From: Sinnett, Everett (CSR)
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 11:53 AM
To: Review Users Group
Cc: Benfer, Claire (OD); Blizard, Colleen
Subject: "VA form"
With Eileen's permission, I am asking for some feedback on a proposal I would like to bring to the Committee Management Users Group on 1/9:
During discussion of suggestions from review staff for the new Committee Management module at the 12/12 CMUG meeting, the concept of flagging reviewers who need the "VA form" arose. While the reaction of the group was mixed, the idea had not been fully fleshed out, nor had opinions been sought from other review staff beforehand. Thus, this message is to lay out the concept and seek guidance as to whether or not it should be pursued.
Background: The broader idea is to simplify the process of entering names on a roster by having a limited selection of reviewer types and then defaulting all of the fields related to scientific/public, fed status, travel, etc. With that in mind, it seems that study section members generally fall into a limited number of types: regular, temporary, mail, and SEP are the ones used most commonly. Beyond that, when it comes to travel and honoraria, there are only three categories: full time university/business, part time university/part time VA, and full time Feds. (This is slightly simplified, but will serve for discussion.) Those in the second category require that the reviewer sign a certification to the effect that the reviewer attended the meeting under their university appointment in order to travel on SREA funds and receive an honorarium.
Problems: At the moment, there is no way to designate such reviewers in IMPAC II. Further, the necessary form is not in the system and must be copied and filled out individually, even though most of the information is in the database.
Suggestions:
1. A new field (or at least a checkbox) is needed to designate such reviewers. Logically, it should reside in the Committee Management module, but if a shared roster generation module is to part of the system, it should be there.
2. The attached form should be included in the system as a report. Logically, it should be clustered with the conflict forms and other reports used in mailing in the Review Module. The attached form was designed for CSR but could easily be adapted for any IC and should default appropriately based on the users logon. Fields that should print out include:
Reviewer Name (first, middle, last)
SRG
Date of meeting
University (from Employment field or IPF lookup if that concept becomes part of CM)
Let me know what you think.
Ev Sinnett
Everett E. Sinnett, Ph.D.
Scientific Review Administrator
Respiratory Physiology Study Section
Phone: (301) 435-1016
Fax: (301) 480-1171
E-MAIL ADDRESS:
or
NEW MAILING ADDRESS (Study Section name change)
CSR RESP
Room 2178, MSC 7818
6701 ROCKLEDGE DR
BETHESDA MD 20892-7818
(for courrier, use 20817)