![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Professional Review and Documentation
Subjecting documented methods and assessment reports to rigorous peer review is ultimately the best way to ensure an agency’s credible data and scientific underpinnings. Inherently, reviews should be conducted in an objective and independent manner (outside the agency and with no vested interest in the outcome) by technical and policy experts able to provide valid critique and suggestions, and where recommendations for improvement and refinement are taken in good faith. Validation of standard operating procedures for all aspects of the assessment and monitoring program by outside experts is an initial step in establishing confidence in the resulting data. Programs that do not address and implement critical recommendations fail to benefit from an independent endorsement of their procedures and assessments.
Some Frequently Asked Questions
Question: Agency documents and reports are subjected to a thorough internal review by management; why is that not sufficient?
Answer: A peer review by technical experts from outside the agency is crucial to validating all aspects of a bioassessment program. Peer review provides validation and feedback for strengthening a program. Publishing bioassessment protocols through a peer-reviewed process demonstrates a level of acceptance and rigor equal to Levels 3 and 4 (see Figure below).
As an example of good peer review practices, please visit EPA's Peer Review homepage. and the EPA guidance document "Evaluation Guidelines for Ecological Indicators"