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 Archived File The file below has been archived for historical reference purposes only. The content and links are no longer maintained and may be outdated.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.archivedOER Public Archive Home Page

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

3. NIH Governance Structure: Relevance To Peer Review NIHs 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 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 There are currently 5 standing working groups 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 Committees functions

5. NIH Governance Structure: Relevance To Peer Review NIH Steering Committee Extramural Activities WG Co-chairs: Drs. Allen Spiegel / Norka Ruize Bravo Facilities WG Co-chairs: Dr. Richard Hodes / Mr. Leonard Taylor Information Technology WG Co-chairs: Dr. Larry Tabak / Mr. Al Graeff Intramural Activities WG Co-chairs: Drs. Francis Collins/ Michael Gottesman Management and Budget WG Co-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 NIHs I nformation for M anagement, P lanning, A nalysis, and C oordination (IMPAC) database is an electronic Research Administration (eRA) system fundamentally important for the management of peer review across NIH eRA is managed by NIHs Office of Extramural Research, but the governance of eRA is broader

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

9. NIH Governance Structure: Relevance To Peer Review Involving several components in eRAs governance structure helps ensure that there is broad input for this business- critical element There are additional trans-NIH entry points for input on eRAs 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 IMPAC II/eRA Governance

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 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) CSR Governance

12. NIH Governance Structure: Relevance To Peer Review 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 Governance CSR is a service organization and does not have its own appropriation for facilities and staff CSRs budget is determined by the NIH Steering Committee and is allocated from a central services fund CSR and other central services such as eRA are funded from the same budget pool and essentially compete for resources

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

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

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

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

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