FACACLASSIC

Note: An Annual Comprehensive Review, as required by §7 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, is conducted each year on committee data entered for the previous fiscal year (referred to as the reporting year). The data for the reporting year is not considered verified until this review is complete and the data is moved to history for an agency/department. See the Data From Previous Years section at the bottom of this page for the committee’s historical, verified data.

Details on agency responses to committee recommendations can be found under the Performance Measures section for each committee in the fields “Agency Feedback” and “Agency Feedback Comment.”

VA - 2019 - Rehabilitation Research and Development Service Scientific Merit Review Board - Agency Authority

GENERAL INFORMATION

Committee Name	Rehabilitation Research and Development Service Scientific Merit Review Board	Agency Name	Department of Veterans Affairs
Fiscal Year	2025	Committee Number	2019
Original Establishment Date	5/12/1995	Committee Status	Chartered
Actual Termination Date		Committee URL
Actual Merged Date		Presidential Appointments*	No
New Committee This FY	No	Max Number of Members*	12
Terminated This FY	No	Designated Fed Officer Position Title*	Health Science Specialist
Merged This FY		Designated Federal Officer Prefix
Current Charter Date	4/11/2024	Designated Federal Officer First Name*	Kristy
Date Of Renewal Charter	4/11/2026	Designated Federal Officer Middle Name
Projected Termination Date		Designated Federal Officer Last Name*	Benton-Grover
Exempt From Renewal*	No	Designated Federal Officer Suffix
Specific Termination Authority		Designated Federal Officer Phone*	(202) 465-6537
Establishment Authority*	Agency Authority	Designated Federal Officer Fax*
Specific Establishment Authority*	38 USC 7303	Designated Federal Officer Email*	kristy.benton-grover@va.gov
Effective Date Of Authority*	8/18/1978
Exempt From EO 13875 Discretionary Cmte	Not Applicable
Committee Type*	Continuing
Presidential*	No
Committee Function*	Scientific Technical Program Advisory Board

RECOMMENDATION/JUSTIFICATIONS

Agency Recommendation*	Continue
Legislation to Terminate Required	Not Applicable
Legislation Status	Not Applicable
How does cmte accomplish its purpose?*	The purpose of the Board and its Subcommittees is to provide high quality scientific peer review of proposed projects to improve the health and health care of our Nation’s Veterans. These projects seek to develop and test interventions that have potential to enhance HIGH QUALITY AND ACCESSIBLE treatment options that are matched to the UNIQUE CLINICAL NEEDS and preferences of the Veteran; enhance VETERAN EXPERIENCES and strengthen foundational services in the VA through implementation of innovative strategies for optimal healthcare delivery; enhance community care by BUILDING AND MAINTAINING TRUST between the Veteran and their healthcare providers through proven stewardship; enhance TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY; strive for excellence of care by examining different technologies and platforms to REDUCE BARRIERS TO ACCESS; aim to reduce Veteran HOMELESSNESS AND SUICIDE RISK; and to provide job training to Veterans to SUPPORT THEIR HEALTH, WELL-BEING AND INDEPENDENCE THROUGHOUT THEIR LIFE JOURNEY. In 2024, the Board reviewed 352 proposals for scientific, programmatic and technical excellence. The Board accomplishes its work assisted by an information technology platform developed by the National Institutes of Health, utilizing ongoing system enhancements in continuous efforts TO STRIVE TOWARD EXCELLENCE IN ALL BUSINESS OPERATIONS—SYSTEMS, DATA AND MANAGEMENT. Each proposal was individually reviewed by at least three interdisciplinary Subcommittee members; a summary of discussions/recommendations and a summary statement of the assigned reviewer critiques from the Board was prepared for each proposal. Board recommendations have resulted in improved research plans and duplicate and unnecessary research was avoided. The Board advises the Under Secretary of Health, the Director of Rehabilitation Research and Development Service and the Chief Research and Development Officer, on the scientific and technical merit, mission relevance, originality, protection of animal and human subjects, especially for those at risk of suicide and feasibility of rehabilitation research proposals. The Board merit review promotes ACCOUNTABILITY by ensuring effective allocation of RR&D resources, ensuring that research selected for funding has the greatest potential to ultimately strengthen foundational services in VA and identifying areas for special oversight in funded projects. In addition, post-meeting briefings solicit important feedback for ongoing improvement of overall meeting processes. The annual comprehensive report provides TRANSPARENCY of all meeting actions and associated costs. All Board recommendations and comments were considered by the Director and only the most scientifically meritorious projects were funded. For additional details on the purpose and areas of FY2024 funding along with connections to the VA Strategic Goals, please see each Subcommittee meeting's description/purpose.
How is membership balanced?*	The Board is representative of a variety of scientific, technical and medical disciplines in the area of neurological dysfunction/spinal cord injury; restoration rehabilitation surgery; orthopedic/vascular; amputations/prosthetics/orthotics; communicative, cognitive and sensory aids; spinal cord injury; serious mental illness; behavioral and mental health; geriatric rehabilitation; outcomes studies; and dementia and aging. Among the members are biomechanical engineers, surgeons, psychiatrists, research methodologists, audiologists, speech pathologists, neurologists, psychologists, physical and occupational therapists and other experts, as well as representatives of Veteran service organizations. The points of view are reflected to provide interdisciplinary expertise needed to coincide with Rehabilitation Research and Development priority areas. Board membership is diverse in relation to their subject matter expertise and experience; military service, rank and deployments; previous experience serving as a reviewer with specific subject matter expertise in merit review processes; as well as their diversity in race/ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, disability, geographical background and employment background (VA or other Federal position and/or academia position held).
How frequent & relevant are cmte mtgs?*	The Board and its Subcommittees will meet up to two (2) times per year. In 2024, the Parent Committee (Board) met virtually via Webex platform in the late Summer and mid-Winter; Subcommittees held review meetings virtually via Webex platform in the late Summer and mid-Winter; editorial reviews (mail-in only) were held in mid-Fall and mid-Spring. The purpose of each session is to review all proposals submitted in March, June, September and December of each year. Also, there are occasions in which ad hoc reviews are held at different times in response to special solicitations. Members provide technical assistance on other issues, such as preparation and review of five (5)-year plans, participation in review site visits and review of small (pilot) projects.
Why advice can't be obtained elsewhere?*	Submitted proposals are of a highly scientific and technical nature and involve the application of medical research to rehabilitation. Board members are experts in their respective fields and are currently involved in state-of-the-art research in rehabilitation. Staff does not have the highly technical, scientific and collective interdisciplinary knowledge required to evaluate and make decisions as to the scientific and technical validity of these projects.
Why close or partially close meetings?	The Parent Committee (Board) meetings are partially closed because of the confidential nature of the Subcommittee recommendations being considered and the integrity of the peer review process. Subcommittee meetings are closed due to the integrity of the peer review process and the highly confidential discussion of information proprietary to the scientific investigators and the research proposed in their award applications; the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Additionally, premature disclosure of research information could significantly obstruct implementation of proposed agency action regarding the research proposals. Scientific proposals contain research ideas original to the scientific investigators/applicants and do not become public until publication of study outcomes in scientific journals.
Recommendation Remarks	In 2024, Federal Staff Support Years remained at the same level as 2023.

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Outcome Improvement To Health Or Safety*	Yes	Action Reorganize Priorities*	No
Outcome Trust In Government	No	Action Reallocate Resources	Yes
Outcome Major Policy Changes	No	Action Issued New Regulations	No
Outcome Advance In Scientific Research	Yes	Action Proposed Legislation	No
Outcome Effective Grant Making	No	Action Approved Grants Or Other Payments	No
Outcome Improved Service Delivery	Yes	Action Other	No
Outcome Increased Customer Satisfaction	No	Action Comment	This process encourages increased collaboration and communication with other experts engaged in similar research efforts.
Outcome Implement Laws/Reg Requirements	No	Grants Review*	No
Outcome Other	Yes	Number Of Grants Reviewed	0
Outcome Comment	The Board also provides recommendations that include cost-saving measures and avoidance of duplicate funding and poor quality research. The interdisciplinary expertise among Board and Subcommittee members replaces the huge cost of providing a large and highly scientific/technical interdisciplinary staff needed to provide this expertise within the VA.	Number Of Grants Recommended	0
Cost Savings*	Unable to Determine	Dollar Value Of Grants Recommended	$0.00
Cost Savings Comment	The interdisciplinary expertise among Board and Subcommittee members replaces the huge cost of providing a large and highly scientific/technical interdisciplinary staff needed to provide this expertise within the VA. Cost saving comes from funding only the most meritorious research projects.	Grants Review Comment	The research proposals reviewed by the Board are internal to VA and are not considered grants to outside entities.
Number Of Recommendations*	5,660	Access Contact Designated Fed. Officer*	Yes
Number Of Recommendations Comment	This is a total of proposals and programs funded from FY 2003 through FY 2024.	Access Agency Website	Yes
% of Recs Fully Implemented*	90.00%	Access Committee Website	No
% of Recs Fully Implemented Comment	The Board's scientific and technical reviews and comments are usually followed by the Director of Rehabilitation Research and Development Service and the Chief Research and Development Officer of the Office of Research and Development. Funding of all research projects is only possible if sufficient funds are available within the Service's budget.	Access GSA FACA Website	Yes
% of Recs Partially Implemented*	0.00%	Access Publications	No
% of Recs Partially Implemented Comment	N/A (see above)	Access Other	No
Agency Feedback*	Yes	Access Comment	N/A
Agency Feedback Comment*	Feedback is provided in the Subcommittee meeting minutes distributed to the Board and in communications regarding specific proposal summaries of discussion and summary statements provided to scientific investigators on their award proposals. Board discussions involve consultant critiques of research proposals, the scientific merit of each proposal, relevance to the health care needs of Veterans, protections of human and vertebrate animal subjects and qualifications of personnel conducting the studies. Discussion by the Board is highly confidential as the information is proprietary to the scientific investigators and the research they propose in their award applications; the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Additionally, premature disclosure of research information could significantly obstruct implementation of proposed agency action regarding the research proposals.	Narrative Description*	The Board advises the Under Secretary of Health, the Rehabilitation Research and Development Service Director and the Chief Research and Development Officer in VHA on the scientific and technical merit, mission relevance, originality, protection of human and animal subjects, and the feasibility of proposals reviewed. Advice from the Board results in the funding of programs and research projects that support the mission of the VA, which is to promote functional independence and improve the quality of life for Veterans.

COSTS

1. Payments to Non-Federal Members*		1. Est Paymnts to Non-Fed Membrs Nxt FY*
2. Payments to Federal Members*		2. Est. Payments to Fed Members Next FY*
3. Payments to Federal Staff*		3. Estimated Payments to Federal Staff*
4. Payments to Consultants*		4. Est. Payments to Consultants Next FY*
5. Travel Reimb. For Non-Federal Membrs*		5. Est Travel Reimb Non-Fed Membr nxtFY*
6. Travel Reimb. For Federal Members*		6. Est Travel Reimb For Fed Members*
7. Travel Reimb. For Federal Staff*		7. Est. Travel Reimb to Fed Staf Nxt FY*
8. Travel Reimb. For Consultants*		8. Est Travel Reimb to Consltnts Nxt FY*
10. Other Costs		10. Est. Other Costs Next FY*
11. Total Costs	$0.00	11. Est. Total Next FY*	$0.00
Date Cost Last Modified	2/19/2025 9:22 AM	Est. Fed Staff Support Next FY*
Federal Staff Support (FTE)*		Est Cost Remarks
Cost Remarks

Interest Areas

Category Area Applied Science Engineering Food and Drugs Biotechnology Food and Drugs Medical Devices Health Aging Health Care Hospitals Medical Education Medical Practitioners Treatment Medicine Diseases Health and Health Research Illnesses Medicine and Dentistry Rehabilitation Rehabilitation and Disability Research Research and Development Science and Technology Innovation Science and Technology Veterans Benchmark and Clinical Trials Research Studies Veterans and Veterans' Medical Care

Custom Links

Committee Level Reports