E Library SPD 01APeerReviewConflicts of Interest

SCIENCE MISSION DIRECTORATE POLICY

HANDLING CONFLICTS-OF-INTEREST FOR PEER REVIEWS

SMD POLICY DOCUMENT 01 REV A (SPD-01A)

Original Version: Only peer review panels
Approved by Mary L. Cleave, AA for SMD, on January 3, 2006 Version A: Addition of non-panel (mail-in) reviewers
Approved by Mary L. Cleave, AA for SMD, on February 28, 2007 Responsible SMD Official: Chief Scientist
All peer reviews managed by the Science Mission Directorate will be conducted in compliance with the following policies regarding the handling of conflicts-of-interest for peer reviewers.
NASA may conduct peer review panel meetings for the purpose of developing consensus evaluations. Reviewers who serve on a peer review panel are termed panel reviewers. NASA may also solicit proposal reviews from individuals who will not attend the peer review panel meeting; these reviewers are termed non-panel or mail-in reviewers. Nonpanel reviewers are referred to as individual reviewers in the Guidebook for Proposers Responding to a NASA Research Announcement, Section C.3. Peer reviewers, as referred to in this document, include both panel reviewers and nonpanel reviewers. Section 1. Guiding Principles
(a) All peer reviewers must possess appropriate technical expertise to provide knowledgeable expert reviews. The issues of conflict-of-interest and confidentiality are of critical importance to ensure the fairness and credibility of the peer review process. All NASA personnel and all reviewers of NASA proposals are directed to avoid not only actual but also any apparent conflicts-of-interest and to maintain confidentiality about all activities involved in the review process. (b) The presiding NASA Program Officer is responsible for assuring that the results of the review are objective and have no elements of bias.
(c) Review organizers shall make every effort to prevent peer reviewers from being exposed to a proposal with which a conflict-of-interest is known to exist. (d) Generally, peer reviewers have potential non-statutory or “scientific ethics” conflicts– of-interest if they are associated with a proposing institution and/or are participating in a proposal under evaluation. Reviewers who are Federal employees or IPA’s are also subject to statutory conflict-of-interest restrictions under criminal statute codified at 18 USC §208 and Office of Government Ethics (OGE) guidelines.

(e) In accordance with the Proposal Peer Review Non-Disclosure Agreement and Conflict of Interest Avoidance Statement, which NASA Science Management policy