FR 2025-00689

The document titled "Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meetings" was published by the National Institutes of Health, part of the Health and Human Services Department. It informs the public about upcoming meetings that will be closed to the general public. These meetings, set to occur in February 2025, are intended to review and evaluate grant applications across various fields, such as brain disorders, pulmonary diseases, and genetics. Due to the sensitive nature of the discussions, which could reveal trade secrets or personal information, these meetings will not be open to the public. Each committee's contact information and the format of the meetings, predominantly virtual, are provided.

Significant Issues and Concerns

Several issues arise from the notice that warrant further attention:

1. Lack of Specific Justification: The notice references general provisions for keeping meetings closed, citing concerns about disclosing trade secrets and personal privacy. However, it lacks specific justifications for each committee meeting, which could negatively impact transparency.

2. Meeting Duration: Some meetings are scheduled for extensive durations, lasting eight to nine hours over several days. Without an explanation for these long durations, there could be concerns about inefficiencies in time management or potential wastage of resources.

3. Cost and Budget Transparency: The notice does not disclose any cost or budget information associated with conducting these meetings. This omission makes it difficult for the public or stakeholders to gauge whether the use of funds is appropriate or wasteful.

4. Repetition and Clutter: The meeting notice repeatedly lists the address for the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, despite the meetings being conducted virtually. This can cause confusion and clutters the document unnecessarily. Additionally, the repetitive listing of contact information for each committee might not be necessary and could be streamlined.

5. Lack of Evaluation Criteria Details: There is no detailed information on the criteria used to evaluate grant applications. This absence could suggest a lack of transparency in how applications will be judged and raise concerns about potential favoritism or bias.

Public and Stakeholder Impact

The implications of these closed meetings are noteworthy both broadly and for specific stakeholders:

• Public Impact: General public access to government processes and decision-making ensures transparency and accountability. When meetings are held privately without detailed justifications, it may engender skepticism and erode public trust in the institutions involved.

• Negative Impact on Researchers and Institutions: Universities, non-profit organizations, and research institutions that submit grant applications may have concerns about fairness and decision-making transparency due to the lack of disclosed evaluation criteria. This could lead to discontent if evaluations are perceived as biased.

• Positive Impact on Data Privacy and Proprietary Information: Closing the meetings can be seen positively, as it helps protect sensitive scientific data, potentially patentable material, and personal information of the individuals involved, thereby safeguarding intellectual property and privacy.

Overall, while closed meetings can serve important protective functions, they should be balanced with adequate disclosures and openness to maintain public trust and ensure fairness in decision-making processes.