@palanski We're so glad to hear your team is excited to use the new dashboard! We hope it makes tracking and resubmission more streamlined for everyone.

@jennifer-carroll Hi there! Thank you for the clarification. I'd like to note that your initial reply has been the basis of many successful renewal submissions, whereby only EN layout has been provided by our agency and others for renewal of originally EN+FR efiles. It was very clear that this was the correct approach: Q: "Does this mean that for renewals, we only need to send in the English layout without English and French copy decks?" A: "You are correct for straight renewals if the previous file contained a copy correct layout." This latest reply is a change to this previously clear policy; it may be simpler to delete the original post to prevent confusion if this is the way things will be moving forward.

Hey @stet The base highlighting for previously approved copy should remain throughout the review process. It should not change. The reviewer still needs to be able to easily locate and assess the areas of the piece that are “new” content. The only highlighting that would be changing is in the sections which are “new content”. These sections would have no background highlighting so if you are picturing overlapping highlighting, this would not happen.

@jennifer-carroll Thanks very much for clarifying!

@SKW , The PAAB does not require a PO. We currently accept EFT or cheque. We do not accept credit cards. For additional information you may find helpful, please see https://www.paab.ca/about-review-fees.htm.

Hey @SKW We did some digging and here's what we found: In the last 6 months, there have been approximately 4087 distinct APS submitted for review from 65 manufacturers. Of these, 87 (just over 2%) were submitted directly from 6 manufacturers. Of these, 2 manufacturers did not use an agency at all during that period.