Committee Sunset Process

From QIBA Wiki
Revision as of 21:20, 7 May 2019 by Kevino (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search


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 Modality 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.
  • The effects of dormancy include:
    • 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.
    • At least one cochair of a dormant BC will hopefully continue attending CC calls, in particular for reactivation discussions.
  • Once dormant, the Modality Coordinating Committee should schedule a review (e.g. in one year) to revisit the status of the dormant Biomarker Committee.
    • During review, the Modality Coordinating Committee might decide to reactivate the Biomarker Committee, to have it continue dormant, or to dissolve it.
  • A dormant Biomarker Committee may be reactivated by an email ballot in the Modality Coordinating Committee.
    • Just as with forming a new Biomarker Committee, the Coordinating Committee will need to consider the impact on the resources it has available.
    • Since the ballot is essentially yea/nay, it is expected that discussion/debate on the merits will happen in the Modality Coordinating Committee when the motion is made to send out a ballot.
  • When reactivated, 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.
    • 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.
  • The Biomarker Committee wiki page(s), are retained but are listed as dissolved on the Committees page.
  • Further meetings for dissolved committees are no longer scheduled.
  • A dissolved Biomarker Committee may, if appropriate, be recreated by an email ballot in the Modality Coordinating Committee to assign it a newly approved Biomarker proposal.
    • Since the ballot is essentially yea/nay, it is expected that discussion/debate on the merits will happen in the Modality Coordinating Committee when the motion is made to send out a ballot.
    • It is permissible for a Biomarker Committee to work on more than one Profile at the same time, however this raises logistical/timesharing issues which the Biomarker Committee will have to resolve, so it is generally recommended to have a different Biomarker Committee for each Profile.

Considerations for the Modality Coordinating Committee:

  • 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
    • When making a Biomarker Committee dormant, the Modality Coordinating Committee should think through when they expect to reactivate it and where the necessary resources will then be taken from.
  • 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
  • The Modality Coordination Committee is responsible for balancing its allocated and available resources across its Biomarker Committees.
    • <Think about what might be good triggers for this periodic review? maybe dashboard updates? certainly any time the CC plans to submit a new proposal to Steering>
  • One tool for doing this 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.