NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS CLOSEOUT MEMORANDUM Case Number: A04040015 11 Page 1 of I The complainantlis concerned that a paper with a similar synthetic strategy appeared almost concurrently with her own synthesis pape?, and is suspicious that the authors of the duplicative paper3were reviewers of her NSF proposals4. The allegation is breach of peer review confidentiality. We compared the papers and determined that there was a similarity in the central strategy for achieving the targeted synthesis. Further, we searched the literature for related papers and found none, underscoring the uniqueness of the synthetic approach. We note that the chronological information published with each paper documents the anteriority of submission of the complainant's manuscript. We examined the reviewer list and reviews for each of the complainant's proposals; we find no support for the allegation. We note that the same synthetic ideas put forward by the complainant may have been described in a PRF-ACS proposal likely to have been submitted in early 2003.~ Our inquiry shows no substance to the allegation of breach of peer review confidentiality in the NSF peer review process. Accordingly, this case is closed. 1 redacted 2 redacted redacted 4 redacted redacted NSF OIG Form 2 (1 1/02)
Published by the National Science Foundation, Office of Inspector General on 2004-04-26.
Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)