Regional Action Plan to support the governance of Responsible Research & Innovation in the Southern & Eastern Regional Operational Programme 2014 - 2020
Appeals
SFI has a formal Appeals Process which is published on the SFI Website. 1. Introduction
This policy establishes procedures and responsibilities for the appeal of the declination of a proposal by SFI. Inmaking its decision regarding funding, SFI takes into account the peer reviewassessments of the scientific and technical merits of a proposal, but also the value to Ireland of the research programme, the budget availability and programmatic priorities of the Foundation. Proposals are evaluated in open competitions via a combination of international peer review and strategic fit with SFI’s mission. In addition to the principles espoused by SFI’s core values, SFI uses the following principles in reaching its funding decisions: value for money, strategic impact, efficient use of the peer review system, internationalisation, critical mass, cohesion with other funding streams, and availability of funding. The primary aim of the SFI appeals procedure is to ensure that SFI’s review process itself has been fair and reasonable and that SFI’s stated review procedures were followed. Although the appeal procedure is not a peer review process itself and will not re-open such a peer review process, it may address procedural errors in the peer review process, or other aspects of proposal review including: unaccounted-for conflicts of interest, inappropriate consideration of rumour / hearsay, or incomplete / inconsistent documentation being made available to the reviewers. SFI would like to emphasise that in all such cases a robust argument must be articulated and that the appeal will subsequently follow the specific procedures outlined in section 2. It is appreciated that applicantsmay, from time to time, disagreewith the detailed technical perspective of the expert referee, or their position on the overall quality or impact of the proposed research. However, SFI has full confidence in the high quality of experts that it engages in the peer reviewprocess and takes the position that this source of expert input allows SFI to make the best and most informed decisions. The judgment, interpretation, or level of understanding of these experts is, therefore, not grounds for appeal. SFI now has in place a formal process integrated into some of its programmes, whereby applicants are invited to provide a scientific response. In programmes where this response stage does not form part of the SFI review process, an appeal may be accepted where specific factual inaccuracies can be clearly identified. Otherwise, appeals must be limited to clearly identifiable issues of procedure. The process required for invoking the formal process of appeal is outlined in detail in section 2. Regarding appeals made prior to full technical peer review of a proposal; SFI remains confident that the procedures for submission of EoIs, pre-proposals and full proposals are clearly delineated in the call documentation and that it remains the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that these are followed correctly. For this reason, appeals based on applications that have been deemed administratively ineligible, including, but not restricted to, late applications, applications exceeding page limits ormissing documentation, will not be considered unless it can be explicitly demonstrated that this resulted from an oversight by SFI. Appeals based on funding levels, or award conditions on applications that have been approved for funding, will not be considered. Award of SFI funding is discretionary and the appeal process is not an adversarial one. A formal hearing, therefore, is not provided. Factors such as programme budgets and priorities will have to be taken into account when making a decision on an appeal.
Southern Regional Assembly | Regional Action Plan
55
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker