Peer review leads and team members will be assigned/agreed to by the steering team for each functional area. A minimum of three peer reviewers will be appointed by the peer review lead to review each proposal. Assigned peer reviewers upon reviewing a proposal will complete the attached form and send their completed review form as a PDF document to peer review lead of the team. The peer review lead will complete a composite peer review recommendation (summarizing all views on a single form) for each proposal. The peer review lead will then sign the composite peer review, and submit a scanned electronic copy of the composite review as well as the individual review PDFs to GSM group mailbox (GSK-EDB-GSM@gsk.com). The composite form will be passed onto the project steering team who will assess proposals across all priorities and make a final decision regarding funding. The individual peer review forms are necessary for audit and feedback purposes.
Principal applicants (PAs) will come from two sources. The first source will be Singaporean Universities (Nanyang Technological University, National University of Singapore, and Singapore Management University). The second will come from Agency for Science, Technology, and Research Institutes (A*Star Institutes, www.a-star.edu.sg ). Industry may partner with a university or institute but may not be PAs.
If a decision is made not to fund a proposal, a clear rationale should be provided so that this can be fed back to principal applicants. If the proposal has significant potential but is lacking in sufficient detail to assess, this should also be indicated so that the applicant can be informed and encouraged to correct the deficiency in the proposal. For instance, if the idea is good but the budget too high, this can be fed back to the principal applicant, or the peer reviewers may recommend to fund the proposal at a lower funding level with a modified scope.
If a proposal is...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document