Cycle 7 Peer Review: 21-23 June 2005

1. Cycle 7 Peer Review: 21-23 June 2005 • 747 proposals, 12 panels, 101 reviewers • Hilton, Logan Airport Chandra Users' Committee

2. Submitted Proposals • New in Cycle 7 • Decrease in allowance for constrained observations: 15%, plus accurate accounting of # obsvns. • Database-based panel GUI software: faster and more accurate access to proposal information • PDF files only • Electronic proposal distribution, hardcopies on request (~20% requested hardcopy) • Spitzer joint time program • Fully-web-based peer-review reports • “War Room” at deadline time! Chandra Users' Committee

3. Aggressive Advertising of New Constraint Policy • CfP Erratum: describing new Constraint Policy • Electronic Bulletin including the same notice • Pitch Angle Restrictions: web page updated • FAQs on Constrained Observations: web page posted • Helpdesk: available as always to answer detailed questions Chandra Users' Committee

4. Receipt Curve Cycle 7 Cycle 6 Chandra Users' Committee

5. % Proposals accepted per Type vs Cycle Chandra Users' Committee

6. % Proposals Approved by Science Area Chandra Users' Committee

7. % Requested Time Approved by Science Area Chandra Users' Committee

8. Time Allocated per Instrument Chandra Users' Committee

9. Grant Award Periods • Award Periods: • Grants may be requested for 1 or 2 years • One-year no-cost extension to allow completion of science project is available on request with a brief justification • Second one-year no-cost extension is also available if justified • Documentation: • CfP Section 8.6, updated to clarify • Updated Section VE of the Terms and Conditions ready for Cycle 7: 1st extension straight-forward, 2nd or subsequent need justification Chandra Users' Committee

10. Constraints and the Peer Review • New Guidelines: • 15% of observations • Observation: individual pointing, e.g. count monitoring sequence, or long observations split due to orbit • Each panel given quota determined by ratio of requested to available constrained observations • Instructed to abide by the quota, but talk to me if they needed/wished to go over • Results: • Real time determination of use/quota for each panel allowed us to update quotas as needed • No panel turned down a highly ranked proposal due to this quota Chandra Users' Committee

11. Suggestions from Panel Chairs Survey • Organization: generally very favorable comments • Pundits: get involved in review reports in advance of the review • LP/VLP: panel chairs (or panels) should meet on Wed pm to strategize on LP/VLPs • Stop it being a race! • Time: should we add another morning? • Too may junior/non X-ray panel members: • Starting much earlier to recruit panel chairs (5 already) and reviewers • Strong emphasis on inviting only senior people first (it is much easier to get junior people!) Chandra Users' Committee

12. Revised Observation Completion Policy • Complete observation: 90% (or more) of allocated time has been observed • Exceptions, implemented 8 July 2005: • TOO/DDT due to scheduling restrictions • Observations >200 ksec, any remaining time > 20 ksec will be observed • Exceptions, proposed for 1 Dec 2005: • Observations < 5ksec, observed only once • Observations with <2 ksec remaining will be considered complete • Policy posted on website and sent in an electronic bulletin • Will be described in Cycle 8 Call for Proposals Chandra Users' Committee

13. Summary of Response to Jan 2005 Report • E&PO: • Complexity of Process • NASA requirements are inherently complex. They are holding workshops. The E&PO CfP will be updated to clarify. • Low funding levels • 2% of GO budget: about $200K. No more funding is available, unless CUC should recommend using more of GO budget to fund E&PO as opposed to GO science • All other items should have been covered during the day Chandra Users' Committee