The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine: Science, Governance, and the Pursuit of Cures by Committee on a Review of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine

Author:Committee on a Review of the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: ebook, book
Publisher: The National Academies Press
Published: 2014-07-30T00:00:00+00:00

Development and approval of RFAs—CIRM scientific staff, with input from the Scientific Advisory Board, should develop RFAs. The ICOC should provide final approval and funding amounts for each RFA.

Composition of the Grants Working Group—To ensure separation of oversight and operations, the ICOC board chair should not be a member of the Grants Working Group. Similarly, patient advocates participating in the Grants Working Group should not be ICOC board members.

Reordering of rankings by CIRM staff—After the Grants Working Group has completed its rankings, the CIRM scientific staff, under the direction of the senior vice president for research and development, should examine those rankings and determine whether, for programmatic reasons, proposals need to be reordered. If so, the senior vice president for research and development should meet with the CIRM executive leadership to adjust the rank order of applications; any reordering should be accompanied by an explanation. The CIRM president should then create a final slate of applications recommended for funding.

Notification of applicants—Once the proposed final slate has been determined, applicants should be notified of their scores, given copies of the critiques, and notified of the likelihood that they will be funded. Applicants should then have a 10-day period during which they can inform the CIRM scientific staff if they believe factual errors in the reviews may have impacted their score and wish to appeal the decision.

Final decisions—The senior vice president for research and development and the president should then decide on a final slate of proposals to submit to the ICOC for a “yes” or “no” vote on the entire slate. The ICOC should not be empowered to evaluate individual applications or move applications from one tier to another. This process would also eliminate the use of extraordinary petitions.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.