UPM Scientific Review Council (UPM-SRC)

The NIH-UPM Scientific Review System

 OBJECTIVES

  • To provide objective expert assessment of scientific merit of research proposals applying for intramural and extramural research grants managed by the NIH-UPM

FUNCTIONS

  • Review the technical aspects and evaluate the scientific merit of all researches applying for intramural or extramural grants managed by NIH-UPM
  • Maintain a roster of experts within the University who are willing and capable of providing expert opinion on a variety of subject matters
  • Determine which researches are eligible to receive funding based on their technical and scientific merit
  • Recommend revisions of research proposals based on available evidence and expert consensus
  • Evaluate the terminal reports of NIH-UPM managed researches
  • Provide sound evaluation of applications for Study Group registration

COMPOSITION OF THE SYSTEM

Scientific Review Council (SRC)

  • Composed of a Chair and four (4) University Scientists representing different research areas, and a Secretariat who serves as the Council Secretary.
  • The Deputy Executive Director of NIH also sits in the Council as non-voting ex officio member.
  • The Chair and SRC members may serve a two-year term, which can be renewed upon the recommendation of the NIH Executive Director.

 Scientific Review Group (SRG)

  • Composed of a group of professionals with similar core expertise and at least one (1) clinical epidemiologist or biostatistician.

 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

SRC Chair

  • Is responsible for convening the meetings together with the NIH Deputy Executive Director;
  • Assigns reviewers for proposed research protocols;
  • Gives final decision on resubmitted protocols, amendments and documents that have been reviewed by the members and elevated to the Chair.

 SRC Members

  • Evaluate all grant applications, conduct the final deliberation and recommend researches for funding approval of the Chancellor.
  • Evaluate and approve the terminal reports of the funded researches.
  • Are in charge of evaluating the applications for registration of new Study Groups of the NIH-UPM.

 SRC Secretariat

  • Prepares and distributes the study protocol to assigned SRGs;
  • Tracks the progress of the review of each submitted protocol;
  • Organizes regular SRC meetings;
  • Retrieves reviewed applications from the SRGs and summarizes the comments, recommendations and scores;
  • Maintains a database of all applications, scores and outcomes of the review;
  • Prepares and processes all administrative documents of SRC;
  • Prepares and processes all documents for the compensation of the SRG reviewers and SRC members and chair; and
  • Coordinates closely with RGAO and the Office of the Deputy Executive Director for the proper tracking and management of funds.

LEVELS OF EVALUATION

 First level of review (initial peer review)

  • An assessment of scientific and technical merit, and is conducted by a Scientific Review Group (SRG) composed primarily of scientific investigators who have expertise in relevant scientific disciplines and current research areas.
  • Each application must be reviewed by 3 members of the SRG, preferably one of them is an external member (non-UPM affiliated).
  • The SRC Chair identifies the SRG members who will review a particular application assigned to their SRG. The SRGs may come from different NIH institutes and study groups, and College research groups.

 Second level of review (Council review)

  • The second level of review is performed by the Scientific Review Council, an ad hoc committee of the University.
  • The SRC makes recommendations on priority areas of research, research policy, and funding of particular applications.

 Core Values of NIH-UPM Scientific Review System

  • Expert Assessment
  • Impartiality
  • Fairness
  • Confidentiality
  • Integrity
  • Efficiency

Review Process

Call for Proposals

↓

Proponents submit full protocol through RGAO-GAPDU

↓

RGAO-GAPDU checks for completeness including budgetary requirements

↓

RGAO-GAPDU endorses the submissions to

Scientific Review Council (SRC) Secretariat

↓

SRC identifies appropriate SRG to review the proposal

(3 reviewers per proposal – 2 expert reviewer and 1 epidemiology/biostatistician)

↓

SRC Secretariat distributes the proposals to the appropriate

Scientific Review Group (SRG)

↓

SRG reviews the technical merit and relevance of the study

↓

SRC Secretariat summarizes the recommendations and scores

for final ranking of the SRC

↓

SRC endorses the final ranking to DED for recommending approval of the

NIH Executive Committee (NEC)

↓

NIH Executive Director endorses the approval of shortlisted protocols with ERB and IACUC (if applicable) clearance

↓

Chancellor approves the recommended research proposals