Decisions:
Summary | Description |
|---|---|
| Everyone should express preferences for reviews they'd like to take on | |
Action Items:
Summary | Description | Responsible | Due Date |
|---|---|---|---|
Create a real-time sheet of review responses (so ECSS L3s can track who has completed them) | |||
Create a preference form | |||
| Ask reviewers upon submission of their review preferences how much time it took to indicate preferences | |||
| Create a Google Calendar with relevant dates regarding Adaptive reviews and other ECSS-related tasks (e.g., dates preferences can be entered, when proposals will be ready for review, review deadline, when spreadsheet of ECSS projects will be sent to Marques for processing, etc.) | Ken Hackworth | ||
Draft e-mail to ECSS staff regarding reviews. Make it clear that the bar for reviews is not the same as it would be for NSF Send the e-mail before Ken sends out a calendar regarding when to expect the reviews in the future | |||
| Check the fields of sciences for everyone but specifically from the Indiana folks |
Notes/ Discussion items:
- Uneven load
- We need to get across the point that if you're not sitting on a NIH panel or something else, we have a very limited field to review all FOS
- High priority
- Real time results of the reviews?
- L2s/L3s will then be proactive about following up with staff.
- Tardy reviews
- Is it possible to make their review response rate a part of their understanding of their FTE allocation?
- There have been instances of people being on vacation the week of reviews
- Would we be able to add on a feature to the preference form
- Is there any big issue that we're missing
- People being qualified to review what they're assigned to review
- Specifically, in deep learning and AI
- People being qualified to review what they're assigned to review
- All the Indiana folks seem to have the wrong FOS (double check to make sure spreadsheet is pulling correctly)
- Uneven load