5. IA Management eReport Review Tab for System Organization Reviewer

Owned by Enrico Bonaiuti
Last updated: Mar 16, 2021
8 min read

When the SMO type of users log in to the system, they see three main tabs “Home”, “IA Report Review” tab, and “report” tab. The home tab includes personal information of name, surname and organization. This chapter will focus on what SMO users see when they go to the “IAReport Review” tab.

 5.1.            Review tab for SMO Reviewer: Section 1 and 2

Screenshot 66: SMO User can use the review tab for all the years and organizations

Upon clicking on the “IAeReport Review tab”, the pages open to the link (https://dev.mel.cgiar.org/ia/iareview) which includes (a) an overview table, (b) Center IA Reports comment box and table, (c) Center capacity related to IA management (d) a table showing CRP/Platform capacity related to IA management, (e) a table on the Center policies, a table on (f) Center IA Portfolio of Registered Ip (Patents), (g) Center IA Portfolio of registered IP (PVPs),  (h) Center IA Portfolio of registered IP (Trademarks).

Please note that all the sub-section tables in this window have a “General Comments” button, in which the SMO can write the comments and click on “Save As”; as well as “View Record” and “Go to Report” button. The “View Record” button opens a window with the details of the reported item while the “Go to Report” button opens the full report in which the item is included. For the third section items, the “View Record” button opens a window with another “Review” button. If the item is in the workflow of SMOs, they can make their review; otherwise, they can see the story of the workflow among other users.

Screenshot 67: Comment boxes in the Review tab for SMO users to fill

The SMO users see the following information boxes on this page, that are not visible for the Center IP Focal Point. The questions belong to the first section and can all be answered by an open text box and click on “Save comments”.

1.6. Please describe key new or ongoing partnerships, arrangements, or collaborations that were impactful (eg: new or ongoing partnerships, arrangements, or collaborations that supported the conservation and widespread use of all genetic resources for food and agriculture or that otherwise furthered the CGIAR Vision) during the reporting cycle.

1.7. Please describe the Center’s approach(es) to maximizing the global accessibility and impact of its Intellectual Assets.

1.8. Please provide any relevant highlights, trends, case studies, practices, LEA/RUA/Patent filings/PVP filings that you would like to highlight for the CGIAR Annual IA Management Report.

1.9. Additional Notes (anything else to report regarding this section)

Screenshot 68: Last questions of section 1 consist of comment boxes for SMO to fill

The SMO also sees comment boxes for the second section; these are not visible to the Center IP Focal Point. These three questions can all be answered by an open text box and click on “Save comments”;

  • 2.1. Facilitated access to Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture held by CGIAR Centers within the purview of the Treaty through Standard Material Transfer Agreements (SMTA)

  • 2.2. Measures for ensuring that acquisition and transfer of genetic resources is conducted following applicable laws

  • 2.3. Farmers Rights

Screenshot 69: Section 2 comment boxes in the review tab for SMO to fill

5.2.            Review tab for SMO Role: Section 3

The components of the 3rd section include comment boxes and tables for each sub-section: (3.1) Reporting of Limited Exclusivity Agreements, Restricted Use Agreements, and IP Applications and (3.2) Public disclosures associated with Limited Exclusivity Agreements, Restricted Use Agreements, and IP Applications. The elements visible in the tables have the action buttons “View Record” and “Go to Report”.

Screenshot 70: The view of Section 3 for the SMO roles in the Review tab

The overview table consists of a filter to select the reporting year and the organization. It is possible to select multiple years. It is also possible to select all years by ticking the box under year selection criteria. In the “Organizations” filter, there will a dropdown menu and all the centers will appear here. It is possible to select any organization from this list. Also, more than one organization can be chosen for filtering. These filter settings are important since they define the data visible for the rest of the page. Each table will show data depending on the selection of the reporting years.

Depending on the selection, the overview table shows the total number of Restricted Arrangements (Aggregate), Restricted Arrangements (Unique), and the total number of Registers. The number of LEAs, RUAs, IP Applications (Patent), IP Applications (PVP) and total numbers falling under each category is visible. The data table shows vary depending on the selected years.

Screenshot 71: Overview dashboard

The table will show the Center IA Reports ID, year, and organization depending on the selected years in the year filter. The column “Status” shows if the report is submitted or is a draft version. The number of LEA, RUA, IP (Patent), IP (PVP), and related number of MLS for each can be seen for each report. The review status shows the history of the review of each report and the order shows the flow between the Center and SMO. For example, “SMO, Center feedback, SMO” means the report was first submitted to SMO and after the review, SMO returned the report to the Center IP Focal Point for feedback. Center IP Focal Point made changes regarding the comments and re-submitted the report to SMO.

Screenshot 72: Report names, Id numbers, status and numbers of LEA/RUA/MLS and IP Applications and Review status can be seen in the table

The available buttons for the SMO are:

  • Go to Report

  • Export as PDF

  • Export section 3 as Excel

Clicking on the “Go to report button” on a specific report in the table will open the link https://dev.mel.cgiar.org/ia/iareporting/ia_report_id/xx (xx being a numerical ID number of the report). If the report that is being reviewed has the status “Submitted”, then all the information in the first and second sections of the report will be in review mode only, and it will not be possible to make modifications by SMO.

Screenshot 73: SMO view of the report’s first section

Since the third section elements have a different workflow, SMO may have some actions to take depending on whether the element was submitted as final before, or not. For example, the table element in 3.1 had been submitted as final, while the table under sub-section 3.2 says that the workflow is at the SMO’s turn.

Screenshot 74: SMOs View in Section 3

Both rows have the button “View Record”. When clicked on the “View Record” button on the item of 3.1, SMO sees the details of the reported item, including an icon of two red rows, which symbolize the changes in the content. When the cursor comes to the icon, it shows the changes made.

Screenshot 75: Viewing the changes/green part additions

If there was an addition, the changes will seem green, while if there was a change of elimination of the content, then the eliminated text will appear with red color.

Screenshot 76: Viewing the changes/red part eliminations

This window with the details of the reported item has the “Review” button on the top right corner.

By clicking on it, SMO can see the flow of the revisions. Since the item has already been submitted as final, there is not action that SMO will take, the workflow has already been concluded.

Screenshot 77: After submitting the review, SMO sees the review history upon clicking on the “Review” button

In case a reported item in section 3 has not been reported as final, and the workflow has been returned to the SMO, then the SMO will see the changes in the content with green and red colors, and a “Review” button. After clicking on the “Review” button, SMO will see the review flow among different users, with a section at the bottom to Grade the last version of the item. The options to select for grading are:

  • Pending

  • Improvement recommended

  • Significant improvement recommended (potential compliance or reputational risk issue)

  • Appears to be satisfactory

Below, the two non-mandatory comment boxes are for the external and internal comments of SMO. After grading and filling the boxes, SMO has the following options to manage the workflow.

  • The button “Save review as Draft”: Saves the review as a draft to continue in a later time.

  • The button “Submit a review to ABS Reviewer”: Sends the latest version of the SMO review to ABS Reviewer for their feedback.

  • The button “Submit review to SCIPG”: Sends the latest version of the SMO review to the SCIPG Reviewer for their feedback.

  • The button “Submit review to Center for follow-up”: Sends the review back to Center IP Focal Point to make modifications.

  • The button “Submit a final review”: Submits the review as final and the workflow for this item finishes.

Screenshot 78: Grading, comment boxes and available buttons for submitting the review for SMO

Note: In case the element that SMO reviews belong to a group of identical elements, the tool will show the following message: “The explanation for the LEA/ RUA/ IP Application related to this item has been marked as identical to the following items LEA/ RUA/ IP Application, do you want to apply the current review for those item(s) too?” At the bottom, the tool will show the entry number of the element, the organization name, year and the type.

Screenshot 79: The message that is seen by SMO while reviewing an item that is linked to another item

Selecting “Yes” will apply the review to the current item to the items stated in the message box, while selecting “No” will require a different review for the item that is indicated in the message box.