 Hello. My name is Judy Rutenberg. I'm the Senior Director of Scholarship and Policy at the Association of Research Libraries, and I represent ARL as a SCOS board member. ARL is based in Washington DC and SCOS, the Global Sustainability Coalition for Open Science Services, is an international endeavor. Next slide. I want to begin today with an acknowledgement that ARL is based on the unceded and traditional land of indigenous peoples. We honor these people, especially the Nakanshtok, Piscataway, and Pamunki peoples who are displaced from their homes through systemic oppression and settler colonialism. We honor these lands and their original stewards, as well as the many indigenous communities past and present, including thousands of indigenous people living in present day Washington DC. We have a global audience today, and I invite you to reflect on your relationship with the land from which you join us today. Next slide. I am very pleased to be here with a fantastic group of colleagues, our co-sponsors at the Canadian Association of Research Libraries, Carl, the Canadian Research Knowledge Network, SCOS staff, and the three open science infrastructures we're here to get to know better. Dryad, La Referencia, and Roar, the research organization registry. I'm going to close with a few questions to SCOS board members and CRKM leaders about process selection and getting involved and with questions from all of you. I'm also pleased to be here with all of you. The audience today is largely librarians from US and Canadian libraries and representatives from US consortia and from CRKM. We're learning an hour with us, learning more about SCOS, what it is, what it's accomplished since its formation in 2017, and its strategy, and for learning how these three critical open science infrastructures will benefit and thrive with your investment. We've all seen the momentum toward open scholarship grow in the last five to 10 years, in particular, with many organizations contributing to a vision of open scholarship published in and identified by open infrastructures, enabling librarians to better steward, preserve, and provide access to open content. There are many, many projects and products to serve this demand. SCOS is a global partnership operating alongside advocates, governments, and the research community and it addresses one very important challenge for libraries, where should we invest our resources that will make a difference and move us along the path toward open and equitable scholarly infrastructure. By rigorously vetting applicants for their importance to the research community internationally and their plans for financial sustainability, SCOS helps libraries and consortium make those decisions. This webinar has Q&A and chat enabled, and we will leave time for open Q&A at the end. And if you could show the next slide. This webinar is governed by ARL's Code of Conduct displayed on the prior slide. Yeah, displayed on the prior slide. And with that, I am delighted to turn this over to Bianca Kramer from SCOS. Thank you very much, Julie, for this introduction. And I think you already framed what SCOS is, why, what it's doing and why it's important quite well. I'll go a bit more into detail about those questions, and then that will be followed by the new, the infrastructures in this fourth round presenting themselves. As you said, SCOS stands for the Global Sustainability Coalition for Open Science Services, and it was started in 2017 to help sustain the infrastructure to support implementation of open science. What we've been seeing in this space is that many open infrastructures were and are created using short term protect money, and once that short term product money runs out, it's often a challenge to remain sustainable. Also, open access and open science infrastructure has grown in number and in usage, making that that's funding even more difficult. And also, many infrastructures being funded by protect money means that that's usually money for new developments and funding for operations is much harder to sustainably have. What that means for sustainability is that many services with stagnation, downsizing, or paywalling, or even being acquired, and then put behind a paywall. And that's a risk if we truly want an accessible and inclusive research ecosystem. And that's where SCOS is trying to step in and play a role by providing a consolidated voice that fets open science infrastructures, not for profit infrastructures, and then recommending it for funding to libraries, institutions worldwide. And SCOS does that by assessing funding needs, alerting those funding needs to community, providing transparency on costs, also increasing efficiency for investors, and also really encouraging good governance from by infrastructures. It's important to emphasize that SCOS itself is not a subscription or a payment agency. What SCOS does, SCOS invites expression of interest from infrastructures, then selects two or three infrastructure for a given fund cycle, and then works with consortia and institutional libraries to bring those infrastructures to their attention and invites the consortia and individual institutions to to pledge funding to those infrastructures. And those financial transactions are then carried out between the consortia and institutions and the individual infrastructures. SCOS is not a central payment agency, but it does provide that fatting it does provide that platform for infrastructures, and it also provides a community for both the infrastructures and the consortia and the library to have these conversations and to bring those two parties together. So, who is SCOS? SCOS is hosted by Saint-Jure, and covered and steered by a number of large organizations, among which ARL and the Canadian Association of Research Libraries are two of them, but on the SCOS board there were representatives from a number of research libraries, associations and other organizations around the globe, so really from from all continents. And together they decide on the direction of SCOS and on the on the way SCOS operates. And they also serve as a point of outreach for consortia and institutions within their own countries, as evidenced by the organization of this webinar today. So, so far, SCOS over four and a half million euros has been pledged to so far nine infrastructures by over 325 institutions in 24 countries. And this started with infrastructures participating in the pilot cycle, Sherpa Romeo and DOJ. And of those DOJ in their three-year cycle has reached the total amount of that target, and Sherpa Romeo has reached well over half of that of that target. So after this initial pilot cycle, the second cycle included three infrastructures. And open access books and OAPN really involved in open access to to books, open citations and PQP, the public knowledge project. These two infrastructures are as you can see also well on their way to to the talks with their web and OAPN having already reached their targets. And the third funding cycle includes Archive, Amelica, Redaliq from Latin America, and, and these space that were selected last year in last year's funding cycle, and are currently really still in the middle of, of collecting those, those pledges towards their targets. So as you can see, this is a wide variety of, of research infrastructures. They're all concerned with furthering open access and open science more broadly. And within this group of infrastructures we're very happy this year to welcome the infrastructure selected for the fourth funding cycle. So there's also the ones that will be presenting to you today, and they will tell a little bit about their infrastructure, and their, their goals with the money they're trying to raise to Skos. So for that, I'd like to hand over and first give the words to Sarah Lippincott from Dariot to tell us something about Dariot. Sarah, over to you. Dariot is an open international data publishing platform and community committed to the open availability and routine reuse of all research data. The open sharing of data underpinning research is essential to achieving the benefits of open science. It provides evidence to support research articles and enable experts to interrogate, validate and build upon new findings, which is nothing short of critical in many domains. And it allows researchers, including those from less resourced institutions and regions to work with data they might not be able to generate themselves. Next slide. These are among the many benefits of open data. And it's also true that emerging data publishing guidance set out by recent memo from the Office of Science and Technology Policy, and the US National Institutes of Health. Make clear that academic institutions need to take urgent action on data stewardship to keep pace with evolving norms for scientific research. The NIH, for example, asserts that data shared in compliance with its policy should be of sufficient quality to validate and replicate research findings. Simply posting data online will not meet these new criteria. Next slide. One of the many reasons researchers around the world rely on Dryad and our fully curated publishing process to make their data discoverable and reusable now and into the future. Since our founding in 2008, we have curated and published nearly 50,000 data sets representing the work of nearly 200,000 researchers at nearly 70,000 institutions around the world. Our data sets are connected to research articles in over 1200 leading academic journals. Next slide. We publishes research data across domains and is a powerful conduit for data that doesn't have a home with a specialist repository. We publish only research data and work in collaboration with Zenodo to facilitate open publication of associated software and supplemental information. One of the many connections we maintain with other open source tools and organizations. Dryad's strengths are in the curation and standards based open publication of research data, as well as in our collaborative approach and our community governance. Our curation process is best in class for generalist data publication. Our open source publishing platform represents the latest best practice for sharing data, connecting it to related research outputs and measuring impact. And our strategy for collaborating with other values aligned services rather than competing sets us apart. Next slide. Our team of curators reviews each data set for inclusion of required metadata that facilitates interoperability, and they check that every data set may be open readily available software, and that there's a read me file to guide future users seeking to build upon it. All of our data and metadata are permanently stored in our poor trust seal certified repository, published under a Creative Commons public domain license and accessible via our open API. We are supported. In part by our institutional and publisher membership program representing over 100 research institutes colleges universities government agencies, academic publishers scholarly societies and university presses, who interest thousands of their data sets to us each year. They're largely based in the United States, and we count among our membership, a number of ARL institutions ARL and Carl institutions. Next slide. We are a member driven nonprofit and we're proud to be one of the first adopters of the principles of open structure scholarly infrastructure. This means that we take seriously our commitments to responsive governance that provides accountability to our stakeholders. The long term sustainability of our services and infrastructure, and ensuring the preservation of our data in the event that our operation sees you can read our detailed self evaluation on our blog. And that's revenue is generated from our core mission activities curation publication and preservation of research data. This revenue comes from membership fees or from a data publishing charge at the point of data set publication. We're committed to building an exemplary data publishing service and community that is right sized and low cost. We're committed to ensure that costs and services are appropriate for both the community and for Dryad sustainability. And this is an ongoing process of generating sustaining revenue through a diversified funding model of data publishing charges and our memberships. Next slide. We have specifically libraries across the US and Canada already invest in Dryad because we help them realize their open research strategy. We help them leverage the traction we have with research communities to promote open data publishing and best practices and to take the guest work out of complying with funder policies. We are an established reliable outsourced and affordable solution that is nonprofit and community led. We have local data management initiatives and can integrate with local data repositories. We actively engage and consult with our library community to co create our services features and operations. Next slide. Our goals in the coming year are to drive adoption of data publishing to grow our open global community to offer a more nimble service model and to support research or needs and and innovate. An investment from your institution through SCOS will help Dryad resource more of our core functions so that we can navigate current demands and establish a strong position for the future. Specifically, we'll be able to invest in growth in outreach and promotion to interested investors, including potential future ongoing members of Dryad. We can integrate our core stakeholders through community engagement to encourage data data publishing and and and it renewed investment, and to stay at the front of best practices for data sharing and building best practice for data reuse. SCOS support will enable Dryad to invest aggressively in growing our community of support and responding to the increasing and changing demands of a highly competitive environment. And the partnership and the annual contributions that sustain our services and infrastructure is critical. It will generate the momentum and ongoing financial support that we need to continue to grow and to remain competitive as an open source community led partner. We're grateful to the for the opportunity to work with SCOS funders to build a more open and equitable future for research data. Great. Thanks a lot Sarah. I'd also like to encourage everyone with questions for Art of Dryad or also for LaRefrancia and Roar later on to put them in the Q&A and we will get to them after the after these presentations. So to continue, can I ask Flotaro to tell us a little bit about LaRefrancia. Thank you very much Bianca. I am LaRomata. I'm the executive and technical director of LaRefrancia. LaRefrancia is the open science and repository network of Latin America, and it's formed by the association of government authorities of science technology and innovation. It was funded like 10 years ago. Initially it was funded by a project by an inter American bank development project and later it became a stable initiative funded by Latin American governments. Here you can see the 12 governments that the 12 countries that are actually are now part of LaRefrancia and we also work with Spain as an external country associated to this group of Latin American countries because the language and the scientific culture tradition around collaboration with Latin America. Our mother institution is Red Clara, which is the regional educational research network. So Red Clara managed or the administrative aspect of LaRefrancia for the countries. Next slide please, Bianca. So I would like to point to three aspects that I think that it's important to remark about LaRefrancia. The first is that LaRefrancia is not only a technical solution but a platform for open science but a political forum for discussion, not only about technical issues but political issues and agreements between the Latin American governments and the external partners. So it's a common forum when where the different countries brings the discussion like open access laws and agreements and policies. Another aspect that I would like to mention today is that we work on the visibility of the contents produced by our scientific and technical institutions. We promote, we aggregate the contents of the funded by the public funds of the countries and we give visibility to this content through national notes, regional notes and also we share our contents with other regions and other aggregator projects like open air, coal, UK, etc. And the third aspect is that to do this visibility, we develop our own software, an open source platform that is available for everyone to use. It is installed in our 12 countries and in the central note and also it's been used that other external countries like Portugal, Spain, and we are working with Africa, with African research networks in order to transfer the knowledge to use this software also to build regional aggregators in the African region. Next slide please, Bianca. So regarding our sustainable plan, we, as I said, the reference is mainly sustained by and financed by the annual contributions of the member countries. We have that stable contribution that allows us to, to support the basic operation, the basic development and maintenance of our aggregation software. We have some traveling for the different members of the Council of the countries to meet once a year for discussion and planning of the general strategy of reference. I will move forward with the expansion of the services and to face the challenge that the open science landscape is showing in the last years, mainly because the COVID, we think we feel that we need, we require an additional source of funding in order to develop some innovative innovation and new features to provide our community. Next slide please, Bianca. So, what our goals are, our goals are with, with this cost funding. We are, we have two main activities or projects to develop with this, this, this cost process funding. One is this centralized and global persisted identifiers, identifiers based on blockchain. Why we are proposing this because we need not only a persistent but then unique or at least the duplicated identifier in order to build better services, last research graph indicators, especially for research that is one of the challenges that we are seeing in the near future for for the open science, infrastructure. We have a lack of coverage in the, in the global, not only in Latin America, but in the global so things in general, because it's not always easy to these two institutions to for the cost of this PID services. And the fees and the annual cost for the institutions are high for some regions. So, so, and always, we discovered that most of the persistent identifiers services are based on centralized models, depending on on agencies and not all we will look for we are looking to build a public good service with decentralized with a decentralized technology based in the blockchain technology. We have a growing project of of a blockchain of a public blockchain network in Latin America, and the idea is to do the idea of this of this project is to, to use that that that blockchain network in order to provide public good service of PID for our institutions. So this is, we have already have a proof of concept of this of this technology that is published in the in that Senado deposit that you can find later, and we are planning to present some results this year in the open repository, hopefully if if our presentation became accepted. And next slide, please. And the other service that needs something that we, we have been working in the last years is an usage and common usage a statistic component and service for the global open science ecosystem. We have, we already have different open components in order to provide the collection of usage events for repositories from different these space versions, and we already have a production stage service for like in American repositories, national networks, we collect and aggregate a statistic usage statistics and we provide some widgets and minimal products so the idea with these funding is to expand these components to other initiatives, because we feel that we need to have a common measure measuring measuring system and methodology, especially again for the use these as the income of input sorry for for research assessment indicators, and so on so we hope that this process with this cost will bring us some funding for these two projects that I discussed, I will be happy to to answer any questions, questions later. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. And indeed, if you have any questions, please put them in the, in the Q&A and deal with them later. And then finally, Roa Maria, can I give you the floor to tell us more about Roa. Hello, everyone, my name is Maria Gould and I am the project lead for Roa, the research organization registry. I'm also based at California Digital Library, which is one of the operating organizations behind Roar and I'll explain what that means. In the course of my presentation, really happy to be here and grateful to Scoss and to ARL and Carl and Sarah Kin for organizing this today and thanks to all of you for being here so Roar is a global community led registry of open persistent identifiers for research organizations. Now let's go to the next slide and I'll show you an example of what a registry record looks like using the Carl Roar record and ID as an example. We have records in the Roar registry right now for more than 100,000 research organizations around the world. And some in the example here, this is just from the Roar search interface that anyone can go to at Roar.org slash search to look up. So here it consists of the unique Roar ID shown in the upper left and then additional descriptive metadata to support discovery and disambiguation that includes versions of an organization name in different languages, shortened versions, etc. We also map to other identifiers for that organization to set up crosswalks when they exist. So let's go to the next slide now. So the use case that Roar was really developed to support was this use case around tracking research outputs by institutions and I think many of you on the call today are familiar with the challenges and the needs of trying to keep track of institutions research outputs and to be able to discover and report on research activities and so this really depends on the ability to drill down at the institutional level and connect these research outputs to the institutions where they are affiliated. So let's go to the next slide. And the problem that comes up when with this work of tracking outputs is that it requires knowing what these affiliations are, and the problem with the way that affiliations are often presented that they are not represented consistently because names can take different forms they can change over time etc. or these affiliation details may only be available in paid and paywalled commercial services, or in many cases just simply not made available at all when research are produced. Next slide. So Roar aims to address this challenge by providing a unique and open identifier for research affiliations that can easily be linked to research outputs and researchers and provide more clean and consistent affiliation metadata that can flow through discovery systems and citation indexes so showing on the slide here an example from Dryad, part of the SCOS family as well. I'm showing how Dryad collects Roar IDs for researcher affiliations when they're submitting data sets, and then includes those Roar IDs for the affiliations in the metadata that they deposit when a DOI is registered for that data set. And this makes the metadata openly available in any system that harvests DOI metadata. Next slide. So if we think about an ideal research workflow in which Roar can play a part, the Roar ID really functions like this invisible piece of metadata that operates in the background wherever affiliation details are being collected like for a manuscript submission or data set submission. The researcher can select an affiliation, the ID is collected in the background, the researcher doesn't even need to know what their Roar ID is or that it's even being collected, and then the Roar ID is included in metadata for that research output that's made publicly and openly available for other systems to harvest and access. Next slide. We have other types of organization identifiers that you might have heard of or might also be using and so I just want to take a moment to clarify a few things about Roar that make our approach unique. And so the first thing that I want to highlight is that Roar is really aiming to provide a truly open registry free and non-commercial service for identifying affiliations. So Roar claims that the Roar data is available under a CC0 dedication. We have a public API, a public data dump that anyone or whoever they are, wherever they are can access and use and integrate. I also mentioned the principles of open scholarly infrastructure which Dryad has signed on to, and this is something that Roar is also a signatory to in terms of really making sure that our infrastructure is openly available in every way possible for the long term. The second thing that makes Roar distinct is that it's really specifically designed to be used with other identifiers and other open infrastructures. So it's not meant to stand alone in a silo, it's an identifier that's meant to enrich other metadata and other types of data. So it's supported in, in CrossRap, it's supported in data site, it's supported in Orchid to provide this standard piece of metadata that can be used to enrich our common understanding of, of, you know, research networks and research insights. And thirdly, another unique aspect of Roar is that it's specifically focused on what we call the affiliation use case. This need to identify affiliations and to make connections between research organizations and the research outputs that they are affiliated with. This is something that, you know, means that Roar is not meant to capture every single hierarchy within an organization, it's not focused on capturing legal entities, it's really about identifying affiliations and connecting them to research outputs and researchers so that we can better discover them and keep track of them. And lastly, Roar is being developed as a community initiative. So this includes the organizations that are operating it. CDL has partnered with CrossRap and data site as co-governing organizations to lead Roar. We all have a stake in it. And also community involvement in our advisory groups and our curation process in terms of strategic decisions, decisions about what's concluded in the registry, how our metadata is represented, etc. Next slide. I just want to close briefly to zoom out and highlight a few examples of Roar playing out and how it can play out in a larger research context in the US and Canada. The first example I wanted to highlight is the OSTP memo that came out in August. Sarah also highlighted this. And just the recommendations that were included in the OSTP memo about capturing and identifying researcher affiliations in publicly available metadata. And so this is precisely the kind of use case that Roar has really set up to support and I think we're going to see growing interest and awareness of this as time goes on. Next slide. The second example I wanted to highlight is a recent integration in the Federated Research Data Repository in Canada, which really leveraged Roar IDs in Dryad metadata. Again, calling out Dryad as a key partner to make available data sets by Canadian researchers in their public repository. Next slide. And so lastly a little closer to home just wanted to mention that we at CDL as a key partner, leading the Roar initiative but also as a major public institution in the United States are really paying attention to the importance of, as Judy mentioned, how we're investing our funds and talking about investments in open infrastructure as a key part of our overall open access strategy. And so highlighting on the slide here, a blog post that we put out last summer, talking about that strategy and how open infrastructure, including Roar really fits into that. Next slide. So this is a really critical moment for Roar's growth. I just highlighted some examples of growing awareness of identifiers and open infrastructure in our research landscapes. We're also seeing major adoption of Roar and major growth right now. Our API is getting 13 million requests a month thereabouts and so we're really excited to be partnering with SCOS to scale our infrastructure at this critical time to be able to support growing adoption to be able to support how wide integrations are across our research landscape so that Roar IDs can populate everywhere so that everyone can use them and have better access to this crucial metadata about tracking outputs. So thank you for your support. Thanks a lot Maria. And thank all three of you too. To really show us what you're interested about. And I think what this really shows is also the diversity between you two, the three of you in the different way you support really open science. In different parts of the research cycle and really also how you interconnect and interoperate. And I think that's really at the key of why supporting open science infrastructures is so important to support a vibrant ecosystem of open science infrastructure services. What I would like to do now is turn this into a bit more of a discussion, and therefore I'll stop sharing screen, and perhaps start the discussion with asking a question to the representatives of the SCOS board here today from ARL and from CRL. And perhaps the first question is that as we already discussed one key aspect of what SCOS is doing is fatting infrastructures and selecting a limited number of infrastructures to present to to the research community to support. And my question is, how does fatting, how does that fatting exactly work each year, because we see many applications. And how do you decide which infrastructures to include in the next course, letting rounds. And that's question for us for Judy from ARL and from for Susan Hay from CRL maybe first to Judy. Yeah, thank you Bianca. Thank you for your question. And I want to just start off by congratulating the three infrastructures and all of the, all nine infrastructures in the SCOS family of products, because the process really is a quite a rigorous one. And it really is the value proposition of SCOS. And so how does it work. Yes, you will have seen makes an open call for expressions of interest for open infrastructure services. There's an advisory group that works with the board so this is drawn from the member organizations. And this group has strong policy technical financial capabilities. And six to eight weeks evaluating applicants and selecting a maximum of six services to invite to advance to the next round which is a formal application. And at that point there's a conversation, you know, with that short list, you know between the board and board board group and, and the infrastructures. The expression of interest stage, the advisory committee is asking questions like, you know, is the service. At least five years, a few years old. Can it demonstrate a sustainability challenge is the service and nonprofit is it affiliated with or owned by a researcher educational institution. And then this is really important and I think all of the infrastructures today did a beautiful job of demonstrating this are the services of international relevance and broadly relevant to more than one discipline. Because, like I said in the intro, there are many, many products out there so this is a critical piece of it. And then there's a short list inviting full applications, and this is a, you know, sort of much richer and more involved application. And then the advice, you know, then the advisory group at this stage is looking like the services value to stakeholder communities so we've discussed today funders universities libraries, the research community research managers repositories. Fund structure costs and sustainability measures future plans and how they fit in within. Like we've been discussing an open sustainable and fair landscape sort of the interoperability. So I think I can't. I can't emphasize enough this notion of importance to the research community and I think that came up in all three presentations today. You know, as a critical criteria, this, you know, for something that the research that the library community wants to support. And, as you've said Bianco, and each has has mentioned today scoffs works with the selected services to promote this kind of crowdfunding from individual institutions and from consortia who make pledges toward toward a target and we've seen that data earlier in the presentation. Thanks a lot I think that's really elucidating illuminating about the process. Following that process then that resulted this year in these three specific instructors being selected. Can tell a bit more about why these three specifically what was the strong points from these three specifically that's that led to them being selected. Yeah, absolutely I think they each did a great job of showing that as well so I mean these are projects within this you know established and well known infrastructures. These three high usage and already making an important contribution to open science and open scholarship. But I think that, you know, as Maria and Sarah both hit on in a moment of growing funder growing strengthening funder policies around data sharing these notions of identification. Interoperability, a strong alternative to commercial or paywall services, the critical importance to researchers and funders and institutions, as all of those are tracking, encouraging the production of and then tracking open research outputs. So the tendency I think stands out as really a model for a different way to, you know, a repository network that, you know that I that I know the world looks at as a as a kind of regional model. Great. Thanks a lot. I also mentioned Susan Hay from Sierra ARL who's also on the Scott's board and but then I realized that she did. She could not be here today so it's. That's why I asked you two questions in succession but I think doing great job representing the Scott's board. So that's from the selection part. So if the researchers has been have been selected. Then of course is, they put forward to institutions and consortia with a request to pledge funding to them and as we've seen in the beginning. Over the last funding circles over 300 institutions have already pledged funding, some do this individually, but that's also a very important role for library consortia to organize that funding to a consortium. And one of the consortia was been very generous in the past already in funding in our circles is the Canadian research knowledge network. So I would first of all like to acknowledge that and thank you for that. And also ask you. Thank you for joining the representative of Sierra can Craig also goes on this call. If you can tell us something about the role of consortia in here what's the benefit of blessing funding to a consortium for you. Absolutely I'd love to Bianca thank you. So for us here at Sierra can it made perfect sense for us to become involved with scoffs and in partnership with Carl. And that pushed us at the beginning of the scoffs. When scoffs first began. As you may know I may not know that Carl has a, about 30 years some odd members in Canada academic institutions, while Sierra can has about 79. It made perfect sense for the although Carl was on the scoffs board. They didn't have the full membership of the Canadian institutions across the country here. So we work collaboratively and closely with them. And it made perfect sense for them to approach us to act as the administrative consortium for putting the scoffs offer out there to all the institutions across Canada, collecting the funding from those institutions that commit and pledge to discuss services, and then also to redirect the pledge money to those services once we invoice the institutions and collect it from all of them. So for us at the consortium here at Sierra can this aligns very much closely with a lot of our own priorities and goals and objectives with respect to open access. We have many different avenues with which we try to support away. We have been specific to away infrastructure services was one that just made perfect sense for us to to assist with so I think we're very proud to have collected I think over 700,000 euros to date with for all the scoffs rounds that have been undertaken so far. And that's not counting around for the just launched I think a few weeks ago so we're looking forward to continuing continuing that and helping anybody can. All the always services at the so far been very collaborative with us in terms of trying to map the scoffs funding tiers to our own particular needs here in Canada, we have a specific way to be mapped our own organizations and institutions to a series of tears. So we've been able to work with discuss services and a lot of ways to more closely map the scoffs tiers to the CRT and tears and this work really well so far so if you're out of consortium elsewhere in the US or internationally that you have specific needs that might need to be taken into account. I would certainly bring those to the conversation as well. So thank you and happy to answer any questions as well. Thank you very much for that. I think it's also very clear from what you said that there are two benefits for for consortial funding both for library consortia themselves but also for the infrastructures in exactly like what you said the conversations and the coming to an end and making sure this is the most beneficial and most efficient for both partners. Perhaps I should elucidate that a little bit also for people in the audience who might not be that familiar with schools. If you go on the, if you are considering bludgeoning if you go on this course website, you can see for each of the selected of the infrastructures participating in this funding round. But prospectus outlining. Well, their goals and also outlining the proposed tiring tier model, which is based on size of institutions. And that's the starting point but as quick said there are always conversation to be had to make sure that that construction is optimally suited to both the infrastructure and the, and the consortium. I really encourage everyone in the audience to start those conversations with the infrastructures and also with schools who can assist in that in that conversation. I'm looking at the at the Q&A and in the chat and I don't see any questions there, which I'm sure doesn't mean that there are no questions but they're not put in there. So maybe I'll take this opportunity to go back to, to the infrastructures, and you already talked a lot about your infrastructure and, and your plans, maybe specifically what made you apply to, what made you decide to apply to discuss. Maybe Sarah from right. Sure, thank you. I, so I mentioned a couple of reasons are alluded to a couple of reasons in my talk but I think largely dry and wants to be able to add momentum to our drive to grow our membership and grow that sustainable revenue that supports us each year and ensures that we can continue making new features improving our technical infrastructure in improving our operations so that again we can remain competitive with, with other, you know, commercial data data repository platforms and with other providers, and to continue to make progress to better serve the research community in to improve interoperability and and all of the things that are core to our mission. We also want to, to be able to envision a future where maybe we can move away from individual data publication fees and a future where institutions are supporting on behalf of all authors open deposit in in dry add I think that's in line with a lot of movement in this world in general moving away from individual author fees and towards a model where, where our services are available to any researcher regardless of their individual means and where we're relying on the larger institutional and funder community to support open data publishing as a public good and as something that's that's critical to the research enterprise. And that's the same question to, to let out from the reference here, what made you decide to apply this course. Yes, as I said, we have our basic funding for for our basic operation, provided by the government, but this is not enough for us to, to face the challenge that we have as a, as a community as a region. This is a global ecosystem of open science. We, we see the research assessment challenge as one of the main goals for the next years. And for, for face that challenge we need to develop a lot of technology that will be useful for Latin America but we think that will be useful for other regions, and to leverage the gaps between the regions also. We are already collaborating with Africa with really with some intra and extra regional initiatives, and we feel that we think that this funding opportunity that discuss is giving us is, is a tool for us to to share all the experience to bring more people work to work in the technical challenge and to share them the results with the global community of the open science. So thank you so much for your thoughts and thanks also for highlighting the importance of connecting with different, with different reasons I think that's really important points. Finally, go to Maria with some question. Sure, thanks. So, for Roar. I will echo what what Lautaro and Sarah have touched on as well but I think for Roar it really came down to a few different reasons why we wanted to apply and especially at this time in Roar's growth and, you know, one of those reasons is that Roar was designed as a community initiative and continues to be run as a community initiative it developed through various collaborations and working groups involving up to 17 different organizations to really develop the vision for Roar and how it be operated and so community funding and community investment in Roar is really a key part of who we are and so being part of SCOS and the SCOS family helps to, you know, helps to keep that, keep that vision, you know, top of mind. Another key reason is just to, you know, really to bring more awareness like we're doing in this webinar about the importance of investing in open infrastructure and one of the challenges that we face at Roar is that we don't charge anything for anyone to use Roar, to integrate Roar, to download our data and make various uses of it, but it still costs money to build Roar and to sustain it and so I think there's, there's, we're definitely at a really key tipping point right now in our, in our space about raising awareness about the importance of making these investments, not just, it's not about Roar benefiting, it's about the collective benefit that those, that these investments can make. And then the, you know, the third reason that's kind of closer, you know, closer to what Roar is experiencing now is really just this particular moment of growth that we are in. Really needing to scale as Sarah touched on, as Locharo touched on, this is really a critical moment for getting additional investment in Roar so that we can keep up, keep up with growing demand for the Roar API, as I mentioned, to be able to scale our infrastructure to be able to support those who are integrating and adopting Roar, again so that everyone who has a stake in this kind of infrastructure can be better off. Thanks a lot, Maria, I think that beautifully illustrates the importance of these funding calls. We also have two questions in Q&A, I think that are nice, nice segue from the why to the how. One question from Leslie more about when institutions are granted cost funding, how long does the funding last and great I saw you already answered that question. In the Q&A but perhaps, so everyone I can hear and see it you, would you mind repeating that answer on the call itself. Sure, I apologize if I'm not understanding the question exactly right but if the question is asking for how long are institutions pledging funding to discuss services. Maybe for a three year period. That's what's recommended, but I didn't mention also that here at CRK and we have accepted pledges that one or two years also if an institution does not have the funding to say to commit to a three year pledge period. Thanks a lot, and perhaps Judy from this cost board. Maybe you can elaborate on that and say something about the reason why this three year period is sort of recommended. And these are I mean the three year period is really the is it's part of the part of the arrangement the plan you know between SCOS and the infrastructures to achieve the goals, you know the funding goals and sustainability goals that they have in mind. Yeah, exactly. And really also to, to try to have a little bit more longer term sustainable sustainable funding. So another question from Nick helper. How does SCOS facilitate if at all connections between SCOS funded services does cost try to coordinate open science infrastructure that this interoperable with each other to help in coalition building. And if I may I can try to answer that question myself because we just had a meeting with all this cost infrastructure where we talked about among other things exactly this. And I guess that we will really make, make good use of the fact that we now have acquired a wider variety of infrastructures represented at SCOS, and one of the good things that we can do beyond just advocating and supporting longer term is really also advocate and support and help a fireman's ecosystem in itself and that can include exploring and increasing interoperability with these services. So it's not prerequisites, but it's certainly something that we hope to try and encourage and work out with these infrastructures. Finally, and we're nearing the end but there is a final question from from getting still. If SCOS continues for not a decade or even longer. There could be 30 or more different platforms that have been funded. So if SCOS board discuss a maximum desirable number of protect will become a time when schools encourage collaboration or consolidation of platforms to afford a fragmented infrastructure environment. I think that's a very interesting question also relating to the strategy and future vision. So that's perhaps a very good question to end with Judy, would you like to say something about this. Yeah, no, it is a great question. You know right now SCOS has a strategy document it's you know to 2025 as the current date of that of that document, which involves, you know, but it's promoting the sustainability of open science infrastructures, raising global awareness about the value of non commercial open infrastructure through advocacy and connection building to your last point, and building and maintaining trust and open science infrastructure and embedding and selection. So those are, but the question is a really good one. And I think it is, you know, part of how SCOS does what SCOS does. It bets and identifies good bets, good places, you know, infrastructures that are very important to the research community that are worthy of support that need that needs support to scale up and ramp up in the ways that we've heard today. And I think it is a piece of a global conversation around exactly this question. You know it is it won't, it won't on its own solve this issue of coherence or, or, or fragmentation but it will be, but it will through fulfilling these goals of raising awareness, building out this funder base. You know, promoting the SCOS family of infrastructures that collaborate with one another will be an important piece of, of mitigating exactly that. What what Jenny raises as a, as a risk. So I thank you for the question. I think that I think we are out of time we are right at the hour mark so I want to say a big thank you to everyone, all of our presenters and for and to, to the infrastructures to our co sponsors, and for all of you for tuning in today.