NCCOS | NCCOS Reviews

NCCOS Reviews

NCCOS scientists prepare for sediment collection. The need for sampling missions like this was
brought into sharp focus when NOAA and other Federal agencies scrambled to characterize
contamination levels of water and land before Deepwater Horizon oil reached Gulf of Mexico
shorelines. — NCCOS scientists prepare for sediment collection. The need for sampling missions like this was brought into sharp focus when NOAA and other Federal agencies scrambled to characterize contamination levels of water and land before Deepwater Horizon oil reached Gulf of Mexico shorelines.

Peer review is a long–established mechanism for ensuring quality scientific research. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and other federal agencies that support extramural scientific work routinely use standardized peer review processes to evaluate external research proposals and ensure high quality standards.

It is appropriate that the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), as a significant NOAA/National Ocean Service science arm supporting both extra– and intramural research, establish similar quality control procedures for the research, monitoring, assessment and related activities it conducts internally. In addition, according to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB, 2004), "A wide variety of authorities have argued that peer review practices at federal agencies need to be strengthened."

Proposal to establish systematic processesfor regular peer review of NCCOS’s intramural research (2006)
Point paperfor this proposal

The purpose of this plan is to ensure that NCCOS scientists are conducting high quality investigations of significant value to NOAA and the nation, and to demonstrate that quality to interested parties through independent, objective review.

Program Reviews

2007 Invasive Species Program Review Final Report: A Synthesis of Reviewer Comments and Recommendations
- Invasive Species Program Review Briefing Book
- NCCOS Response to the Final Report
The External Review of NOAA’s Ecosystem Research and Science Enterprise – A Report to the NOAA Science Advisory Board: Evolving an Ecosystem Approach to Science and Management Throughout NOAA and its Partners (2006)
- External Ecosystem Research Review Team Transmittal letter from the Chair of the SAB to NOAA
- NOAA Response to the Final Reportof the External Review of NOAA’s Ecosystem Research and Science Enterprise
Report of the External Review Panelfor the Bottlenose Dolphin Health and Risk Assessment (HERA) Project, 2006
NOAA’s National Status & Trends Program Mussel Watch Project Review: Phase II(2005)
In 2005, the Ecosystem Research Program (ERP), to which NCCOS is a major contributor, was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). OMB’s Performance Assessment Rating Tool (PART) identifies program strengths and weaknesses to inform funding and management decisions aimed at increasing program effectiveness. ERP’s performance earned the rating Adequate.
Mussel Watch ReviewReport, 2004
2004: Second Coral Reef Program Review Meeting
National Status and Trends Review, 1994
National Status and Trends Review, 1990
- National Status and Trends Review Response, 1990

Center Reviews

Hollings Marine Laboratory Futures RetreatJune 2008 Briefing Book
A 2008 assessmentof CCFHR’s scientific quality and relevance to NOAA’s management mission during the period FY 2004–2008.
- A synthesis of reviewer comments
2002: CCEHBR Science Review Panel 2002: Summary
Internal Assessment
Final report

Management Reviews

2009 Management Control ReviewGrant Processes of NCCOS/CSCOR Response and Corrective Action Plan
NCCOS Environmental Management System External Audit Report 2008
- NCCOS’s response to the External Audit