| Chair | Janice M. Liebler, ATSF, MD | Los Angeles, CA |
| Vice Chair | Narayan P. Iyer, ATSF, MD | Los Angeles, CA |
| Committee Member | Alex Gileles-Hillel, ATSF, MD | Jerusalem, NA, Israel |
| Committee Member | Anica Law, ATSF, MD, MSci | Boston, MA |
| Committee Member | Clement L. Ren, ATSF, MD, MBA | Philadelphia, PA |
| Committee Member | Deebya R. Mishra, ATSF, MD | Dharan, Province 1, Nepal |
| Committee Member | Eileen G. Collins, ATSF, PhD | Chicago, IL |
| Committee Member | James M. Wells, MD | Birmingham, AL |
| Committee Member | Janet Lee, ATSF, MD | St. Louis, MO |
| Committee Member | Janette K. Burgess, ATSF, BSc, PhD | Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands |
| Committee Member | Jared Chiarchiaro, MD | Portland, OR |
| Committee Member | Jeffrey C. Horowitz, ATSF, MD | Columbus, OH |
| Committee Member | Jessica Bon, ATSF, MD, MS | Winston-Sale, NC |
| Committee Member | Kerri A. Johannson, ATSF, MD, MPH | Calgary, AB, Canada |
| Committee Member | Kymberly M. Gowdy, BS, MS, PhD | Columbus, OH |
| Committee Member | Linda Nici, MD | Providence, RI |
| Committee Member | Mahendra Damarla, MD | Baltimore, MD |
| Committee Member | Marta Kaminska, MD, BSc, MSc | Montreal, QC, Canada |
| Committee Member | Mary A. Nevin, MD | Glenview, IL |
| Committee Member | Meghan E. Rebuli, ATSF, PhD | Chapel Hill, NC |
| Committee Member | Michael N. Kammer, PhD | Toulouse, Occitanie, France |
| Committee Member | Michael W. Sjoding, MD | Ann Arbor, MI |
| Committee Member | Michelle Eakin, PhD | Baltimore, MD |
| Committee Member | Mohammad Badran, ATSF, PhD | Columbia, MO |
| Committee Member | Paul E. Moore, ATSF, MD | Nashville, TN |
| Committee Member | Philippe R. Montgrain, MD | San Diego, CA |
| Committee Member | Scott E. Evans, ATSF, MD | Houston, TX |
| Committee Member | Scott H. Randell, PhD | Chapel Hill, NC |
| Committee Member | Sumita B. Khatri, ATSF, MD, MS | NY, NY |
The Project Review Committee reviews project proposals submitted by assemblies and committees that require scientific peer-review and proposes a rank list in accordance with the priorities of the Society for consideration of funding in the annual budget.
Benchmarks, 2026-2027:
- Continue to provide education to Assembly Chairs, Committee Chairs and Assembly Planning Committee Chairs to improve the quality of applications, note process changes, emphasizing time cycle of successful projects to avoid delays in project completion.
- Collaborate with the Documents Development and Implementation Committee leaders to ensure continued communication regarding projects.
- Improve the PRC review process to minimize score compression. Educate PRC members on necessary rigor, using the full scoring range, and expectations for attending the meeting and actively participating in discussions and decision making.
- Explore ATS NOW to see how it can integrate with the committee’s strategic goals.
- Review Proposals with a systematic process including feedback and develop a rank list for the Finance and the Executive Committees.
- Continue to provide education to Assembly Chairs, Committee Chairs and Assembly Planning Committee Chairs to improve the quality of applications, note process changes, emphasizing time cycle of successful projects to avoid delays in project completion.
- Collaborate with the Documents Development and Implementation Committee leaders to ensure continued communication regarding projects.
- Clarify ATS policy regarding diversity data. Benchmark updates depend upon this clarification.
- Continue to provide feedback on portal.
- This committee is responsible for reviewing content it has previously posted to the ATS website to determine if it should be updated and moved to the new site or archived/deleted. Using parameters established by the ATS Digital Content Committee as a guideline, committee members will make necessary modifications to ensure the content is accurate and conforms with established ATS standards. Reviews are to be completed by July 31, 2025.
- Improve the PRC review process to minimize score compression. Educate PRC members on necessary rigor, using the full scoring range, and expectations for attending the meeting and actively participating in discussions and decision making.
