Science Excellence


This checklist describes information that will be posted online when we conduct a peer review, following guidelines detailed in the OMB Peer Review Bulletin.

About the document
• Title
• Short description of the document
• Estimated dissemination date of the final version of the document

About the peer review process
• Kind of peer review that will be conducted
   ◦ Panel,
   ◦ Individual letters,
   ◦ National Academy of Sciences review, or
   ◦ Other procedure approved by OMB
• Anticipated number of reviewers
• Reviewer selection method
   ◦ Reviewers selected by the Service or
   ◦ Reviewers selected by a designated outside organization
• Primary disciplines or expertise needed in the review (describe).
• Estimated start date of peer review

About public participation
• Opportunities for the public to comment on the work product to be peer reviewed (Indicate whether such public comments will be sought and describe how comments are to be submitted.)
• Indicate whether the public, including scientific or professional organizations, will be asked to nominate potential peer reviewers.

• Contact information for one or more staff regarding this peer review.

Peer Review of Scientific Information

Enhancing the Quality and Credibility of Information
To ensure the quality and credibility of the scientific information we use to make decisions, the Fish and Wildlife Service has implemented a formal "peer review" process for influential scientific documents. While we have always consulted experts to ensure that our decisions are based on sound science, through this peer review process we follow the guidelines for Federal agencies spelled out in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) "Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review," (PDF, 263 KB) released December 16, 2004. Part of the peer review process is to provide information online about how each peer review is to be conducted, as described in the checklist in the opposite column.


We have identified the following documents as meeting the OMB criteria of peer review for influential scientific information. Click on the links below to get more information about that document and the peer review process we have set up for it, as well as the resulting peer review comments and our response. This list will be updated as necessary.

Posting Date / Title

December 2015 - Updated - Listing Salamanders as Injurious Due to Risk of Salamander Chytrid Fungus

     Peer Review Plan
     Final Information Quality for Peer Review

November 2015 - Proposed Rule to List 11 Freshwater Species (10 Fish and 1 Crayfish) as Injurious Wildlife Species

     Peer Review Plan

June 12, 2014 - Peer Review Plan for the Risk Assessment and Mapping Program (RAMP)

     Peer Review Plan
     Peer Review Comments and Responses

December 13, 2013 - Proposed Rule to Remove the Gray Wolf (Canis lupis) from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Maintaining Protections of the Mexican Wolf (Canis lupis baileyi) by Listing it as Endangered

     Peer Review Plan
     Peer Review Report

November 1, 2013 - USFWS Review of Lead Exposure and Effects to Scavenging Birds

     Peer Review Plan
     Peer Review Report
     Response to Comments

May 3, 2013 - Draft Technical Guidance on Selecting Species for Design of Landscape Scale Conservation

     Peer Review Plan
     Peer Review Report
     Draft of Document Reviewed
     Link to Strategic Habitat Conservation

Next Step: The Service is developing a new Scope of Work (SOW) outlining ​what is needed​ to address ​peer review ​comments and to finalize the technical document. Once finalized, the SOW will be posted. Download SOW.

December 19, 2012 – Rapid Screening of Species Risk of Establishment and Impact in the United States

     Peer Review Plan
     Peer Review Report

December 19, 2012 – Bayesian Network Model for Invasive and Injurious Species

     Peer Review Plan
     Peer Review Comments and Responses

FY2012 - Sage Grouse Conservation Objectives Team Report

     Peer Review Plan
     Peer Review Report
     Questions and Answers

September 24, 2012 - National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy

     Peer Review Plan
     Peer Review Comments and Responses
     Final Document

Ensuring the Quality and Credibility of Information

The Fish and Wildlife Service is committed to using sound science in its decision-making and to providing the American public with information of the highest quality possible. Federal agencies are required to publish guidelines for ensuring the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information we use and disseminate, and to provide mechanisms for allowing the public to seek correction of that information. Visit our Peer Review website to see all Fish and Wildlife Service peer review agendas by region and program. Visit our Information Quality website for information quality guideline for the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Department of the Interior, as well as our responses to inquiries concerning the quality of information on specific topics.

Last updated: February 19, 2020

Please send comments, suggestions and questions for this Web site to: Megan Cook at

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Home Page | Department of the Interior  |  | About the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service  | Accessibility  | Privacy  | Notices  | Disclaimer  | FOIA