Understanding Nagano's configurable evaluation modules

One mechanism, three names

In Nagano, “convenience review” (convenance), “configurable evaluation modules” and “Nagano Modules” refer to the same mechanism. Depending on the institution or the team, people use one term or another, but it is always the same part of the platform.

Convenience review
Configurable evaluation modules
Nagano Modules

This mechanism lets you:

create different types of evaluation;
configure each one for the department concerned;
decide when an evaluation is triggered;
assign it to the right people;
document the analysis;
make and keep a decision;
trigger other evaluations when needed.

The convenience review is therefore neither a mere feasibility check nor a simple administrative sign-off: it is the framework in which an institution organizes the institutional evaluations its projects need.

What is an evaluation module?

An evaluation module is a type of evaluation that the institution configures itself. Each type has its own people in charge, its own grid, its own trigger rules and its own way of reaching a decision, independently of the others.

A few evaluation types configured by institutions

Contract
Budget / finance
Skills
Pharmacy
Imaging
Nursing / clinical resources
Final review

These are only examples: the list is open, and each institution defines the types it needs.

Triggers

An evaluation does not have to be added to every project. Nagano can trigger the right evaluation at the moment the project's context calls for it, rather than at a single predetermined step. It can be triggered at different points in the journey, automatically or manually, including:

When a project is created: Some evaluations start as soon as the file is opened.
At a specific step of the process: A change of step or status in the process makes the evaluation necessary.
By an office: An office starts the evaluation.
When a form is submitted: Submitting a given form starts the evaluations associated with it.
When a response is saved: Saving a response starts one or more evaluations.
When an evaluation is submitted or completed: A submitted or completed evaluation triggers one or more others.
Based on an answer or a decision: The content of an answer, in a form or a grid, or the decision made in an evaluation makes another evaluation necessary.
Manually: An authorized person adds the evaluation when the situation calls for it, even if no rule anticipated it.

Other events can also be configured according to the process: this list is not exhaustive, and several triggers can be combined.

Project, form or evaluation: where evaluations start

Whatever the trigger, an evaluation stems from a project, a form or another evaluation, and each of these can start one or several evaluations.

Project evaluation(s) The project itself: when it is created, at a step of its process or through a manual addition.
Form evaluation(s) A submitted form, or one of the answers it contains.
Evaluation evaluation(s) A submitted or completed evaluation, an answer in its grid or the decision made.

An evaluation can itself trigger one or more other evaluations:

Evaluation
Evaluation
Evaluation
…

There is no single sequence and no fixed number of evaluations: evaluations can trigger one another according to the rules of the process, making it possible to build complex, adaptive evaluation journeys.

Conceptual illustration of how evaluations are triggered, not a screenshot of Nagano: the evaluations, their links and their number depend on each institution's configuration.

The standard cycle

Each evaluation follows a simple cycle, which the institution adjusts to its needs.

1. Trigger
2. Assignment
3. Evaluation
4. Decision

One or several reviewers: Depending on the type, the evaluation is entrusted to one person or to several.
A separate decision-maker: The decision can rest with someone other than the person who did the analysis.
Reassignment: An evaluation can change hands along the way without losing the work already done.
Deadlines: Each evaluation type can have its own deadlines.
Reminders: Reminders help the people assigned meet those deadlines.
Grids: The analysis is documented in a grid suited to the evaluation type.
Decision: The decision is recorded, communicated and kept with the file.
Traceability: Dates, people and exchanges remain attached to the evaluation.

Grids and watched questions

An evaluation grid is a custom form for the reviewer. It brings together the questions specific to their analysis and can reuse information the research team already provided, so it does not have to be asked again.

Advanced processes

When an evaluation needs more than a simple assignment–evaluation–decision sequence, it can become a process made of several steps.

Custom steps: The process is split into steps that reflect the team's actual work.
Mandatory or optional: Some steps must be completed, others can be skipped.
Loops: Sequences of steps can be repeated as many times as needed.
Progress: The current step and the progress of the process stay visible.
Pausing: The process can be paused when the situation requires it.
History: The dates and the people in charge of each step are kept.
Comments: Exchanges are recorded on the step they relate to.
Attached files: Useful documents stay attached to the step concerned.

This advanced behaviour is currently confirmed for project evaluations.

What happens if an answer changes?

An evaluation may have been triggered by an answer. If that answer changes, Nagano reassesses whether the link between the answer and the evaluation it started still holds.

There is no single rule: what happens next depends on the situation, for instance the status of the project, the work already done on the evaluation, or whether another reason still justifies it. Depending on the case, the evaluation can be kept, cancelled or removed.

An evaluation that has already been assigned is not erased: it is cancelled, and its history stays in the file.

Roles

The same process looks different depending on who takes part in it.

Manager: Configures the evaluation types and follows all evaluations, their assignments and their deadlines.
Reviewer: Receives the evaluations assigned to them, consults the relevant information and fills in their grid.
Decision-maker: Has the analysis and the information needed to make and document a decision.
Research team: Submits its project once and follows the status of the evaluations that concern it.

With or without ethics

Nagano Modules do not depend on a research ethics board. They work with or without an ethics review process, for every type of project.

With an ethics process
Without an ethics process
Fundamental research
Innovation
Different types of projects
Multicentre projects