Evaluation of Research Proposals and Results Subcommittee (CERP): Procedure for appeal against a decision to reject a research proposal
1. Applicants for IPA Evaluation of Research Proposals and Results Subcommittee (CERP) funding who were unsuccessful in their application may appeal against this decision to the President of the IPA (or his/her appointee). Such an appeal must occur within 30 days of being notified of the decision of the CERP. The CERP rejection letter will enclose a copy of this appeals process.
2. Appropriate grounds for such appeal are restricted to the procedures followed by the CERP in arriving at a decision concerning an application.
3. Inappropriate procedures could include (but are not restricted to) the assignment of inappropriate referees, a decision out of line with the judgement of referees, and a refereeing process that is deemed to be inadequate in some way. It is important to note that the scientific conclusion reached by referees and the Chairs of the CERP does not constitute grounds for appeal, even if the applicant believes these to be inadequate in important ways.
4. If the President of the IPA (or his/her appointee) deems the appeal to meet prima facie criteria cited above, he/she (or his/her appointee) will appoint an appeals panel consisting of at least two senior researchers, possibly two members of CERP not previously involved in evaluation of the proposal. No one previously involved with that application in the past, directly or indirectly, may serve as a member of such an appeals panel, and the appeals panel will not include the Chair of CERP,
5. The appeals panel will review the application and all correspondence related to it including correspondence between the Chairs of the CERP. The panel will not concern itself with the merits of the application, but rather if appropriate procedures were followed to arrive at its decision.
6. The panel may take evidence and advice from the Chairs of the CERP, the referees concerned, other appropriate IPA members or non-members and the staff of the IPA. Normally evidence will be collected in writing and it is not expected that the appeals panel will interview either the appellant or officers of the CERP. Mostly it is hoped that the decisions can be made by telephone conference or e-mail.
7. If the appeal is upheld, the President (or his/her appointee) will inform the appellant and the CERP that the CERP is obliged to submit the project to further and immediate peer review, and seek the appellant’s agreement to such resubmission. The referees for the further peer review will be independent of those who had adjudicated on the project in the first instance. They will not be provided with any information regarding the appeal.
8. If the appeal is unsuccessful, the President (or his/her appointee) will inform the appellant that the application may be re-submitted at the next round of CERP funding.
Procedure approved by the Board September 2003
Revised July 2011 to allow immediate review of successful appeals and re-submission of failed appeals at the next round of CERP funding