You are here: Home / About Us / NCCOS Reviews

NCCOS Reviews


      By comparing fish in the agriculturally-dominated Corsica River with fish caught in developed
      or forested rivers, we learn how land use affects fish health, diversity, and abundance. In the
      Chesapeake Bay, we catch more fish in nutrient-rich rivers adjacent to farms, but those fish are
      less healthy and more likely to carry disease. Photo credit: Tracy Gill.
By comparing fish in the agriculturally-dominated Corsica River with fish caught in developed or forested rivers, we learn how land use affects fish health, diversity, and abundance. In the Chesapeake Bay, we catch more fish in nutrient-rich rivers adjacent to farms, but those fish are less healthy and more likely to carry disease. Photo credit: Tracy Gill.

Peer review is a long–established mechanism for ensuring quality scientific research. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and other federal agencies that support extramural scientific work routinely use standardized peer review processes to evaluate external research proposals and ensure high quality standards.

It is appropriate that the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), as a significant NOAA/National Ocean Service science arm supporting both extra– and intramural research, establish similar quality control procedures for the research, monitoring, assessment and related activities it conducts internally. In addition, according to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB, 2004), "A wide variety of authorities have argued that peer review practices at federal agencies need to be strengthened."

The purpose of this plan is to ensure that NCCOS scientists are conducting high quality investigations of significant value to NOAA and the nation, and to demonstrate that quality to interested parties through independent, objective review.

Program Reviews

Center Reviews

Management Reviews