Peer Review

Peer review is the critical evaluation of scientific and technical work by independent experts to enhance the product's quality and credibility. Peer review can actually help avoid costly and time-consuming delays by helping to steer product development along the most efficient, effective course. The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) current peer review policy--updated in 1996 and now under evaluation by the agency--stresses the importance of these reviews and call for the peer review of all major scientific and technical work that may eventually play an important role in key agency decisions. Despite recent progress, GAO found that EPA continues to implement peer unevenly. GAO recommended that (1) upper-level EPA managers have the information needed to know whether all relevant work has been considered for peer review and (2) staff and managers are informed about the need for and benefits of peer review and their specific responsibilities in implementing the policy. EPA has taken steps to implement GAO's recommendations. For example, EPA plans to begin peer review training for its managers and staff in June 1997. Although it is still to soon to know whether these efforts will be successful, GAO is encouraged by the high-level attention being paid to this important issue.

GAO noted that: (1) despite some recent progress, peer review continues to be implemented unevenly; (2) although GAO found some cases in which EPA's peer review policy was properly followed, it also found cases in which key aspects of the policy were not followed or in which peer review was not conducted at all; (3) GAO believes that two of the primary reasons for this uneven implementation are: (a) inadequate accountability and oversight to ensure that all relevant products are properly peer reviewed; and (b) confusion among EPA's staff and management about what peer review is, its importance and benefits, and how and when it should be conducted; (4) EPA officials readily acknowledge this uneven implementation and, during the course of GAO's work, had a number of efforts under way to improve the peer review process; (5) although GAO found these efforts to be steps in the right direction, it concluded that EPA was not addressing the underlying problems that GAO had identified; (6) accordingly, GAO recommended that EPA ensure that: (a) upper-level managers have the information they need to know whether or not all relevant products have been considered for peer review; and (b) staff and managers are educated about the need for and benefits of peer review and their specific responsibilities in implementing policy; (7) EPA agreed with GAO's recommendations and has several efforts under way to implement them; (8) for example, EPA plans to initiate a peer review training program for its managers and staff in June 1997; and (9) while it is still too early to be certain if these efforts will be fully successful, GAO is encouraged by the high-level attention being paid to this very important process.