Archived File

1. Archived File The file below has been archived for historical reference purposes only. The content and links are no longer maintained and may be outdated. See the OER Public Archive Home Page for more details about archived files.

2. Brent StanfieldActing Director Center for Scientific Review National Institutes of Health Department of Health and Human Services NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review

3. NIH’s mission“science in pursuit of fundamental knowledge about the nature and behavior of living systems and the application of that knowledge to extend healthy life and reduce the burdens of illness and disability”–depends on the ability of its Institutes, Centers, and OD offices to develop and implement effective extramural activities NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review To be efficient and effective in executing its mission NIH requires a number of central services and some level of central coordination

4. NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review • NIH has established a Steering Committee to address corporate issues other than development of scientific priorities to help in ensure its mission is met • Standing and ad hoc working groups provide input and support the Steering Committee’s functions • There are currently 5 standing working groups

5. NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review NIH Steering Committee Intramural Activities WG Co-chairs: Drs. Francis Collins/ Michael Gottesman Extramural Activities WGCo-chairs: Drs. Allen Spiegel / Norka Ruize Bravo Information Technology WGCo-chairs: Dr. Larry Tabak / Mr. Al Graeff Facilities WGCo-chairs: Dr. Richard Hodes / Mr. Leonard Taylor Management and Budget WGCo-chairs: Dr. Steve Katz/ Ms. Colleen Barros

6. NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review • How are decisions made regarding trans-NIH issues? • How is funding for NIH central services decided? Some Real Examples

7. NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review IMPAC II/eRA Governance • NIH’s Information for Management, Planning, Analysis, and Coordination (IMPAC) database is an electronic Research Administration (eRA) system fundamentally important for the management of peer review across NIH • eRA is managed by NIH’s Office of Extramural Research, but the governance of eRA is broader

8. Policy Budget NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review eRA Governance Structure NIH Steering Committee Steering CommitteeIT Working Group Steering CommitteeManagement and Budget Working Group NIH Extramural IT Steering Committee

9. NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review IMPAC II/eRA Governance Involving several components in eRA’s governance structure helps ensure that there is broad input for this business-critical element • There are additional trans-NIH entry points for input on eRA’s development and management as well • For example, the Review Users Group (RUG) is a cross-IC user group that meets as needed to discuss issues and to provide insight and suggestions for enhancements to the IMPAC II Peer Review module and the Internet Assisted Review module

10. NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review CSR Governance Very much like the situation for eRA, the governance structure for CSR is somewhat complex Responsibility for the governance of CSR rests primarily with the Extramural Activities Working Group (EAWG)

11. NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review CSR Governance EAWG is a working group of the NIH Steering Committee • EAWG considers all issues broadly impacting NIH extramural activities regardless of their organizational placement • EAWG also provides governance for efforts aimed at restructuring and consolidating key administrative components associated with extramural research and research training Mission most commonly intersects with activities under the purview of : - Office of Extramural Research (OER)- Center for Scientific Review (CSR) - Office of Science Policy (OSP)

12. NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review CSR Governance EAWG also makes recommendations to the Management and Budget Working Group (MBWG) on the annual resource requests made by the Center for Scientific Review CSR and other central services such as eRA are funded from the same budget pool and essentially compete for resources CSR is a service organization and does not have its own appropriation for facilities and staff CSR’s budget is determined by the NIH Steering Committee and is allocated from a central services fund

13. Policy Budget NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review CSR Governance Structure NIH Steering Committee Steering CommitteeEAWG Steering CommitteeManagement and Budget Working Group NIH Office of Extramural Research

14. NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review Key Points: NIH Steering Committee addresses corporate issues to help ensure the NIH mission is met efficiently and effectively Steering Committee functions are supported by five standing working groups EAWG has purview over peer review issues at NIH and also oversees CSR’s budget request to MBWG

15. NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review Additional Considerations: While CSR is the focal point of peer review at NIH most of NIH’s 24 funding Institutes and Centers perform some of their own peer review Considerations of peer review policy and practice must take this diversity into account PRAC was established and its membership selected to facilitate harmonization across NIH’s peer review components and within NIH’s governance structure (e.g., including members of EAWG on PRAC)

16. Advisory Decisional/Policy PRAC NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review Peer Review Governance Structure NIH Steering Committee Steering CommitteeEAWG NIH Office of Extramural Research Institute/Center Peer Review

17. NIH Governance Structure:Relevance To Peer Review Questions and Discussion