Kent Peer Review
Getting constructive feedback on your funding application before submitting greatly increases your chances of success. Not only is it good practice, but some funders demand it. The University has had a system of internal peer review in place since 2011.
- What applications need to go through the system?
- Research council applications; OR
- First substantial applications to an external funder (or applications to specific first grant schemes); OR
- Large grant applications. The threshold for these is based on the total amount being requested, and differs between Faculties:
- Humanities: over £100k;
- Social Sciences: over £200k;
- Sciences: over £300k.
- How do I submit my proposal to Kent Peer Review?
The system is integrated into KRIMSON, and is intended to be both simple, flexible and appropriate to your timeframe and the scale of your project.
In order to get your project peer reviewed, complete the 'Basic Project Information' section on the KRIMSON 'Project Application' record for your proposal as soon as possible, click 'yes' to the question 'peer review required', and choose the Funding Officer relevant to your Faculty as follows:
- Sciences: Dr Helen Leech and Dr Carolyn Barker
- Social Sciences: Brian Lingley
- Humanities: Lynne Bennett
You can leave the rest to us. The relevant Funding Officer will be alerted to your proposal, and will be in touch to suggest the most appropriate reviewer for it from the University's Peer Review College.
All the members of the College have either had experience in getting grants from the funders that they represent, or as part of the funders' peer review colleges, or as members of their panels - or all three. As such, they have considerable experience of what makes a successful application, and can provide feedback which could make the difference between success and failure for your proposal.
- The Peer Review College
- We want the University's peer review system to be as transparent as possible. As such, the membership of the College is open to scrutiny, and is available here (.xls). Any academic with relevant experience can apply to be part of the College.
- Membership will last for two years and can be renewed indefinitely, if the member continues to have a strong association with an external funder. Membership will be decided by the Associate Deans of Research & Innovation (currently Professor Paul Allain (Humanities), Professor Richard Jones (Sciences) and Professor Phil Hubbard (Social Sciences)), in discussion with staff from Research Services.
- Members will be expected to review around 5-8 applications annually, and these will primarily be Research Council applications, although large grants and substantial first grants will also be expected to seek internal peer review.
- If an external call limits the number of applications from a single institution, the PRC will be asked to assess competing internal bids and recommend which should go forward.
- In addition, members will be consulted on issues relating to the external research policy environment, as well as the development of funding internally, by the VC, PVC Research & Innovation, and other members of senior management.
- PRC members will, where time commitments allow, be asked to share their insights with colleagues through the Grants Factory and Early Career Researcher Network, via mock panels, writing workshops, and masterclasses.
- Your name
- Your School
- The funder(s) with whom you have worked
- In what role you have worked with them (for instance as a college member, reviewer or panellist), and
- Whether the interaction is current or historic. If historic, when did it take place.
For further information on peer review at the University, contact Phil Ward
- xtn 7748