After filing the application and gathering all needed references, the application bug is marked as "next screening round". This means that this application will be screened within the next weeks and there is nothing else to do for the applicant for now.
The screening team is a renewable team with 4 people, where only 2 are Reps Council members. Every 6 months there will be a new team (so we can have a Reps Council member also after election but the same team, helpful during the council changing).
Team selection criteria
- 1 year since joining on the program
- The Reps Council will review the candidates for this team and vote for them to have 4 members, with a minimum of 3
- 4 members from different part of the world to improve the diversity
- Required a Telegram account and GitHub account
- Once a Rep is approved the Council member will need to invite them to the Portal - this automatically sets the Council member as a mentor of this person until the new Rep gets reassigned
Team application process
- To get candidates GitHub will be used taking in consideration all the reps that replied the ticket about the new team
Team members onboarding process
- The new members will be added on the Telegram group, the outgoing member will be removed
- To the spreadsheet document will be removed the access to old members and added the new one
Team Workflow rules
- Every year there will be a new spreadsheet on Google Drive that contains a tab for every application screening round
- To do a new application screening is required to have at least 1 new application in queue for a month
- The Reps Council members will check every 2 weeks on the queue for a new screening round
- Communicate to the Reps application to wait 2 weeks for the next screening round
- GitHub issue is created in the Reps repository by a Reps Council member
- Team is informed that they have 7 days to screen the applicants
- Every team member gives a vote according to the points below and writes a comment justifying the vote
- If an applicant has more than 3 votes value, they are informed that they can proceed to the Webinar
- If they have less than 3 votes value or we do not have enough information to screen the application, the applicant is informed about this and asked to open a new application with all necessary information (skipping references).
- The applications to be screened will require to add in CC the Onboarding team members to get access
- The Reps Council members part of the team will be focused only in communications between applicants and feedback by the onboarding team members
- The Reps Council members part of the team will reply to the new applications (modifying the flags) and will add them on the spreadsheet with a ping to the Telegram group
- The Onboarding screening team (except Reps Council members) will be focused on read every applications and add feedback and votes based on the selection criteria
All applications are screened against the ReMo/Application_Process/Selection_Criteria.
All the applications open with screened one: https://mzl.la/2sQawNH
Only the reps application to review: https://mzl.la/2CL6Q4o
The following schema is used:
|2||Very fitted for the Reps program, highly suggested|
|1||Fitted for the Reps program, should be moving to Webinar and Orientation Period|
|-1||Not fitted for the Reps program or not enough information provided or application criteria not fulfilled|
Minimum amount for approval is 2 as total vote.
|Tim Maks van den Broek||Rep|
|Manel Raheim||Council Member, not voting, all administrative processes|
|Tim Maks van den Broek||Rep|
|Aka Brou Yannick N||Rep|
|Daniele Scasciafratte||Council Member, not voting, all administrative processes|
2017 experimental team
|Michael Kohler||Council Member|
|Daniele Scasciafratte||Council Member|
|Hossain Al Ikram||Rep|
The bugzilla flags for every step can be found at ReMo/SOPs/Joining.
The relevant communication templates for screening can be found at ReMo/Webinar/Communication.
This links are private because only the Reps Council, staff and Onboarding Team member can access due to evaluation comments.