ARC – The Rejoinder Process Maya Roberts Senior Grants Officer Research Services Office

Overview of ARC Funding Process Source: http://www.arc.gov.au/Peer-Review-Overview-ARC-funding-process

Rejoinders Are part of the grant assessment process Two types of assessors: two College of Experts members (General Assessors), and at least two Detailed Assessors (aka external assessors) Give applicants an opportunity to respond to assessment comments made by external assessors Rejoinders are not seen by external assessors but are considered by the ARC College of Experts Panel (CoE) or Selection Advisory Committee (SAC)

Assessment process CoE members assigned to discipline panels, which vary by scheme Two General Assessors assigned for each proposal – Carriage 1 and Other Carriage Carriage 1 assigns Detailed Assessors Carriages provide a single preliminary score on A to E rating scale Detailed Assessors comments (not scores) provided to applicant for rejoinder

Assessment process Carriages view Detailed Assessor comments, scores and rejoinder, review initial scores and assessment, discuss assessment with other carriages, and provide final ratings Proposal score is used to rank all proposals before meeting of General Assessors at the Selection Meeting to discuss proposals and to make recommendations re funding

Rating Scale Rating Scale Criteria Recommendation A Outstanding: Of the highest quality and at the forefront of research in the field. Approximately 10% of Proposals should receive ratings in this band. Recommended unconditionally B Excellent: Of high quality and strongly competitive. Approximately 15% of Proposals should receive ratings in this band. Strongly support recommendation of funding C Very Good: Interesting, sound and compelling. Approximately 20% of Proposals should receive ratings in this band. Support recommendation of funding with reservation D Good: Sound, but lacks a compelling element. Approximately 35% of Proposals are likely to fall into this band. Unsupportive of recommendation for funding E Uncompetitive: Uncompetitive and has significant weaknesses or more fatal flaws. Approximately 20% of Proposals are likely to fall into this band. Not recommended for funding

Scoring and Ranking Each proposal is scored and a ranked list derived for each panel Source: ARC Selection Meetings presentation by Dr Dan, 8 June 2016

RMS Proposal view – CoE member Source: ARC Selection Meetings presentation by Dr Dan, 8 June 2016

The Rejoinder Submission Process Notification When assessor reports are released, a notice is posted on the ARC website and a network message sent to the RSO The first named CI also receives an automated email Access and submission Assessor reports and rejoinders forms are accessed and submitted via RMS

The Rejoinder Submission Process Period Usually 2 weeks to respond Internal closing deadline set to allow RSO to review and submit rejoinders to ARC Need to submit rejoinder in RMS to RSO Late rejoinders are not accepted by the ARC RMS Instructions PDF Format (453KB) – Word Format (246KB)

ARC Rejoinder Instructions Be clear and concise 5000 character limit (including spaces) No pictures, graphs, links, or other documents can be included Clarify any perceived weaknesses Directly address assessor comments Be constructive

ARC Rejoinder Instructions Rejoinders should draw only on information already provided in the proposal Rejoinders should not include: new information including new research results/methods reference to any new awards, appointments or publications since submission any information that was left out of or incorrectly entered in the original proposal any information relevant to eligibility

Bad Assessments Respond via rejoinder If you feel that an assessment is unethical or provided by a conflicted assessor, you need to act promptly and contact the RSO to ask that the assessment be reviewed by the ARC during the rejoinder period. Note the assessment panel will disregard a patently unfair assessment

Some Preparation tips… Advise other investigators in advance when the assessor reports and rejoinder period is expected to commence Start preparing your response early Ensure you address the major criticisms Refer back to the application as required Example Assessor C: The proposal suggests that PI Bloggs will play only a minor scientific role… Response: In relation to Assessor C’s comment re PI Bloggs’s involvement, she will have significant scientific input into the project and provide supervision of research personnel as detailed at pages 56 and 99 of the proposal.

Some Preparation tips… Always be professional and polite, even if you feel the assessors have not been! Be assertive, when required – not aggressive Be mindful of your tone Remember the external assessors don’t see your response – only the CoE/SAC do The assessment panel will disregard or downgrade an unfair assessment Is there a better word? Use a Thesaurus

Useful ARC links Rejoinders ARC Funding Process Assessor Resources includes guidelines e.g. dos and don’ts for assessors examples of good and bad assessments Assessor Handbook Instructions for Detailed and General Assessors PDF format (1MB) – Word format (183KB) Good Luck!