1. NHMRC Rebuttal
Gareth Rees

2. What happens? By the rules
7.1 External Assessments and Applicant Response (Project Rules 2017)
All applications are assessed by a peer review panel. 2 spokespeople assigned to assess each application. NHMRC will seek at least two reviews from External Assessors. Prior to the GRP meeting, applicants will have an opportunity to rebut the reviews provided by Spokespersons and External Assessors.
4.1.9 Applicant Response (Guide to Peer Review 2017)
The Assessors’ Report will be provided to applicants in one of two release periods. Instructions on the required format of Applicant Response and the date that it is due will be provided with the release of the Assessors’ Report. The response should address the questions raised and is not an opportunity to modify the proposed research plan. Applicants will be allowed up to 10 days, inclusive of weekends and public holidays, in which to submit their Applicant Response. The provision of the Assessors Report to applicants is dependent upon the timely provision and availability of reports from the Spokespersons and External Assessors and therefore may occur outside of the indicative time periods. Where significant delays occur, applicants will be notified.
Spokesperson reassessment of applications
Once the Applicant Responses have been received, the 1SP and 2SP for each application will consider the research proposal in conjunction with the Assessors’ Report and Applicant Response. The 1SP and 2SP will then be asked to review their initial scores and may rescore the application in RGMS against each of the three assessment criteria.

3. When does it happen? Grants submitted 15th March 2017
Assigners find 2EAs
EAs complete reports (no scores)
Apr
May
We are here
Assessor (reports released)
5-16 Jun: response due 10 days ~15-26 Jun
26 Jun - 4 July: ~6-14 July
Jun
Jul
GRP meetings over 6 weeks
1&2 SP already scored (NFFC vs rescue)
2SP only speaks to EA issues and rebuttal
Completion peer review 8 September
Aug
Sep
Oct
Grant outcomes announced Nov
Nov

4. Where do you get it?
You will receive notice directing you to RGMS.

5. What do you get? APPXXXXXX_ assessment_comments.pdf – consists of:
Letter telling you what to do;
Attachment A – assessor comments; and
Attachment B formatting requirements.

6. Assessor Comments - Attachment A
Attachment A – you will have comments from the two spokespersons and several external assessors
Comments will be under the following headings for each assessor (No scores provided):
01 Scientific Quality
02 Significance of the expected outcomes AND/OR Innovation of the concept
03 Team quality and capability – relative to opportunity
Budget comments
Overall comments

7. Format - Attachment B
A single document converted into a PDF file that must not exceed 2Mb in size.
Not more than 2 pages (3 pages for applications that addressed the Indigenous Research Excellence Criteria).
All margins must be at least 2cm. At least 12 point and Times New Roman only. Must be set to single or greater. Text within tables must comply with the above requirements concerning fonts and spacing.
Do not include links to additional information on any website in the Applicant Response.
PDF file must be named in the following format: “Application ID - CIA Surname - Applicant Response.pdf” (for example: APP Smith -Applicant Response.pdf).
Template Available from RSO on request!

8. What do you say?
The rebuttal should be used to clarify queries raised by the reviewers.
Do not propose changes to the project plan, methodology or team membership.
References and updates to the Chief Investigator’s publication list are allowed but must be included within the page limit.
It is important to raise potential concerns regarding the appropriateness of assessor comments during the applicant response period. Complaints received after peer review will be difficult to address. Talk to RSO.

9. How do you submit? RGMS
Assessments Rebuttals – results page select the Rebuttal tab and the Rebuttal link from the drop down menu:
Then upload your rebuttal document and select yes under completion of Rebuttal. Save and return.

10. What then?
CONSIDERED - The 1SP and 2SP for each application will consider the research proposal in conjunction with the Assessors’ Report and Rebuttal. The 1SP and 2SP will then be asked to review their initial scores and may rescore the application in RGMS against each of the three assessment criteria. NFFC OR PANEL - The Not for Further Consideration (NFFC) process. The Spokespersons’ scores will determine the ranked list for each panel. The bottom 50% of applications from each list will form a preliminary NFFC list and will be provided to respective panel members before the GRP meeting. PANEL – If you are not NFFC, then your application will be considered by the panel. 1SP speaks to your application. The 2SP present the Rebuttal briefly and highlight their agreement/disagreement with the 1SP and External Assessors’ comments.

11. Why do it? Only opportunity to address reviewer concerns.
Can change scores.
Is explicitly considered by 2nd spokesperson. Essential in panel discussion.

12. Useful links
PEER REVIEW
RGMS TRAINING
REBUTTALS FOR
RSO Contact – Gareth Rees