Grant Review Process

Grant Review Process for Advanced Engineering Platform

All grant submitted to AEP will be carefully evaluated accordingly to international practice and following strict protocol and well defined procedure and process. The process of evaluation will be transparent and carefully monitored by Campus Research Management. Since the nature and purpose of the Sustainable and SMART Living Lab (S2L) and Pump Priming Scheme (PPS) are fundamentally different, there will be minor differences in the evaluation process.

a) Evaluation Procedure for Sustainable and SMART Living Lab (S2L) proposals

1.  An evaluation panel of at least 6 members (including one of the AEP directors) will be formed for the evaluation. The Panel members will be appointed by the Director and Deputy Director of AEP;

2.  Two evaluators will be assigned to each submitted proposal, chosen by the grant administrator (Mohana).

3.  Each of the evaluators will complete their evaluations using the Evaluation Report Form, and submit to Mohana prior to the Panel meeting. It is the job of these evaluators to properly scrutinise the proposal given to them;

4.  An evaluation panel will be convened and a Panel Meeting will be organised to deliberate the evaluators' reports. Minutes of meeting will be confidential and recorded by Mohana.

5.  During the Panel Meeting, the evaluators will take turns to present and justify their support decision of each proposals to the panel members. The decision can be "Not Supported", "can Support", "Must Support". The panel members will then vote on whether they support the decision of the evaluators on that particular proposal.

6.  All "Must Support" decisions will automatically be funded. Proposals with only one decision as "Must support" and at least one decision as "Can support" will be ranked according to grading from the evaluators and those highly ranked will be funded. Those proposals receiving at least "Not Supported" decision will NOT be funded.

7.   In the interests of fair play and anonymity, Panel Members who have submitted proposals will not participate in the evaluation of their own named proposal, and will be asked to leave the room during the discussion of that proposal.

8.   Panel members will not be allowed to discuss any matters concerning the evaluation panel outside of the panel meeting, and the minutes of the meeting will be kept confidential and available only to the panel members and CRM.

9.   The final decision of funding award is with the Director and Deputy Director of AEP, and no appeal will be entertained.

b) Evaluation Procedure for Pump Priming scheme (PPS) proposals

1.  An evaluation panel of at least 6 members (including one of the AEP directors) will be formed as and when required for the evaluation. The Panel members will be appointed by the Director and Deputy Director of AEP, and should consist of at least 1 member not from SoE or SoIT.

2.  In the interests of fair play and anonymity, academics who are named in the PPS submission will not be part of the evaluation panel;

3.  Three evaluators will be assigned to each submitted proposal, chosen by the grant administrator (Mohana).

4.  Each of the evaluators will complete their evaluations using the Evaluation Report Form, and submit to Mohana prior to the Panel meeting. It is the job of these evaluators to properly scrutinise the proposal given to them.

5.  The evaluators will then indicate whether this proposal should proceed to the oral defence stage;

6.  During the oral defence stage, the PI and at least 1 Co-I will be asked to give a verbal presentation and defend the proposal before the panel members during a panel meeting;

7.  An evaluation panel will be convened after the oral defence stage to deliberate the PPS proposal. A panel decision will be made to proceed with funding or reject this PPS proposal. Minutes of meeting will be confidential and recorded by Mohana;

8.  Panel members will not be allowed to discuss any matters concerning the evaluation panel outside of the panel meeting, and the minutes of the meeting will be kept confidential and available only to the panel members and CRM.

9.  The final decision of funding award is with the Director and Deputy Director of AEP, and no appeal will be entertained.