Committee Sunset Process

From QIBA Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

<<DRAFT FOR STEERING CMTE REVIEW>>

This process describes how QIBA committees are inactivated and/or dissolved. The process differs based on the type of committee.

Task Forces (TF)

Task Forces are created by a Biomarker Committee when useful to perform work in a focused subgroup for subsequent review & use by the Biomarker Committee.

Task Forces are informal (no provision for minutes or voting), intended to be temporary, and are generally dissolved by the Biomarker Committee when they have returned their work.


  • A Task Force can be dissolved by a simple motion/vote in the Biomarker Committee.
  • The Task Force wiki page(s), if any, are typically retained but would no longer be listed on the Committees page.
  • Further meetings are no longer scheduled.
  • The Biomarker Committee might choose to recreate the Task Force in the future, if appropriate.


Biomarker Committees (BC)

Biomarker Committees are proposed by a Modality Coordinating Committee (CC) and approved by the Steering Committee (SC) to develop a biomarker profile and advance it through the QIBA Profile Stages. A Biomarker Committee is a collection of subject matter experts specific to its assigned biomarker profile.

A Biomarker Committee is expected to go dormant, or be dissolved, when work on its profile is suspended for a time, or is completed.


  • A Biomarker Committee becomes dormant by an email ballot of the Biomarker Committee.
    • The CC might suggest to the BC Cochairs to hold a dormancy ballot.
      • An observation during a quarterly CC meeting that the BC has not met in several months might trigger such a discussion.
    • During the dormancy discussion and ballot it is recommended to record how long dormancy is expected to last and/or what trigger might prompt reactivation.
    • BCs may periodically not schedule meetings for a few months. Dormancy is intended for longer periods such as 6-24 months.
  • When dormant:
    • The BC wiki page(s), are retained but are listed as dormant on the Committees page.
    • Meetings are not scheduled while a BC is dormant.
    • Staff resources for the dormant BC may be reallocated by the CC to other BCs or may be returned to the Steering Committee for allocation elsewhere.
    • At least one cochair of a dormant BC will hopefully continue attending CC calls, in particular for reactivation discussions.
    • The CC should schedule a review (e.g. in one year) to revisit the status of the dormant BC.
      • During review, the CC might decide the DC should be reactivated, continue dormant, or be dissolved.
  • A dormant BC may be reactivated by an email ballot in the CC.
    • Just as with forming a new Biomarker Committee, the CC will need to consider the impact on the resources it has available.
    • Since the email ballot is essentially yea/nay, discussion/debate on the merits are expected to take place in the CC when the motion is made to send out a ballot.
  • When reactivated:
    • It is up to the CC to reallocate resources from its other BCs to staff the reactivated BC.
      • The CC may request the Steering Committee allocate new resources to the CC for use by the reactivated BC, but that will involve a discussion similar to that for forming a new BC.
    • All members in attendance at either the first or second meeting will start with voting privileges.


  • A Biomarker Committee is dissolved by an email ballot of the Modality Coordinating Committee.
    • The Biomarker Committee might suggest to the Coordinating Committee Cochairs to hold a dissolution ballot.
    • An observation during a quarterly CC meeting that the BC been dormant for 2 or more years might trigger such a discussion.
    • A Biomarker Committee might be dissolved if there is no imaginable way to reach the next Stage (but the Profile would still be published and available for use)
    • A Biomarker Committee might remain active despite a Profile reaching Stage 5 if there were plans for a a new edition of the Profile to incorporate new technology or information.
    • Typically, a Biomarker Committee will go dormant prior to being dissolved.
  • When dissolved:
    • The Biomarker Committee wiki page(s), are retained but are listed as dissolved on the Committees page.
    • Further meetings are no longer scheduled.
  • A dissolved BC may, if appropriate, be recreated by an email ballot in the CC to assign it a newly approved Biomarker proposal rather than creating a new BC.
    • It is permissible for a BC to work on more than one Profile at the same time, however this raises logistical/timesharing issues which the BC will have to resolve, so it is generally recommended to have a different BC for each Profile.
    • Since the email ballot is essentially yea/nay, discussion/debate on the merits are expected to take place in the CC when the motion is made to send out a ballot.


Resource Considerations:

  • A Biomarker Committee consumes significant QIBA resources (Staff support for agendas, minutes, meetings, process, coordination with co-chairs).
    • Typically a 1 hour teleconference consumes about 2 hours of additional overhead for staff.
  • A dissolved or dormant Biomarker Committee frees up staff resources and frees up active members to migrate to new related work in another Committee
    • Committees should consult with RSNA staff about the likely resources dormancy/dissolution might provide, and the resources reactivation might require
  • The Modality Coordination Committee is responsible for balancing its allocated and available resources across its Biomarker Committees.
    • Resource discussions might be part of periodic dashboard reviews or any time the CC plans to submit a new proposal to the Steering Committee
    • A tool for balancing resources is dissolving Biomarker Committees or making them dormant.
      • One BC might be waiting for groundwork and could go dormant and free up time for others in the same CC - but there is a risk that the new one is still working when groundwork comes back. How will CC resolve?
      • BC might go dormant because no things in the near future they expect to add - give time for adoption, free up resources for others
      • Mostly BCs would go Dormant - even if they reach Stage 4/5, profiles might need review/update cycle with advances/new data after a couple of years
  • Start discussion with staff - tracking total # of calls per quarter or half or year or something in the dashboard.

Other Committees

Other Committees, such as the Process Committee, the QIDW Oversight Committee, and the Sustainability Task Force, are created, made dormant, and/or dissolved, by the Steering Committee as part of normal business.

Future Topics

Tcon-based Resource Allocation vs Committee-based Resource Allocation

  • The Steering Committee effectively allocates resources to the Modality Coordination Committee by approving a new Biomarker Profile proposal.
    • In practical terms, the resource load might scale more with tcons than with Committees.
      • One committee that is holding 4 calls a month likely consumes more resources than two committees that meet once every other month.
    • Might think about the Steering Cmte allocating a "tcon quota" to each CC, then let each CC allocate those to its BCs?
    • Could put meeting load in the dashboard and the Steering could review it vs quota (is it on target, over, or available slack)
    • Could also factor it in when considering new biomarker proposals. Along the lines of the "start-one;stop-one" idea Rich suggested
    • Steering should consider the upper bounds on resources. Limited staff. Limited weekly time slots for calls when West Coast, East Coast and Europe all want to be on calls
  • Recruiting outside secretariats can help defray the resource issues by bringing in new resources