Advanced Search

Rule §703.6 Grants Review Process


Published: 2015

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now for only USD$40 per month.
    (D) The Product Development Review Council assigns
a Numerical Ranking Score to each Grant Application recommended for
a Grant Award.
(f) Institute Employees may attend Peer Review Panel
and Review Council meetings. If an Institute Employee attends a Peer
Review Panel meeting or a Review Council meeting, the Institute Employee's
attendance shall be recorded and the Institute Employee shall certify
in writing that the Institute Employee complied with the Institute's
Conflict of Interest rules. The Institute Employee's attendance at
the Peer Review Panel meeting or Review Council meeting is subject
to the following restrictions:
  (1) Unless waived pursuant to the process described
in Chapter 702, §702.17 of this title (relating to Exceptional
Circumstances Requiring Participation), the Institute Employee shall
not be present for any discussion, vote, or other action taken related
to a Grant Applicant if the Institute Employee has a Conflict of Interest
with that Grant Applicant; and
  (2) The Institute Employee shall not participate in
a discussion of the merits, vote, or other action taken related to
a Grant Application, except to answer technical or administrative
questions unrelated to the merits of the Grant Application and to
provide input on the Institute's Grant Review Process.
(g) The Institute's Chief Compliance Officer shall
observe meetings of the Peer Review Panel and Review Council where
Grant Applications are discussed.
  (1) The Chief Compliance Officer shall document that
the Institute's Grant Review Process is consistently followed, including
observance of the Institute's established Conflict of Interest rules
and that participation by Institute employees, if any, is limited
to providing input on the Institute's Grant Review Process and responding
to committee questions unrelated to the merits of the Grant Application.
Institute Program staff shall not participate in a discussion of the
merits, vote, or any other action taken related to a Grant Application.
  (2) The Chief Compliance Officer shall report to the
Oversight Committee prior to a vote on the award recommendations specifying
issues, if any, that are inconsistent with the Institute's established
Grant Review Process.
  (3) Nothing herein shall prevent the Institute from
contracting with an independent third party to serve as a neutral
observer of meetings of the Peer Review Panel and/or the Review Council
where Grant Applications are discussed and to assume the reporting
responsibilities of the Chief Compliance Officer described in this
subsection. In the event that the independent third party observes
the meeting of the Peer Review Panel and/or the Review Council, then
the independent third party reviewer shall issue a report to the Chief
Compliance Officer specifying issues, if any, that are inconsistent
with the Institute's established Grant Review Process.
(h) Excepting a finding of an undisclosed Conflict
of Interest as set forth in §703.9 of this chapter (relating
to Limitation on Review of Grant Process), the Review Council's decision
to not include a Grant Application on the prioritized list of Grant
Applications submitted to the Program Integration Committee and the
Oversight Committee is final. A Grant Application not included on
the prioritized list created by the Review Council shall not be considered
further during the Grant Review Cycle.
(i) At the time that the Peer Review Panel or the
Review Council concludes its tasks for the Grant Review Cycle, each
member shall certify in writing that the member complied with the
Institute's Conflict of Interest rules.
(j) The Institute shall retain a review record for
a Grant Application submitted to the Institute, even if the Grant
Application did not receive a Grant Award. Such records will be retained
by the Institute's electronic Grant Management System. The records
retained by the Institute must include the following information:
  (1) The final Overall Evaluation Score and Numerical
Ranking Score, if applicable, assigned to the Grant Application;
  (2) The specified amount of the Grant Award funding
for the Grant Application, including an explanation for recommended
changes to the Grant Award funding amount or to the goals and objectives
or timeline;
  (3) The Scientific Research and Prevention Programs
Committee that reviewed the Grant Application;
  (4) Conflicts of Interest, if any, with the Grant
Application identified by a member of the Scientific Research and
Prevention Programs Committee, the Review Council, the Program Integration
Committee, or the Oversight Committee; and
  (5) Documentation of steps taken to recuse any member
or members from the Grant Review Process because of disclosed Conflicts
of Interest.
(k) For purposes of this rule, a Peer Review Panel
chairperson or a Review Council chairperson that is unable to carry
out his or her assigned duties due to a Conflict of Interest with
regard to one or more Grant Applications or for any other reason may
designate a co-chairperson from among the appointed Scientific Research
and Prevention Programs committee members to fulfill the chairperson
role. Such designation shall be recorded in writing and include the
specific time and extent of the designation.


Source Note: The provisions of this §703.6 adopted to be effective December 21, 2009, 34 TexReg 9213; amended to be effective March 2, 2014, 39 TexReg 1386; amended to be effective September 17, 2014, 39 TexReg 7342; amended to be effective March 11, 2015, 40 TexReg 1092