a half day training session for the new chairs to avoid another travel commitment for the incoming chairs.  Some chairs are in favor of a shortened training to avoid the other travel and others were cautious because people can only absorb so much information at any one time and after the long week would be very burdensome for TAP staff.  It was generally agreed that some training should be given at the annual meeting with the remainder, more specific training in January.  The more general training could be offered to any member who is considering being a chair and the non-returning chairs could participate in the training.  Other suggestions were maybe adding two hours of training and networking time to the end of the meeting for the Joint Committee and vice-chairs and/or considering a working dinner.

Duquette said we also spoke about training for TAP’s program owners and suggested staff include this in the discussion regarding the agenda.  Coston supports that idea because that is a big gap in the TAP training program and program owners have to learn their roles and responsibilities as they are meeting with the panel.  TAP has done a good job as far as training the Designated Federal Officials (DFO), and last year added the TAP leadership training for chairs in person and vice chairs by teleconferences.  The missing gap is the program owners and teaching them the process and what it is like to work with volunteers.  Coston needs to get the commitment from the operating divisions to attend this training.  Program owners need to meet with their issue committee at an early stage to discuss their expectations from the panel and what the operating division would like the panel to do.  Coston stated he will emphasize that the issue committee’s focus shuld be in line with the strategic objectives of the operating divisions to make it easier for the program owners to commit their time and resources and to make it more likely that TAP’s recommendations will be implemented.

Lee asked why the annual meeting has to be held in December and why not May, June or July.  Coston, it has to do with the TAP year and when new members are brought into TAP since the annual meeting is the orientation of the new members.   

Fireman stated that today the Joint Committee discussed members’ effectiveness and would like to have a group discussion about TAP effectiveness; how to best use our time on the October Joint Committee agenda.  Whitehead said he would rather discuss measures.  J.T. Wright said to discuss effectiveness or determine effectiveness; you need to have measures.  Karwin added you cannot separate the two. 

Meyers noted the survey for returning members has been sent out; the responses are due July 11.  The information from the surveys should be used to plan the annual meeting and shuld be part of the discussion at the October meeting.
ACTION:  The discussion of measures/effectiveness of TAP and a discussion of the survey and annual meeting Agenda will be placed on the October Joint Committee meeting agenda. 

Karwin said it seems that some area committees have a scarcity of issues and some have too many.  Nicholas said one of her committees went into the TAP parking lot and found a lot of issues.  However, the committee was uninspired and under-whelmed by the issues in the parking lot.  It is a matter of opinion because some feel that there are many issues in the parking lot that merit consideration by TAP but the original committee had too many issues on their plates already.