DEPARTMENT of HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service s1

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Public Health Service

National Institutes of Health National Institute of Allergy And Infectious Diseases Bethesda, MD 20892 {date}

TO: Members of the {panel name} Review Committee

FROM: {SRO Name, Degree}

SUBJECT: Schedule and Instructions for Review Meeting on {date of review mtg}

Thank you for agreeing to participate in a Special Emphasis Panel to evaluate the scientific and technical merit of Contract Proposals received in response to {RFP/BAA #, “Title”}. This letter provides information about review policies, procedures, schedules and deadlines, and instructions for preparing your reviews. Please pay particular attention to the “SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THIS REVIEW” below.

Review Date: {start time} on {start date} to {end date}

SRO Contact Information: {SRO Phone Number} or {SRO email address}

LIST OF ENCLOSURES: {The SRO should tailor this list; these are only typical examples!}

 Meeting Fact Sheet  Assignment List (Note: ALL reviewers will critique ALL Proposals)  Meeting Tentative Agenda  Meeting Tentative Roster  A Proposal Scoring Scale  Special Review Guidelines {if applicable}  Technical Evaluation Score Sheets (TESS’s) for each Proposal  “Instructions for Reviewers” containing the funding opportunity announcement {RFP/BAA number} and security awareness guidelines.  CD-ROM with proposal pdf files and TESS critique templates for each proposal  Hard copies of assigned Proposals {insert if applicable: and Appendix materials}  Pre-review and Post-review Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Certification w/ FedEx reply envelope for completion, your original signature, and return after the meeting ends

{SRO name}, {SRO mailing address}, {SRO phone}, {SRO email} 1 FOR YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION:

Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Certification: You have previously received conflict of interest information related to the enclosed proposal{s} and returned to me a signed "Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Certification” form for this review. Contact me immediately if, as you read the review materials, you discover a potential conflict of interest that is not already noted on your certification form, since that could jeopardize the validity of the entire review. Please note that you must keep all review materials and review proceedings strictly confidential.

Review Assignments and Scoring: Please check the enclosed Assignment List for your review assignments, and call me at once if you have any questions. All assigned reviewers must prepare a detailed written critique following the format specified in the “Instructions for Reviewers” manual. For each Proposal, there is a Technical Evaluation Score Sheet (TESS) that lists the set of Technical Evaluation Criteria pre-weighted in point values. Under each criterion of the TESS form, describe clearly and concisely the main strengths and weaknesses listed from most to least important in bullet point format. Focus on your particular areas of expertise, and tentatively give a numerical score within the point range for that criterion. These critiques will be submitted electronically prior to the review meeting (see below). IMPORTANT NOTE: During the meeting, ALL reviewers - assigned and unassigned - will complete a TESS for each proposal that indicates key strengths and weaknesses as the discussions proceed. Your final score for each proposal will be computed as the sum of all the Technical Evaluation Criteria. We realize that one reviewer’s expertise may not extend to all aspects of a given proposal, and thus the detail of your comments for any given area may vary. However, the collective expertise of the panel will provide a full assessment of the scientific and technical merits of the proposal. Reviewers must complete a TESS for ALL proposals, listing strengths and weaknesses during meeting discussions, to justify fully the score provided. It is appropriate for the same strength(s) or weakness(s) to appear on multiple TESS forms for the same proposal. It is inappropriate to score a proposal without listing its strengths and weaknesses.

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THIS REVIEW:

The SRO should determine if any of the following issues apply. Additional modules are provided in the Standard Documents. SROs should also add anything UNIQUE to this review.

Orientation teleconference: Prior to the actual review, the NIAID Scientific Review Program frequently schedules a teleconference to assist reviewers in preparation of their critiques. We will hold two pre-meeting orientation teleconferences, one on Month Day and one on Month Day. We have already sent e-mails regarding these teleconferences. Please mark your calendar.

OTHER IMPORTANT INFORMATION:

Reviewer Reimbursement: The NIH “Internet Assisted Review” (IAR) website, which is accessed through the NIH eRA Commons, will be used only to register for reimbursement. If you are new to the system, instructions on how to create your account will be sent shortly. This is a one-time process. Please create your account as soon as possible, because it may take 3-5 business days to set up. The IAR website provides a link to the Secure Payee Reimbursement System (SPRS), a secure registration process for reviewers to receive reimbursement and honoraria for their participation in NIH peer review meetings. For step by step registration instructions see page X of the “Instructions for Reviewers” or the following web link: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/peer/guidelines_general/SPRS_Reviewer_Instructions_for_payment.pdf.

NOTE: IAR is only designed for the review of GRANT applications and not for the CONTRACT proposals that will be evaluated in this review. You will use it here only to register for

{SRO name}, {SRO mailing address}, {SRO phone}, {SRO email} 2 reimbursement. This system automatically generates e-mails specific for the review of GRANT applications. Please ignore these system generated e-mails.

There is an IAR assistance page for reviewers at http://commons.era.nih.gov/commons-help (scroll down) and at Electronic Research Administration (eRA) HELPDESK; 866-504-9552 or 301-402- 7469; [email protected]

Electronic Review (ER): IAR is not designed for the review of CONTRACT proposals. Therefore, this review will use the NIAID “Electronic Review” (ER) website to submit critiques. I will e-mail you an individual login name and password for use in posting and viewing critiques. For details see page X of the “Instructions for Reviewers” or the following web link: http://era.niaid.nih.gov/era/review.

CRITIQUE SUBMISSION: We ask that you submit your critiques electronically to the Web site by [INSERT TIME] Eastern Time on [INSERT DATE]. When you have submitted your critique, you will then be able to see the critiques of others after the [INSERT SAME DATE] deadline. This will allow you to consider what other reviewers have written before the meeting, to help you prepare for a fruitful discussion of the issues.

Electronic Review HELPDESK 301-435-8451; [email protected]

What to bring to the review: Please bring your set of proposals and at least one copy of each of your critiques with you for reference at the review meeting. Please also bring your laptop computer to access and electronically sign the conflict of interest forms via the Internet Assisted Review website.

Honorarium: Non-Federal reviewers will receive an honorarium of $200 USD for each day of your teleconference review participation.

Confidentiality: As the Scientific Review Officer and the official Government representative for this review meeting, I am responsible for managing the review and for providing information on NIH and NIAID contract review practices and policies. No unpublished information or ideas in the proposals, nor information about the review proceedings themselves, may be shared or discussed with anyone outside the membership of the review panel or involved Government staff. You must not discuss the contents of the proposals with any of the investigators or other participants involved in the proposals. Also, you should not communicate with any of the other reviewers about their reviews prior to the review meeting. IN ADDITION, please see “Protecting the Security of Grant Applications” on page X of the “Instructions for Reviewers”.

If you have any questions, or if you find that items are missing from the proposals or from your package, please contact me right away. You may also contact my assistant for this review listed below.

Thank you again for participating in this important review meeting.

{SRO name, degree} {SRO branch/unit} {SRO IC} {SRO phone} {SRO fax} {SRO email}

{SRO name}, {SRO mailing address}, {SRO phone}, {SRO email} 3 Assistant: {DEAS staff name} {DEAS staff phone number} {DEAS staff fax} {DEAS staff email}.

{SRO name}, {SRO mailing address}, {SRO phone}, {SRO email} 4