Peer Review Plan 

Title of Review: Process and Use of the WIC 

Nutrition Risk Assessment 

and Tailoring Study

[ X ] Influential Scientific Information 

 

Agency: FNS [ ] Highly Influential Scientific Assessment 

 

Agency Contact: Melissa Abelev 

 

Subject of Review: WIC Nutrition Risk Assessment and Tailoring 

 

Purpose of Review: FNS will seek scientific peer review for the subject study. 

 

Type of Review: [ ] Panel Review [X] Individual Reviewers 

 

[ ] Alternative Process (Briefly Explain): 

 

 

Timing of Review (Est.): Start: 2018 End: 2023 Completed: 2023 

 

Number of Reviewers: [X ] 3 or 

fewer

[ ] 4 to 10 [ ] More than 10 

 

Primary Disciplines/Types of Expertise Needed for Review: 

There are three areas of expertise needed: (1) research methodology and statistical analysis; (2) knowledge 

of subject FNS programs; and (3) expertise in WIC Nutrition Risk Assessment. 

Reviewers selected by: [ ] Agency [ X ] Designated Outside 

Organization 

 Organization’s Name: Westat, the contracting 

firm conducting the study 

will identify the peer 

reviewers 

Opportunities for Public Comment? [ ] Yes [X ] No 

 If yes, briefly state how and when these opportunities will be provided: 

 How: 

 When: 

 

Peer Reviewers Provided with Public Comments? [ ] Yes [X ] No 

Public Nominations Requested for Review Panel? [ ] Yes [X ] No 

Other: 
 

The reviewers will be charged with two tasks as follows: 

1. Reviewers will be requested to determine if (i) the data collection as implemented was 

appropriate, (ii) whether the analyses as carried out reflect the original plans and (iii) 

whether the analyses are appropriate given the actual implementation of sampling and data 

collection. 

2. Reviewers will be charged with evaluating the clarity of hypotheses, the robustness of 

the methods employed to address the hypotheses, the appropriateness of the methods for 

the hypotheses being tested, the extent to which the conclusions follow from the analysis, 

and the strengths and limitations of the overall conclusions. The peer reviewers will be 

requested, as appropriate, to suggest ways to clarify assumptions, findings, and 

conclusions; identify oversights, omissions, and inconsistencies; and, if needed, encourage 

authors to more fully acknowledge limitations and uncertainties. 

All peer reviewers will be informed that the Agency does not have funds to make changes that 

require additional data collection, reconsideration of the research design, or significant 

modifications to data collection and analysis methods. The reviewers will be informed that the 

Agency, while it will welcome recommendations that may improve the design of other FNS studies, 

requires an evaluation of the current product that is cognizant of the funding constraints. 

Each reviewer will be instructed to supply the results of their review in written form. Because this 

study is considered influential scientific information, reviewers will be informed that the Agency 

is required to make available to the public the written charge to the peer reviewers, the peer 

reviewers’ names, the peer reviewers’ report(s), and the agency’s response to the peer reviewers’ 

report(s).