Home / scientific / epa board of scientific counselors Epa Board Of Scientific Counselors 07/08/2021 Chapter: Appendix F: Draft Board of Scientific Counselors Handbook for Subcommittee Chairs: Draft Proposed Charge Questions for BOSC Reviews You watching: Epa board of scientific counselors Unfortunately, this book can"t be printed from the OpenBook. If you should print pperiods from this book, we recommend downloading it as a PDF. Visit kaupunkiopas.com/10766 to acquire even more information about this book, to buy it in print, or to download it as a complimentary PDF. Suggested Citation:"Appendix F: Draft Board of Scientific Counselors Handbook for Subcommittee Chairs: Draft Proposed Charge Questions for BOSC Reviews." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing Research Efficiency in the UNITED STATE Environpsychological Protection Agency. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12150. See more: Tenafly Nature Center Camp S, For Campers (School Break & Summer) Suggested Citation:"Appendix F: Draft Board of Scientific Counselors Handbook for Subcommittee Chairs: Draft Proposed Charge Questions for BOSC Reviews." National Research Council. 2008. Assessing Research Efficiency in the UNITED STATE Environmental Protection Agency. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12150. Suggested Citation:"Appendix F: Draft Board of Scientific Counselors Handbook for Subcommittee Chairs: Draft Proposed Charge Questions for BOSC Reviews." National Research Council. 2008. Examining Research Efficiency in the UNITED STATE Environpsychological Protection Agency. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12150. Below is the uncorrected machine-review text of this chapter, intended to administer our own search engines and also external engines via extremely wealthy, chapter-representative searchable message of each book. Since it is UNCORRECTED material, please take into consideration the complying with message as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pperiods. Appendix F Draft Board of Scientific Counselors Handbook for Subcommittee Chairs: Draft Proposed Charge Questions for BOSC Reviews1 PROGRAM ASSESSMENT (EVALUATE ENTIRE RESEARCH PROGRAM) The responses to the routine assessment charge questions below will bein a narrative format, and will certainly capture the performance for the whole researchregimen and all the activities in support of the programâs Long Term Goals(LTGs). The Long term Goals have to be regular with EPAâs Strategic Planand also mutually agreed upon by ORD and also OMB. Program Relevance 1. How consistent are the Long Term Goals (LTGs) of the regimen withachieving the Agencyâs strategic arrangement and also ORDâs Multi-Year Plan? 2. How responsive is the regimen focus to program office and also neighborhood re-search needs? 3. How responsive is the regimen to references from exterior advi-sory boards and stakeholders? 4. How plainly noticeable are the public benefits of the program? Program Structure 1. How clear a logical structure perform the LTGs carry out for arranging andplanning the research study and also demonstrating outcomes of the program? 1 EPA 2007. 109 110 Evaluating Research Efficiency in EPA 2. How proper is the science used to achieve each LTG, i.e., is theprogram still asking the best inquiries, or has actually it been eclipsed by advancementsin the field? 3. Does the MYP define an correct flow of occupational (i.e., the sequenc-ing of connected activities) that reasonably shows the anticipated pace of scientificprogress and also timing of client needs? 4. Does the regimen use the MYP to assist overview and also regulate its research? 5. How logical is the regimen style, via plainly determined priorities? Program Performance 1. How a lot development is the regimen making on each LTG based onclearly proclaimed and also appropriate milestones? Program Quality 1. How excellent is the clinical quality of the programâs study products? 2. What means does the routine employ to ensure quality research study (in-cluding peer evaluation, competitive capital, etc.? 3. How efficient are these processes? Scientific Leadership 1. Please discuss the management role the research study regime and also itsstaff have actually in contributing to progressing the current state of the scientific research and solv-ing essential research study problems. Coordicountry and also Communication 1. How effectively does the regimen communicate researchers and also supervisors fromORD and appropriate program workplaces in its planning? 2. How successfully does the regime connect external establishments, bothwithin and also exterior federal government, to promote participation, achieve input on pro-gram purposes and also research study, and avoid duplication of effort? 3. How reliable are the mechanisms that the routine offers for communi-cating research results both internally and also externally? Outcomes 1. How well-identified are the programâs actions of outcomes? 2. How much are the regime results being offered by environmental deci-sion devices to increate decisions and accomplish results? Appendix F 111 SUMMARY ASSESSMENT (RATE PROGRAM PERFORMANCE BY LTG) The responses to the 3 summary assessment charge questions belowwill rate the performance for each LTG. For each LTG, a qualitative score willbe assigned that reflects the high quality and definition of the study also asthe degree to which the program is meeting or making measurable development to-ward the goalâloved one to the information and also proof provided to the BOSC.The scores will be given in the form of adjectives that are plainly characterized andwhich are intended to promote consistency among reviews. The adjectives willbe provided as component of a narrative summary of the evaluation of each LTG so that theconmessage of the rating and also the rationale for picking a certain rating will betransparent. The rating may reflect considerations past the summary assess-ment questions, and also will be defined in the narrative. The adjectives to describedevelopment are: â¢ Exceptional: indicates that the regimen is meeting all and also exceedingsome of its goals, both in the top quality of the science being produced and also thespeed at which research result tools and also approaches are being produced. An excep-tional rating also suggests that the program is addressing the ideal concerns toattain its goals. The review need to be particular as to which elements of the pro-gramâs performance have been impressive. â¢ Exceeds Expectations: suggests that the routine is meeting every one of itsobjectives. It addresses the appropriate clinical inquiries to accomplish its goals and also thescientific research is experienced or better. It exceeds expectations for either the high qualityof the scientific research or for the rate at which work-related commodities are being created andlandmarks met. â¢ Meets Expectations: indicates that the routine is meeting many of itsgoals. Satisfactory programs live as much as expectations in terms of addressing theappropriate scientific inquiries to accomplish its goals, and also that occupational assets arebeing created and also turning points are being reached in a timely manner. The qual-ity of the science being done is proficient or much better. â¢ Not Satisfactory: shows that the program is failing to meet a substan-tial fractivity of its purposes, or if meeting them, that the success of milestonesis substantially delayed, or that the questions being addressed are ikaupunkiopas.compropriateor inadequate to satisfy the intended function. Questionable scientific research is likewise a rea-son for rating a regimen as unsatisfactory for a certain long term goal. Thereview should be certain regarding which elements of a programâs performance havebeen inadequate. For each regimen testimonial, the summary assessment charge questions be-low will be tailored to the particular evaluation and LTG: 112 Analyzing Research Efficiency in EPA 1. How appropriate is the scientific research used to achieve each LTG, i.e., is theroutine still asking the ideal concerns, or has actually it been eclipsed by advancementsin the field? 2. How excellent is the clinical high quality of the programâs study products? 3. How much are the routine outcomes being used by eco-friendly deci-sion machines to increate decisions and also achieve results? REFERENCESEPA (UNITED STATE Environpsychological Protection Agency). 2007. Draft Board of Scientific Counsel- ors Handbook for Subcommittee Chairs. Board of Scientific Counselors, UNITED STATE En- vironmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.