FSP FAQs: Project Reporting and Cooperator Publications

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]

Cooperator publications are scientific information products funded and released by an external cooperator to which USGS authors contribute. Cooperator publications are prepared under formal collaborative agreements between the USGS and Federal, Tribal, State, local, academia or other parties. [Read more]

To comply with FSP, the requirements for release of the publication, and any associated data release, must be specified in a signed agreement between USGS and the cooperator, the publication must be reviewed and approved through the USGS Information Product Data System (IPDS), and be made available on a publicly accessible website by the cooperator. [Read more]

Cooperator publications are released on cooperator websites. Because the results of Federal Government scientific research must be made publicly available, these publications must be hosted on a publishing platform with continued persistent public accessibility. [Read more]

Editing and formatting requirements are applied to cooperator publications according to the cooperator’s publishing standards. Although cooperator publications are not required to follow the editorial requirements for USGS series publications, Bureau writing quality and standards must be met. [Read more]

Citations for cooperator publications may list USGS authors by individual names or by using the Bureau name (U.S. Geological Survey). In all cases, the citation must include the cooperator’s name as the publisher. For examples [Read more]

The cooperator determines use and placement of the trademarked USGS identifier or a text identification line (such as "Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey") based on their own visual identity/logo requirements. To acknowledge the Bureau’s contribution, USGS authors should request that USGS be prominently displayed. [Read more]

Although USGS does not require or assign DOIs for cooperator publications, assignment of DOIs is a best practice to ensure long term access to a product. If they have the capability to do so, cooperators should assign a DOI or other persistent link to the information product. [Read more]

The FSP requirements for release of USGS scientific data and software associated with scholarly publications also apply to cooperator publications. Data and software management, publishing, and curation responsibility should be specified in data management plans. [Read more]

Yes. If data collection for a cooperator publication is USGS-funded, a publicly accessible data release is required prior to or simultaneously with release of the associated cooperator publication. An acceptable digital repository for the data release should be identified in the data management plan or agreement. [Read more]