User Programs
Committee on Visitors,
Appeals Process,
Unified Access & Feedback
Committee on Visitors
• Internal reviews provides – fast turnaround,
flexibility, ability rapidly respond to new
science, flexibly dovetail user requests with
MagLab timing and upgrades.
• Opens conflict of interest questions…
• Proposed Committee on Visitors to address
this issue (based on reviews of NSF panel
process)
Committee on Visitors (2)
• Drawn from users and non-users
• Non-users preferentially from other user communities
• Meet once during a 5 yr funding period
• Committee will review processes and assess
appropriateness for fairness and transparency.
• Committee will examine both successful and
unsuccessful proposals and assess fairness of magnet
time assignments.
• Report findings in open document to MagLab
management
Appeals Process
• A scientist who is denied magnet time has the
right to appeal the decision.
• The Magnet Time Appeals Committee is
comprised of the Director of the NHMFL, the
Chair of the NHMFL User Committee (or his/her
designee) and one additional member of the
NHMFL User Committee who is an ad hoc
selection, based upon his/her knowledge of the
science in the unsuccessful proposal under
appeal.
Appeals Process
• The appeals committee will review the unsuccessful
proposal in the context of competing proposals, both
accepted and rejected, as well as the total amount of
magnet time distributed to users in the relevant user
program(s).
• The appeals committee will report its decision to the
appealing scientist and the relevant User Program
Head(s).
• A summary of the appeal and decision will be made at
the next NHMFL Users Committee meeting.
Appeals Process
• The appeals committee has wide latitude in its datacollection and decision-making.
• It can endorse the denial of magnet time, direct that
magnet time be granted as a high priority at the
earliest possible date (potentially displacing a lower
priority user), or direct that the proposal receive
magnet time in the next allocation of magnet time.
• If the appeals committee overturns a denial of magnet
time, it will explicitly consider whether to provide
feedback to the relevant User Program Head(s) to
address any perceived bias in assigning magnet time.
Feedback
• DC Fields emails PI asking for feedback from
each group the week after their magnet time
• Other user programs get feedback informally
• Feedback will a more formal part of all the
user programs
Feedback only useful if the gain is high enough!
Proposal: Approaching Unified User Access
and Reporting
All NHMFL users
enter the system
through the same
web portal
All users submit a
project summary and
provide demographic
data
Common reporting,
user feedback and
surveys, and
publication records
The project proposal
sent to the appropriate
program
Each user facility will
review, rank,
schedule and manage
its own time
according to
established protocols.