Fundamental Science Practices Frequently Asked Questions

Restricted-File Federal Interagency Reports (RFFIRs) are not public and cannot be cited, it may be worthwhile to publicly release these reports in other USGS series, such as Open File Report (OFR), once deemed appropriate to do so. A new IPDS record for OFR should be created, following the standard process for review, approval, and coordination with the Science Publishing Network. [Read more]

Restricted-File Federal Interagency Reports (RFFIRs) are not to be referenced, posted, or indexed on USGS public-facing web pages or included in a list of publications on individual staff profile pages. Because RFFIRs are not citable, they are not to be indexed in the USGS Publications Warehouse or included in a list of publications on individual staff profile pages.

The Restricted-File Federal Interagency Reports (RFFIR) series is to be used for confidential communication between USGS and a U.S. Government agency, foreign government or agency, or international entity funding partner. RFFIRs cannot be produced for private communications. [Read more]

Project progress reporting can involve noninterpretive scientific information, previously published interpretive scientific information, or new interpretive scientific. The type of content dictates how the FSP apply and whether tracking in the IPDS is required. [Read more]

Reports of project progress that contain non-interpretive or previously published interpretive information can be delivered in slides, summaries, correspondence, emails, or oral communications; conversely, new interpretive content must be tracked in IPDS and may include: (1) abstract, poster, presentation, exhibit, newsletter, (2) USGS publication series product, or (3) outside publication. [Read...

No. There is not a product type in the IPDS for reports of project progress.

Project progress reports with new interpretive information must include disclaimers indicating preliminary/provisional, deliberative, predecisional nature of information; requirement to not disclose or release information; and waiving of USGS and U.S. Government liability. These reports must be labeled “Preliminary Information Subject to Revision. Not for Citation or Distribution." [Read more]

If the project progress reports contain new interpretations, then the reports of project progress also require peer reviews, Bureau approval, and publication before being delivered to the greater community of stakeholders, steering councils, or cooperating groups who are not directly contributing to project activities. [Read more]

FSP review and approval of project progress depends on the content (new and interpretive findings versus noninterpretive or previously published information) and intended distribution of the report. [Read more]

Reports of project progress may be presented at a scientific conference, but sensitive, confidential, or proprietary information cannot be discussed. Peer review is at the discretion of the Science Center Director. FSP requirements for presentation materials that are left or not left at scientific meetings and conferences apply.

Reports of project progress are not related to the collaborator/partner courtesy reviews. While both types of reporting may contain new, interpretive content, a progress report discusses the status of project work and a draft of a final project report provided to collaborators for courtesy review discusses the results of the project. [Read more]

A nonendorsement disclaimer statement, if appropriate, is the only statement that may be needed in a report of project progress that is noninterpretive or that includes interpretations only from previously published sources. Note, however, that published sources must always be cited.

Yes, all scientific information products, including those submitted to an agency that has provided funding to the USGS to carry out scientific research, assessments, or investigations reporting final technical outcomes (new interpretive information) of a project must be peer reviewed and receive Bureau approval.

Abstracts may be for scientific conference or meeting sessions or they can be extended abstracts. Science Center Director determines need for peer review of short abstracts and grants Bureau approval. Extended abstracts have the same approval requirements as journal articles and require approval by an OSQI Bureau Approving Official. Abstracts must be tracked in the IPDS. [Read more]

Presentation materials and poster sessions presented once and not left for conference dissemination or posted on a public website do not require peer review; however, the Science Center Director has discretion to require peer review. Poster session/presentation materials requiring Bureau approval must be tracked and approval documented in the IPDS. [Read more]

If previously approved abstract, poster session, or presentation is reused in a different meeting venue, additional Bureau approval is not required as long as the content has not substantially changed. Authors should always ensure that supervisors and management are informed whenever USGS scientific information is presented, even if the material has been presented in a prior venue. [Read more]

No, working notes, field notes, and other related material that have not met FSP requirements of peer review and Bureau approval cannot be publicly posted. These materials are considered predecisional and are protected from public disclosure, unless materials have been specifically included for publication as part of the approved manuscript or are subject to a FOIA request.

The USGS OCAP provides policy direction for audiovisual products, including video productions, motion picture films, public service announcements, video news features, and electronic/satellite transmissions that are produced by or attributed to the USGS. OCAP reviews, approves, and certifies these products for approval by DOI Office of Communications. [Read more]

The intent of the book review is to address the content, not advance the notion of purchase. Book reviews are, by definition, new interpretive content. As for other new interpretive science information, two peer reviews are required and Bureau approval by a BAO is required for the book review prior to it being submitted to the journal for publication. [Read more]

Upon completion of the dissemination task for an information product in IPDS, bibliographic metadata are transferred from IPDS to Publications Warehouse for creating product citation pages. Accurate and complete bibliographic information must be entered in the IPDS and the dissemination task must be completed in a timely manner to catalog and index product in the Publications Warehouse.[Read more]

The Publications Warehouse catalog includes, but is not limited to, citation pages for USGS publication series, outside publications (such as journal articles, books, book chapters, other government and nongovernment publications, cooperator publications, and conference proceedings) prepared by USGS and other authors, and extramural publications (produced by non-USGS authors funded by USGS). [Read...