Final Agenda for February 2012 board meeting - rev. 1 Meeting to be held on Sunday 5th February at 2pm at irc.starlink-irc.org #autscape Attendance Apologies 1. Ratifications 1.1. The board's decision to spend £100 (one-off fee) to register with Virgin Money Giving in order to collect sponsorship donations from a marathon runner who has named us as one of her charities. This would also be a way of receiving donations from other sources, particularly individuals. (Made on list 12/1/12) 2. Appointments 2.1. Chair of sc-research 2.2. Childcare coordinator (Volunteer: Elaine) 3. Proposals 3.1. The chair proposes that the board instruct an individual to arrange the transfer of the autscape.org and autscape.org.uk domains to the company's ownership as soon as possible, provided the current owners of those domains are willing to relinquish them. 3.2. The treasurer proposes that the company offer a GBP 5 discount on fees only to people who: become a member at the time of booking, or extend their existing membership for a year, or have at least 6 months' remaining of their existing membership. [Rationale available in Appendix A] 3.3. The vice treasurer proposes a fee structure for Autscape 2012 for the board's approval (see Appendix B) 3.4. The formal programme coordinator requests a budget of £900 to cover: 1. presenters' accommodation (one night per presentation) 2. up to two essential carers for presenters 3. invited presenters' travel expenses 4. other exceptional expenses for any presenter 5. other costs directly related to the formal programme which are reasonable in the opinion of the formal programme coordinator (see Appendix C for breakdown) 3.5. The Publications and Publicity subcommittee chair requests a budget of £220 to cover: 1. A quarter-page advertisement in AuKids Magazine (£120 incl. VAT). See http://www.aukids.co.uk/>. 2. Printing and posting flyers and/or posters to organizations and events that might distribute them (e.g. the Autism Show). 3. Any other expenses that are reasonable in the opinion of the subcommittee chair. (see Appendix D for breakdown) 3.6. The transport coordinator proposes that Autscape: 3.6.1. set a fee of GBP 10 now, so that this can be collected during the booking process on the web site. 3.6.2. authorise him to book 5 Star Taxis Norwich Ltd for transport, with exact times to be decided (see Appendix E for further information) 3.7. The formal programme subcommittee chair proposes that Autscape adopt a theme for 2013. This is the short list put forward by the formal programme sub-committee for consideration (in alphabetical order): A. Autism through the lifespan B. Autistic autonomy C. Expanding Autistic Horizons / Exploring Autistic Futures (this would go back to the sc to work out the exact wording) D. Finding a voice E. Independent living / living in the community (as with C) F. Mapping the world of autism 4. Subcommittee progress reports (suggested topics in brackets) 4.1. Sc-prog-form (proposals, presenter numbers, carer places, invitations, theme 2013) Chair: Kalen 4.2. Sc-prog-alt (sc membership, call for leisure activities, budget, alternative programme intentions) Chair: Trish 4.3. Sc-fund (sc membership, task list and timetable for the year) Chair: Elaine 4.4. Sc-research (sc membership, childcare research progress) In lieu of chair: Kalen 4.5. Sc-pub (website wording, advertisement deadlines, publicity planning) Chair: Martijn 4.6. Working group reports (if any) (Echo - Kalen, Newsletter - Stephen, Purchasing - Stephen, Tech - Stephen) 5. Key position progress reports (matters not covered earlier) 5.1. Webmaster (updating website, certificate issues, registration system) 5.2. Venue coordinator 2012 (planned venue visits, venue information for sc-pub) 5.3. Treasurer (bank form, tax return, accounts, expenses payments, fees) 5.4. Company Secretary (annual report, info@ guidance, policies and job descriptions, files) 5.5. Chair (general progress, any other matters) 6. Any other business APPENDIX A The membership fee is not quite neutral because this year the conference is unusually early. If we were to follow last year's scheme exactly, we'd be offering GBP 5 discount to nearly everyone because they'd be in month 11 of their annual membership so there'd be no incentive for people to extend their membership for another year. In terms of our finances, this is small change. The big deal is that the number of members will drop significantly in August, leaving Autscape in the control of a small and probably unrepresentative subgroup of its current membership. The proposal would prevent this by encouraging attendees to renew their membership. APPENDIX B Original Proposal: Adult - Standard - £195 Adult - Low Income - £175 Child 6-13 - Standard - £115 Child 6-13 - Low Income - £95 Child 14-17 - Standard - £175 Child 14-17 - Low Income - £155 Child 0-5 - Standard - £60 Child 0-5 - Low Income - £40 Carer/SA - £165 Professional - £250 En-suite supplement: £30 *per room*. Attached to my email to the board list of 29/1/12 you'll find my working for how I reached the residential figures, unfortunately due to the per-room supplement the spreadsheet is slightly more awkward to interpret compared to last year's, and I didn't make it able to handle the family rooms being used by more than two people. For the purpose of the contracted minimum, 6-13 year olds count as half an attendee, which is why the figures add up to 91 attendees rather than 90. Option A: Adult - Standard - Single - £200 Adult - Standard - Shared - £190 Adult - Low Income - Single - £180 Adult - Low Income - Shared - £170 Child 6-13 - Standard - Single - £120 Child 6-13 - Standard - Shared - £110 Child 6-13 - Low Income - Single - £100 Child 6-13 - Low Income - Shared - £90 Child 14-17 - Standard - Single - £180 Child 14-17 - Standard - Shared - £170 Child 14-17 - Low Income - Single - £160 Child 14-17 - Low Income - Shared - £150 Child 0-5 - Standard - £60 Child 0-5 - Low Income - £40 Carer/SA - Single - £170 Carer/SA - Shared - £160 Professional - Single - £250 Professional - Shared - £240 En-Suite Supplement: £30 *per room* --- Option B: Adult - Standard - Single - £195 Adult - Standard - Shared - £185 Adult - Low Income - Single - £175 Adult - Low Income - Shared - £165 Child 6-13 - Standard - Single - £115 Child 6-13 - Standard - Shared - £105 Child 6-13 - Low Income - Single - £95 Child 6-13 - Low Income - Shared - £85 Child 14-17 - Standard - Single - £175 Child 14-17 - Standard - Shared - £165 Child 14-17 - Low Income - Single - £155 Child 14-17 - Low Income - Shared - £145 Child 0-5 - Standard - £60 Child 0-5 - Low Income - £40 Carer/SA - Single - £170 Carer/SA - Shared - £160 Professional - Single - £250 Professional - Shared - £240 En-Suite Supplement: £30 *per room* Day fees (same for all options): Adult day attendees attending for three days of the conference cost us £33 less. This allows us to broadly speaking keep the costs to day attendees the same as last year while having day attendees who are attending for three days pay about the same amount towards the non-venue costs of the conference as residential attendees. Like last year, the venue is not charging for children age 0-5, so I haven't reduced the cost to 0-5 year olds compared to residential attendees. Adult - Standard - £80 one day; £160 two or more days Adult - Low Income - £70 one day; £140 two or more days Child 6-13 - Standard - £45 one day; £90 two or more days Child 6-13 - Low Income - £35 one day; £70 two or more days Child 14-17 - Standard - £70 one day; £140 two or more days Child 14-17 - Low Income - £60 one day; £120 two or more days Child 0-5 - Standard - £30 one day; £60 two or more days Child 0-5 - Low Income - £20 one day; £40 two or more days Carer/SA - £45 one day; £90 two days; £135 three or more days Professional - £100 one day; £200 two or more days Rationale for original proposal Proposed fee structure The minimum cost for an adult to attend the venue for this proposal is higher than last year (£170 last year compared to £195 this year), however it is cheaper than the last time we were at Ammerdown, which was a venue with a comparable cost to this one (£200 last time we were at Ammerdown compared to £195 this year), and the cost for an adult using a single room - Which many of our participants either need or prefer - is lower than last year (£210 last year compared to £195 this year) Due to the significant lack of shared rooms at this venue, I haven't offered a discount for using them. This is to lower the demand for shared rooms so that attendees who need them due to caring for young children and needing support in the mornings will be able to get them. This is partially countered by the per room rather than per person en-suite supplement, which is intended to help encourage those who can use the en-suite doubles as doubles to do so - traditionally this type of room has proven difficult to fill and this venue does not have a lot of rooms compared to our target of 90 attendees. This is unlikely to have much impact on those who need the twin and family rooms, since only three of those are en-suite. The fees include the membership fee. Subtract GBP 5 to get the fee offered to members. Since the membership fee is neutral, you can ignore it for any analysis. I've assumed an organiser rebate of a single day, and included any non-committee members on the on-site team in the estimate of how many organiser rebates we'll have. Other costs are estimates based on last year, and numbers that some of the subcommittees have been floating round prior to proposing them to the board. The figures I am proposing loses us around £10 for each low income 14-17 year old attending compared to what the venue is charging us. This is well within what we can afford, and the lower cost, despite no discount to us, should help our accessibility to families and young autistic people who cannot attend without an adult. We are currently towards the upper end of our reserve range, as such I have set the fees with the aim of running our reserves down. If my estimates of attendance and costs are correct - and we meet the venue minimum - These fees will run our reserves down by about £750. If we fall short of our contracted minimum by 20 places, and only get 70 attendees, then this proposal should run our reserves down by about £2500 when taking the underwritten 10 places into account. If that happens, we'll be at the lower end of what our reserve policy permits. We obviously don't want this to happen, and I hope our publicity can get us the 90 contracted minimum so we don't have to use any of the underwritten places, but we can afford it. Rationale for Options A and B While we do have 20 shared rooms counting doubles as shared rather than single, historically we have apparently struggled to use the doubled as shared with higher discounts for shared rooms than we can offer this year due to how high our reserves are and what the venue costs. Last year, six of the seven carers shared a room, two with en-suite facilities. Assuming the same number of carers attend, and all the carers who shared last year did so due to the support needs of the person they were attending with, that leaves 6 twin and family rooms left over, along with the 8 double rooms. Bearing that in mind, and attempting to cut into our reserves without reducing the cheapest option for low income to the same amount as the carer rate, I would like to propose the following two additional options: The discount for sharing in both options is half of that for low income, it is possible some people will choose to go for a low income in order to get a free upgrade. In both cases, I have reduced the lowest carer rate by £5 from the initial proposal, which is necessary to get the figures to work in both cases - in the case of Option A, this slightly helps get our reserves down slightly more, and is simply to help us get our reserves down from the high end of our reserve policy. In the case of Option B, it's needed so that low income participants are being charged more than carers. This, I believe, would make the fees look off to someone who doesn't know how much Belsey Bridge is charging us. I expect it to make a difference of less than £50 to our finances (We had 7 carers attending last year, I've been working on the assumption of 8), although carers in a shared non-ensuite room are being charged £5 less than the venue are charging us. Option A gives us a deficit of about £500 assuming we meet our minimum booking, and £2400 if we miss by 20 places, after taking into account the ten underwritten places. In both cases, this lands us within the range our reserve policy allows, although a £500 deficit would still be a little high in the range, and I've been working with figures indicating more low income attendees than there were last year. Option B gives us a deficit of about £900 assuming we meet our minimum booking, and £2700 if we miss by 20 places, after taking into account the ten underwritten places. Again, this lands us within our reserve range in both cases, however if we miss by 20 places, that puts us only about £1000 over our minimum reserve amount, after taking into account the deposit we've paid for Belsey Bridge into account. Relevant comments from the board list on the above proposal: Chair: "There is a significant lack of shared en suite rooms. I don't think there's a lack of shared rooms overall. There is an abundance of single rooms, relatively speaking, which is good, but there are 20 shared rooms, which is *far* more than we have families of any description (including couples and parent carers with child). With no motivation to share, even some families will prefer to split up." APPENDIX C Breakdown of how the budget has been calculated: 1. 8 x £55 = £440 2. 2 x £55 = £110 3. 2 x £200 = £400 4. £50 5. Any surplus from the above. APPENDIX D Breakdown: 1. £120 2. up to £80 3. any surplus from the above APPENDIX E Setting a fee now and collecting it during registration will save a *lot* of hassle later on. Norwich is the best station to use - it is a terminal station so people don't have to keep on eye on where they are in their journey. It is also has direct trains to Peterborough on the East Cost Main Line, and to London Liverpool Street. It has step-free access to the platform. If people arrive early, they can visit the city. The proposed fee is at cost. The cost of transporting people from Norwich station is going to be around GBP 10 (total, not each way). This is based on taxi quotes for a combination of 4 and 8 passenger vehicles.