Peer review process

Peer review process

The University operates a Peer Review Process which require all bids with values over £50,000 (fEC) and/or to one of the following funders to be reviewed prior to submission:

  • UK Research Councils
  • National Institute of Health Research
  • Department of Health
  • NHS
  • Strategic Health Authority
  • British Academy
  • Royal Society
  • Leverhulme Trust
  • Wellcome Trust
  • Joseph Rowntree Foundation
  • Nuffield Foundation
  • Medical Research Charities
  • European Commission

Please note that this process only automatically applies to bids on which UW is lead. Where UW is a partner on a bid this process does not normally apply. The lead investigator is expected to organise peer review. This should be done in good time to ensure that the investigator has time to revise the bid in light of the reviews. Two reviewers should be used and their name and institutions recorded in Section 4 of the approval form. The reviewers may be internal or external – this is at the discretion of the investigator.

 Reviewers should meet the following requirements:

  • They must not be co-investigators on the project
  • They must be broadly independent of the project
  • They must have expertise in the subject area
  • Ideally, at least one of the reviewers should have experience of bidding for and winning funding and experience of the funder 

The nature of the peer review process is at the discretion of the investigator and the reviewers. They may decide that it should be an iterative process with a reviewer seeing and commenting further on the revised application or they may decide that a reviewer will comment on the initial draft and have no further role to play. Peer review should be a formative process. It is important that investigators take on board all comments from reviewers. There is no expectation that an investigator should accept all comments but where a reviewer has serious concerns about the viability of a bid, this should be given serious consideration. The GRS does not ask to see the reviews or evidence of how the investigator has responded to reviews. It does, however, wish to see evidence that peer review has taken place. Therefore reviewers should sign the approval form to demonstrate that review has taken place (or alternatively an email stating this can be appended to the form).

The process seeks to improve the quality of the bids it reviews and to ensure that all major bids submitted are of high quality. Please contact Charlotte Wasilewski for further details