1 HRSA Division of Independent Review The Review Process Regional AIDS Education and Training Centers HRSA-15-154 Toni Thomas, MPA Lead Review Administrator.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ASTM Officers Training Workshop Subcommittee Chairmens Duties And Responsibilities September 11-12, 2006 Joe KouryChristi Sierk.
Advertisements

Assessing Your Organization: Gauging Your Land Trusts Progress Maryland Land Conservation Conference 2009 Sylvia Bates, Land Trust Alliance Beki Howey,
Roles and Responsibilities. Collaborative Efforts to Improve Student Achievement Guidelines for developing integrated planning and decision making processes.
Site Visit Review Just-in-Time Training. Pre-work and Training Judging Examiner Evaluation Process Stage 1 Independent Review Stage 2 Consensus Review.
MSCG Training for Project Officers and Consultants: Project Officer and Consultant Roles in Supporting Successful Onsite Technical Assistance Visits.
In Depth Panel Review Training. Activity: Mock Panel Review To evaluate the Need for Assistance, reviewers will consider the extent to which the application.
Participation Requirements for a Guideline Panel Member.
Panel Reviewer Training Overview 1 ANA Objective Panel Review Process Each year, ANA convenes panels of experts to objectively analyze and score eligible.
Participation Requirements for a Guideline Panel Co-Chair.
Ensuring that building products meet code requirements ICC Evaluation Service, Inc. The ICC-ES Evaluation Committee conducts open public hearings on proposed.
Participation Requirements for a Patient Representative.
Exercise Swaps Community Emergency Response Team.
PEER REVIEW OF TEACHING WORKSHOP SUSAN S. WILLIAMS VICE DEAN ALAN KALISH DIRECTOR, UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING ASC CHAIRS — JAN. 30,
Role of the Executive Secretary Gail Dapolito Advisory Committee Coordinator Div. Scientific Advisors and Consultants Center for Biologics Evaluation and.
How Your Application Is Reviewed Vonda Smith, Ph.D. Scientific Review Officer (SRO)
Syed Zaidi, P.Eng. PM (Stanford), PhD. Director, Strategic Partnerships Alberta Infrastructure. Government of Alberta Canada Richard. B. (Dick) Innes,
1 Dissertation Process 4 process overview 4 specifics –dates, policies, etc.
1 Major changes Get ready! Changes coming to Review Meetings Considering Potential FY2010 funding and beyond: New 1-9 Scoring System Scoring of Individual.
How to write a Report On Assessment Source: AUN Secretariat.
Pre-Review Orientation Conference Call Bureau of Health Workforce HRSA Health Careers Opportunity Program June 29 – July 1, am Review Administrator.
Pre-Review Orientation Conference Call Maternal and Child Health Bureau Universal Newborn Hearing Screening Program HRSA National Technical Resource.
Teacher Assistant Guidelines Student Services 2009.
Ensuring an Equitable Review AmeriCorps External Review Training.
Pulaski Technical College Committee Training August 11, 2014.
1 Public Outreach October 2008 By Adelina Murtezaj – Public Relation Officer For Inaugural Partnership Activity between ICC and ERO.
Reviewing the 2015 AmeriCorps Applications & Conducting the Review AmeriCorps External Review.
Objective Review Training 2009 Sponsored by Grants Policy Staff/OMS Michelle G. Bulls, Director Presenter: Ms. Tammy G. Bagley Senior Grants Policy Analyst.
HEALTH RESOURCES & SERVICES ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT DIVISION OF GRANTS MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS HEALTH PROFESSIONS BRANCH.
NSW Department of Education & Training NSW Public Schools – Leading the Way SELECTION PANEL PROCEDURES FOR SCHOOL TEACHERS 2009 Procedural.
Your Role in Ensuring Equitable Reviews 2014 AmeriCorps External Review Training.
Overview Lifting the Curtain - Debriefings FAI Acquisition Seminar.
ADEPT 1 SAFE-T Judgments. SAFE-T 2 What are the stages of SAFE-T? Stage I: Preparation  Stage I: Preparation  Stage II: Collection.
Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 National Training and Technical Assistance Cooperative Agreements (NCA) Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) HRSA Objective.
EVALUATOR TRAINING. EVALUATION TEAMS 1 Adult Evaluator 2 Student Evaluators + 1 Student Room Consultant 1 Student Timer 1 Student Clerk 1 Monitor (only.
APPLICATION PANEL CHAIR ORIENTATION 2015Community Economic Development (CED) 2015 CED- Healthy Food Financing Initiative (HFFI) Grant Application Review.
Project Manager Training. Agenda Revised Consultant Selection Process Invoicing Overtime, Travel and Vehicle Reimbursement Policies Performance Evaluations.
The Performance Management And Appraisal System (PMAS) Principal Performance Appraisal.
CED Application Reviewer Training Module 1: Introduction to CED Program and Application Review June 2012.
The Facts About Schoolsite Councils The Roles and Responsibilities of a Schoolsite Council.
Rev.04/2015© 2015 PLEASE NOTE: The Application Review Module (ARM) is a system that is designed as a shared service and is maintained by the Grants Centers.
Proctor Training Thank you for serving as a proctor in the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools testing program!
Health Resources and Services Administration Division of Independent Review Objective Review Orientation Scholarships for Disadvantaged Students 1.
ADEPT 1 SAFE-T Judgments. SAFE-T 2 What are the stages of SAFE-T?  Stage I: Preparation  Stage II: Collection of evidence  Stage.
HEALTH RESOURCES & SERVICES ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF FEDERAL ASSISTANCE MANAGEMENT DIVISION OF GRANTS MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS (DGMO) Presented by the: HEALTH.
Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Audit Program - The Audit Process.
TTI Performance Evaluation Training. Agenda F Brief Introduction of Performance Management Model F TTI Annual Performance Review Online Module.
The Achievement Chart Mathematics Grades Note to Presenter:
1 Panel Review Orientation Administration for Children and Families Office of Grants Management Division of Discretionary Grants.
“Inspiring our students to reach their full potential.”
Rev.04/2015© 2015 PLEASE NOTE: The Application Review Module (ARM) is a system that is designed as a shared service and is maintained by the Grants Centers.
Reviewing the Applications & Preparing for the Review School Turnaround AmeriCorps FY13 Peer Review Orientation Session IV.
HEALTH RESOURCES & SERVICES ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT DIVISION OF GRANTS MANAGEMENT OPERATIONS LaToya Ferguson.
NATA Foundation Student Grants Process
Well Trained International
NSF/NIH Review Processes University of Southern Mississippi
NSF/NIH Review Processes University of Southern Mississippi
HUD REQUIREMENTS FOR DEVELOPING A HOUSING COUNSELING WORK PLAN
Division of Independent Review (DIR)
Look Beneath the Surface Regional Anti-Trafficking Program
Review Administrator Vicky Johnson February 15, 2017
Funding Opportunity Announcement Number: HRSA
Review Administrator Vicky Johnson April 18, 2017
External Peer Reviewer Orientation
Roles and Responsibilities
OCPS CCNA SELECTION COMMITTEE TRAINING
American Institute of Constructors Constructor Certification Commission Training for Scorers for the Writing Skills Portion of the Level I Certification.
Roles and Responsibilities
2012 Annual Call Steps of the evaluation of proposals, role of the experts TEN-T Experts Briefing, March 2013.
Training for Reviewers Fall 2018
(Project) SIGN OFF PROCESS MONTH DAY, YEAR
Presentation transcript:

1 HRSA Division of Independent Review The Review Process Regional AIDS Education and Training Centers HRSA Toni Thomas, MPA Lead Review Administrator

2 DIR Mission To ensure a fair, ethical and objective review of each application

3 Conflict of Interest A conflict of interest occurs when a reviewer, close relative, or professional associate of the reviewer has a financial or other interest in an application that is likely to bias the reviewer’s evaluation of that application.

4 Conflict of Interest cont.  If it could be perceived that you have a conflict of interest then it is an apparent conflict of interest.  If you have questions as to whether you have a conflict of interest, consult DIR staff.

5 Confidentiality Before, during, and after the meeting. Before, during, and after the meeting. Results of deliberations are CONFIDENTIAL. Results of deliberations are CONFIDENTIAL. Discussions regarding applications should be confined to the meeting room. Discussions regarding applications should be confined to the meeting room. All review materials are to remain on-site after the meeting has concluded. All review materials are to remain on-site after the meeting has concluded. All electronic files must be permanently deleted from your electronic equipment. All electronic files must be permanently deleted from your electronic equipment.

6 Outside Information If information is not in the application the reviewer should review as though the information does not exist. If information is not in the application the reviewer should review as though the information does not exist. Applications should be reviewed and evaluated in accordance with the Review Criteria and the entire application. Applications should be reviewed and evaluated in accordance with the Review Criteria and the entire application. Applications should not be compared. Applications should not be compared. DO NOT discuss or mention any information that is not contained in the application itself. (includes web-site references). DO NOT discuss or mention any information that is not contained in the application itself. (includes web-site references).

7 Approach Avoid personal bias. Avoid personal bias. Independently review, evaluate and score each application based on the FOA and the Review Criteria. Independently review, evaluate and score each application based on the FOA and the Review Criteria. Consistently evaluate each application (i.e., scores should reflect the strengths and weaknesses noted). Consistently evaluate each application (i.e., scores should reflect the strengths and weaknesses noted). Participate in the panel discussion. Participate in the panel discussion.

8 Role of the Participants Chair: Review Facilitator: Directs the order of review, leads the panel in the review process, clarifies and facilitates the progress of the review, mediates questions and comments from panel to Program/Grants Management and vice versa, assists in the preparation of the review summary, and certifies the review process. Chair: Review Facilitator: Directs the order of review, leads the panel in the review process, clarifies and facilitates the progress of the review, mediates questions and comments from panel to Program/Grants Management and vice versa, assists in the preparation of the review summary, and certifies the review process. DIR: Review Administrator (RA): Guides, oversees, and verifies the integrity of the objective review process. DIR: Review Administrator (RA): Guides, oversees, and verifies the integrity of the objective review process.

9 Role of the Participants cont. Summary Statement Operator (SSO): Captures discussion from panel. Summary Statement Operator (SSO): Captures discussion from panel. Program: When requested, responds to specific technical and programmatic issues. Program: When requested, responds to specific technical and programmatic issues. Grants Management: When requested assists with budget issues. Grants Management: When requested assists with budget issues.

10 Steps in Conducting the Committee Review 1. INTRODUCTION: The Chair introduces the application and the application number to be reviewed. The Chair asks for any Conflicts of Interest. Those with conflicts leave the room for that application discussion.

11 Steps in Conducting the Committee Review cont. 2. OVERVIEW:  The Chair allows the reviewers two (2) minutes to quickly read the abstract of the application to be reviewed, if they have not prior to review.  The First Primary Reviewer gives a descriptive overview of the application that gives the “big picture” and the significant strength and weakness.  The Second and Third Reviewers give any additions, comments or clarifications to the First Reviewer’s overview as well as his/her additional significant strength and weakness.

12 Steps in Conducting the Committee Review cont. 3. INITIAL SCORING ANNOUNCEMENT: Each assigned Primary Reviewer provides his/her initial scores by criterion, as well as his/her overall total.

13 Steps in Conducting the Committee Review cont. 4.OPEN DISCUSSION:  The Chair invites discussion from all members of the Review Committee.  Other reviewers are expected to ask questions of the Primary Reviewers to promote a full discussion and understanding of the application  Approximately 20 minutes are allocated for Steps 2, 3 & 4.

14 Steps in Conducting the Committee Review cont. 5. FORMULATING AND EDITING THE SUMMARY STATEMENT:  The First Reviewer leads the Panel in editing of the projected summary statement.  The SSO makes the edits to the strengths and weaknesses of each criterion, based on the group discussion. (20 – 30 minutes).  Difference of opinion regarding strengths and weaknesses noted by the assigned Reviewers are to be discussed to derive group consensus. Contradictory statements are to be avoided.  Reviewers should focus on content, especially on accuracy and consistency as final editing of grammar, spelling, etc., will occur prior to mailing results.

15 Steps in Conducting the Committee Review cont. 6. SCORING APPLICATION:  The Chair asks each Reviewer to complete and sign a Final Score Sheet, including any revisions to initial scores, using a scale from 0-100, with 100 being the highest composite score.  Unless absent or recused, every Reviewer will score each application (by criterion) assigned to the committee. An individual criterion score may not exceed the maximum specified for that criterion.

16 Steps in Conducting the Committee Review cont. 7. BUDGET DISCUSSION:  The Primary Reviewers provide recommendations regarding the budget proposal.  Considering the assigned Reviewers’ recommendations, the panel discusses and determines a budget recommendation (10 minutes).  Reviewers cannot recommend an increase in the Applicant’s budget request. If a reduction in the budget request is recommended, Reviewers must provide a rationale.

Steps in Conducting the Committee Review cont. 8. RECOMMENDATIONS TO HRSA :  Reviewers may provide recommendations to HRSA at this time. The recommendations should reflect a consensus of the entire panel of reviewers 17

Summary Statement Development Please provide clear and useful feedback in the Summary Statement. Please provide clear and useful feedback in the Summary Statement. We are especially interested in the value of the statement, particularly in areas of weaknesses. We are especially interested in the value of the statement, particularly in areas of weaknesses. No contradictory statements! No contradictory statements! 18

Summary Statement Development, Continuation Each statement must be properly justified. Each statement must be properly justified. There is nothing wrong with leaving in a statement that is a “requirement” of the FOA, so long as it is not a contradiction with other statements within the summary. There is nothing wrong with leaving in a statement that is a “requirement” of the FOA, so long as it is not a contradiction with other statements within the summary. 19

20 Logistics Start time will vary each day based on panel progress Start time will vary each day based on panel progress AM/PM breaks provided. AM/PM breaks provided. No review of a new application will begin after 4:30 pm on the first day of review. No review of a new application will begin after 4:30 pm on the first day of review.

21 Post Review Process: Debriefing Conducted by the panel Chair and DIR after panel reviews are complete. Conducted by the panel Chair and DIR after panel reviews are complete. Encourage comments regarding program issues, pre- & post-review meeting process, instructions, etc. Encourage comments regarding program issues, pre- & post-review meeting process, instructions, etc. Please complete and submit the reviewer feedback form. Please complete and submit the reviewer feedback form.

22 Extra Notes This is a CLOSED Meeting. This is a CLOSED Meeting. Reviewers are not permitted to leave the call (meeting) room during consideration of an application except for emergencies. In such cases, the Chair must be consulted first. Reviewers are not permitted to leave the call (meeting) room during consideration of an application except for emergencies. In such cases, the Chair must be consulted first. It is the responsibility of the participants to safeguard the documents from the meeting. It is the responsibility of the participants to safeguard the documents from the meeting.

23 Extra Notes cont. To avoid distractions during the review, cell phones should be on vibrate or turned off. Disposition of review materials will be discussed after the review.

Time is PRECIOUS! Please be conscious of the time spent on each application. Please be conscious of the time spent on each application. Please be respectful of the times chosen to re-convene after breaks, lunch and start of day. Please be respectful of the times chosen to re-convene after breaks, lunch and start of day. 24

Removal of electronic Files in your PC/Lap Top Deletion of Files At the conclusion of the meeting, HRSA expects that you permanently delete all files from your electronic equipment. 25

26 Questions?  On behalf of HRSA, Thank You again for serving on this review panel!