Proper follow-up of advisory committee reports is often neglected in the absence of an institutionalized follow-up process. A model procedure is the operation of the Defense Science Board in the Office of the Secretary of De-­ fense, where the secretary has directed that there be written response to its conclusions and recommendations. Feedback to the advisory committee can be salutary in terms of its future performance. Significant reports may deserve monitoring and periodic revisiting, even after the advisory group has been ter­minated, so the decision-maker can know of the actions taken, the reasons for inaction, and whether there are questions requiring further examination.

Guideline: Heads of government departments and agencies should es­tablish formal policies and procedures for the use of science and tech­nology advisory committees and advisers, taking into consideration the foregoing principles and guidelines. This should include procedures for follow-up of committee repoas. The formulation and application of such guidelines requires coordination and monitoring at the highest level of government. The policies and procedures could be incorporated into a reference manual for decision-makers.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement