Cycle 5 Chair Pundit Questionaire

1
Cycle 5 ChairPundit Questionaire

• Circulation 15 people (12 chairs, 3 pundits)
• Responses 8 (7 chairs, 1 pundit)
• In your opinion (somewhat speculative given that
  the observations have yet to be made), is the
  Cycle 5 allocation between normal, LP, and VLP
  likely to produce science at the high levels
  expected from Chandra? Was the time allocated
  between normal, LP, and VLP proposals
  appropriate? If not, what should the allocation
  be?
• 8 balance good for Cycle 5
• Comment panel had freedom to move time between
  LP and VLP and voted not to do so
• Recommend review, using metrics, in Cycle 7
• Recommend monitor science balance of VLPs

2
Cycle 5 ChairPundit Questionaire (cont)

• With respect to your panel, was the quality of
  the lower-ranking approved LP or VLP proposals
  (those just above the pass/fail line) higher or,
  at least as high, as the highest-ranking, but
  unapproved, normal proposals (those just below
  the pass/fail line)?
• 7 approved VLP/LP higher quality than just
  failing GO, 1 disagreed
• 2 said opposite failing LP was of higher quality
  than passing GO
• Agreed that standards should be higher for LP/VLP
  given large time allocation

3
Cycle 5 ChairPundit Questionaire (cont)

• In your opinion, was there a significant
  difference (other than observing time) in the
  nature of the LP and VLP programs? For example,
  did the VLP proposals address science questions
  that would not have been addressed properly
  otherwise or, was the nature of the approved
  programs different in some way, such as the VLP
  being more of an archive or "Legacy" nature than
  the LPs.
• 5 Y, 2 N , general feeling that Legacy value is
  higher and that proposals which were similar but
  longer than GOs did not fare as well.

4
Cycle 5 ChairPundit Questionaire (cont)

• Do you have any recommendations regarding the
  peer review process for consideration in planning
  future cycles?
• Generally happy with organisation
• Big Project Panel
• more pre-defined structure for BPP, work w/chair
  in advance
• Allow time to read highly ranked LP/VLP, add 1
  day?!
• Mandate proper presentation of highly ranked
  proposals
• Topical panels
• circulation of panel member names lt review
• List of proposals by secondary and primary
  reviewer
• LAN in panel rooms
• Projector for spreadsheet
• Pre-plan discussion order within panels
• Telecon is hard
• Specific allocation for high-risk proposals

5
Changes in Cycle 6

• Operations/observation planning
• Pitch angle restrictions impact on time
  constrained observations gt 50 ksecs
• Ability to link archive and observing proposals
• Bakeout see later in agenda
• Peer Review planning
• Website
• track reviewer status, travel address
  information
• personalized access to proposals, reports etc
• access to Non-disclosure forms, review
  information
• Proposal distribution CD and/or hardcopy, to be
  collected at review
• Reports TBD, we hope to move away from diskettes

6
IIR OBSERVATION (1)

• CONTROL OF OBSERVERS PROPOSAL INFORMATION
• Proper measures may not have been taken to fully
  protect and control information provided in the
  investigators proposals.
• Current review process could allow inappropriate
  dissemination of sensitive information (e.g.,
  salaries, intellectual capital).
• Cycle 5 review did not verify collection/disposal
  of proposer CDs
• Requirement for individual salary data is concern
  of proposers
• RECOMMENDATION
• Investigate additional controls to reduce the
  possibility of inappropriate dissemination of
  sensitive data, including minimizing proposal
  distribution, verification of proper disposal of
  proposal data, and elimination or masking of
  individual salary information.

7
Response to IIR Observation

• CXC will review procedures and controls for
  safeguarding sensitive information, areas to be
  considered include
• Completeness of procedures for safeguarding
  proprietary information
• Increased training for all involved in peer
  review
• Earlier collection of non-disclosure forms
• Minimize number of people with access
• Restricting transfer of electronic files
• Verifying destruction of hardcopies and CDs
• Methods for investigating misuse of information
• Budget reviewers need for information
• Physical security
• Timescale completed to support Cycle 6 review

8
CXC User Communication

• Website information, documentation, software
  etc.
• Helpdesk search, submission, answer questions
• USINT observation planning
• Electronic Bulletins and Announcements as
  needed, approximately monthly
• Newsletter annual (electronic and hardcopy)
• AAS Exhibit twice a year
• Workshops
• CIAO 5 to date, 25 people per workshop
• Calibration annual since 2001
• Electronic announcements of data readiness

9
Helpdesk Statistics
Month Ticket Activity During Month Ticket Activity During Month Ticket Activity During Month Ticket Status as of End of Month Ticket Status as of End of Month Ticket Status as of End of Month
Entered Closed Net Change in Month Active Deferred Total
October 02 41 42 -1 6 5 11
November 02 64 63 1 9 3 12
December 02 46 42 4 15 1 16
January 03 59 59 0 15 1 16
February 03 61 67 -6 7 3 10
March 03 366 359 7 15 2 17
April 03 45 50 -5 10 2 12
May 03 52 53 -1 10 1 11
June 03 44 31 13 21 3 24
July 03 50 40 10 31 3 34
August 03 83 98 -15 15 4 19
September 03 44 49 -5 9 5 14
10
Topic Distribution of Helpdesk Tickets
11
Observation Planning USINT

• Procedures posted on web page
• All Observers/PIs are contacted to confirm
  observational parameters
• Allowed changes are made at CXC and confirmed
  with Observer/PI
• Restricted changes (e.g. instrument, coordinates,
  constraints) must be justified and approved by
  CDO. CDO review includes check for conflicts with
  other programs

12
Cost Review Results (FDS)

• ----------------------------------------------
  --------budget request no. of budget
  approved/fair-share proposals f-s
  intermediate as-requested--------------
  --------- ----- ------------
  ------------0.00 60.50-0.95 7
  - - 70.95-1.05 143 - - 1431.06-1.15 161.1
  6-1.30 11 2 2 71.31-1.60 10 1.61-2.10 7
  1 6 -2.11-3.50 2