ACTG, Aids Clinical Trials Group - Berzins SASC Leadership Support

Ms. Baiba Berzins will serve as SASC CTU/CRS Coordinator at-large as of 12/01/2014. As the CTU/CRS Coordinator at-large, in addition to regular input into SASC discussions, she is responsible for keeping the SASC informed of the site coordinator perspective concerning current issues and of any issues raised by ACTG coordinators that may have an impact on the overall agenda or functioning of the network. The SASC is responsible for the prioritization of the network scientific agenda and for the integration and coordination of the TSGs, major subcommittees, and network laboratories. The SASC also makes recommendations to the Executive Committee with regard to the deployment of Protocol Implementation Funds (PIF) across the TSGs. SASC Members’ responsibilities are listed below: • Members are expected to participate in all conference calls and face-to-face meetings of the SASC. In the event you are unable to participate, you should notify the SASC Coordinator in advance. • Materials for calls and meetings are distributed approximately 1 week before the scheduled event, usually in the form of PDF packets that you must retrieve from the SASC portal. Distribution of addendum materials closer to the date of the call is common. Members are expected to review the materials included in the packet prior to the call and be prepared to provide comments as appropriate. • The SASC will continue to have the overall responsibility for prioritization of the scientific agenda of the ACTG. However, in the current structure, the primary responsibility for review and prioritization of concept proposals and other submissions devolves on the TSGs and subcommittees, which further oversee the prioritization of all work within their respective domains. TSG chairs and vice chairs and the chair of the ARTS Subcommittee are therefore responsible for reporting to the SASC on the status of the work of their groups. • All members of the SASC are expected to participate in reviews and discussions of all the issues submitted for SASC consideration. Decisions regarding approval or disapproval are generally arrived at by consensus through voice vote. Occasionally, electronic review (or followup review) and ballot votes may be undertaken.