Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Section <br /> <br />1. <br /> <br />II. <br /> <br />III. <br /> <br />IV. <br /> <br />v. <br /> <br />VI. <br /> <br />Table of contents <br /> <br />I22!& <br /> <br />Paoe <br /> <br />EXECUTIVE SUMMARY <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />INTRODUCTION <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />METHODS . . . <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />Format for Conducting the Review 4 <br /> <br />Primary Goal of Present Studies that were Reviewed. 5 <br /> <br />Objectivee of the Peer Review 5 <br /> <br />Deliverable 5 <br /> <br />RESULTS AND DISCUSSION <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />Topic of Review Too Broad <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />Documentation for Peer Review Not Adequate <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />Perception of Individual Studies . . . . . <br /> <br />6 <br /> <br />Syntheses of Available Information Lacking <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br />RECOMMENDATIONS <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />1. <br /> <br />Lack of An OVerall Strategic plan <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />2. <br /> <br />content of Research Proposals and <br />Annual Reports. . . . <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />A. <br /> <br />Research Projects. <br /> <br />9 <br /> <br />B. <br /> <br />Annual Reports . . <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />3. <br /> <br />Summary of Biological Information. <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />4. <br /> <br />Integration of Available Information <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br />5; <br /> <br />Identification of Research Gaps <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br />6. <br /> <br />Considerations for Future Peer Reviews <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br />A. <br /> <br />Examples of the Peer Review Process <br />by Several Agencies . . . . . . . <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br />B. <br /> <br />Recommended Pear Review Process for <br />the Upper Colorado River Basin <br />Recovery Program <br /> <br />13 <br /> <br />REFERENCES <br /> <br />. .. . . . . .. . .. <br /> <br />15 <br />