Expert Review Process

Наверх

Overview

Currently due to amendments to the State Research and Technical Expert Review (SRTER) Rules the Center conducts works to enhance and adopt new state research and technical expert review procedures including those associated with conflict of interest management, issuance of Expert Review Conclusion based on experts’ consensus etc.

SRTER phases for grant and targeted program funding

PHASE I. SUBMISSION PROCESSING

Each phase does not exceed 30 calendar days from completion of the previous phase, phase I - from the date the submission is received.

Submission processing

1. Formal check: submissions are checked for compliance with Competition documentation requirements, SRTER Rules, Basic, Grant and Targeted Program Funding Rules.

2. Maintain data base and base of electronic submissions: submitted data is added to the Center’s DB for further processing, transfer and storage.

3. Review submissions: to identify classification attributes, areas of knowledge, key words in order to define requirements to qualification ad knowledge of potential experts.

 

II PHASE. SELECTION OF EXPERTS

Each phase does not exceed 30 calendar days from completion of the previous phase, phase I - from the date the submission is received.

Selection of experts

1. select candidates: search relevant works (publications, patents), assess publication activity and efficiency of research activity, comparison and ranging of candidates, approval of candidates. Selection criteria include:

a. Academic degree;
b. At least 5 years of experience in the relevant discipline;

c. Relevant qualification.
Additional criteria for project and program expert review are: publications of scientific articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals, Hirsh index (at least 5 for recent 5 years – does not apply to scientists specializing in humanitarian, public, political and social sciences).

2. Establish expert group: selection of approved candidates (at least three experts) based on the following factors:

a. Five-year h-index.
b. Recommendations from lead world universities and research organizations and research experts having publications in the lead world scientific journals in research areas consistent with the SRTER themes.
c. publications in reputable peer-reviewed journals with high impact factor.
Additional factors are:
d. Expert activity experience in foreign organization.
e. experience in successful management of foreign grant.
f. Scientific title (Full Professor, Associate professor, Assistant professor).
g. participation in successfully accomplished research projects.

3. Involve experts: contact a candidate, provide abstract, data on research leader and applicant to ensure expert evaluates his/her competence and conflict of interests, sign contract.

 

PHASE III. Carry out state technical research and technical expert review

Each phase does not exceed 30 calendar days from completion of the previous phase, phase I - from the date the submission is received.

Carry out state technical research and technical expert review

1. Carry out expert review: Expert analyzes submitted materials, makes an expert conclusion by scoring each criteria and providing his/her arguments in the Expert’s comments section. If necessary, he/she also requests and analyzes additional materials that may influence on review quality.

2. Agree on criteria scores within the expert group: Expert studies expert conclusions made by other members of the expert group, makes comments, reviews comments to his/her Conclusion and prepares a final conclusion.

3. prepare Expert Review Conclusion: State Research and Technical Expert Review Conclusion is prepared based on summary evaluation of the expert group for each submission and including score points agreed by experts and their comments.

This Phase also includes forming the list of projects ranked from top to bottom (by the total score value) and containing data on each project (requested funding, name of applicant etc.).

After Phase completion the full set of documents for each submission including all accompanying documents and Expert Review Conclusion as well as lists of projects ranked by the total score are submitted for consideration to National Scientific Councils.