Please note that the review panel is not an advisory committee Therefore, the objective is not to come to a consensus regarding the Division's program, rather, the report should represent a summation of individual critiques, opinions, and viewpoints OVERALL GOAL The primary goal is to conduct a scientific peer review of the Reproductive Toxicology Division to provide the Laboratory and Divisional senior management with guidance for the planning and implementation of research and the allocation of resources over the next five years.
The review shall be conducted to evaluate 1 the nature and quality of the science within the Division, and 2 the impact of the Division's science on Agency needs and problems. Each of these two dimensions should be assessed relative to the research, advisory, and leadership roles of the Laboratory. Specific questions relative to these roles are outlined on page 6. If you cannot, we will have laptops available. We prefer you to use WordPerfect 9, but we have converters for other programs.
The proposed writing assignments may be found in the notebook If you have objections to or concerns about these proposed assignments, we will be happy to discuss them and try to accommodate your needs. Specified assignments do not preclude reviewers from evaluating other research areas, in fact, such efforts are encouraged, especially when disciplines cross research areas.
A hard copy of your initial critiques should be given to the Peer Review Coordinator during the Executive Session on October 21 Copies of these critiques will be distributed to all panel members for discussion during the site visit. Executive Summary Dr. Holson Critical Windows Dr. Terranova Receptor-mediated Toxicity Hines Chlorotnazmes Dr. Eldridge EDCs Dr.
Stocco Susceptibility Dr. Mattison The critiques should provide an analysis of 1 the Division's research i. Significant accomplishments, strengths, and weaknesses should be highlighted.
