FR 2025-05032

Overview

Title

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Notice of Closed Meeting

Agencies

ELI5 AI

The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke is having a special online meeting in April to talk about secret things like people's personal details and business secrets, so they won't let anyone else join. If someone wants to know more, they can ask Ana, who knows all about it!

Summary AI

The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke has announced a meeting that will be closed to the public. This meeting, scheduled for April 28-29, 2025, will take place virtually and will focus on reviewing and evaluating grant applications. The decision to keep the meeting closed is due to the potential discussion of confidential information, such as trade secrets and personal details, which must be protected. Interested parties can contact Ana Olariu for more information.

Type: Notice
Citation: 90 FR 13603
Document #: 2025-05032
Date:
Volume: 90
Pages: 13603-13603

AnalysisAI

The document is a notice from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke about an upcoming meeting that will be closed to the public. Scheduled for April 28-29, 2025, this virtual meeting will focus on reviewing and evaluating grant applications related to neurological sciences and disorders. The meeting will be closed to protect confidential information, which could include personal details or trade secrets linked to the grant applications.

General Summary

This notice serves as an official announcement of a meeting held by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. The meeting is designed to assess grant applications, likely to fund innovative research within neurology that could have broad implications for understanding and treating neurological disorders. The meeting will be conducted virtually but is hosted by the National Institutes of Health at its Neuroscience Center in Rockville, Maryland. Ana Olariu, Ph.D., the Scientific Review Officer, is named as the contact person for further information on the meeting.

Significant Issues and Concerns

Several concerns arise from the document:

  1. Closed Meeting Justification: The notice refers to sections of the law that justify closing the meeting to the public. However, it does not provide specific instances of how these sections apply to the potential discussions. This lack of detailed explanation could hinder transparency and public trust.

  2. Physical Address Mentioned for a Virtual Meeting: Although the meeting is virtual, the notice includes the address of a physical location. This might confuse readers about the necessity or possibility of attending in person or why a physical address is relevant in this context.

  3. Lack of Detail on Grant Applications: There is a lack of extensive details regarding the types of grants to be reviewed and the criteria against which they will be evaluated. Further context could be valuable for those interested in the focus areas of NIH research funding.

  4. Contact Person’s Role: While contact information for Ana Olariu is provided, there is no information on her specific role in the meeting, which might be useful for potential attendees or interested parties seeking more information.

Impact on the Public

The closure of the meeting aligns with the protection of sensitive and personal information. However, it limits public access to a process that involves the allocation of public funds to health research projects. Some may see this as a loss of transparency, while others may appreciate the privacy and protection of proprietary information.

Impact on Stakeholders

  • Researchers and Applicants: Researchers and individuals involved in the grant applications may benefit from the privacy afforded by the meeting's closed status, allowing for open discussion of proprietary information without fear of public dissemination.

  • Public and Advocacy Groups: These groups might find the lack of transparency concerning, as they are left without insight into decision-making processes that impact public health funding. This might be mitigated by transparent post-meeting reports, if available.

Overall, the document outlines an important scientific meeting that aims to advance neurological research, albeit behind closed doors, balancing privacy concerns with transparency expectations. Efforts to clarify the details and implications of such meetings can enhance public understanding and support for the research processes managed by governmental institutions.

Issues

  • • The document indicates that the meeting will be closed to the public due to the potential disclosure of confidential information. However, there is no detailed explanation of why each specific section of the law (552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6)) applies to this situation. Additional justification could enhance transparency.

  • • The meeting format is indicated as virtual, yet the address of the physical location is provided, which may cause confusion. Clarification on the necessity of mentioning the physical address for a virtual meeting would be beneficial.

  • • The purpose of the meeting is stated as 'to review and evaluate grant applications.' Greater detail on the types of grants being reviewed or the specific criteria for evaluation could offer important context.

  • • The document lists contact information, but it might be useful to provide more information about the contact person's role or responsibilities during the meeting.

Statistics

Size

Pages: 1
Words: 317
Sentences: 13
Entities: 44

Language

Nouns: 125
Verbs: 15
Adjectives: 8
Adverbs: 2
Numbers: 28

Complexity

Average Token Length:
5.49
Average Sentence Length:
24.38
Token Entropy:
4.72
Readability (ARI):
19.74

Reading Time

about a minute or two