Welcome to the ARC Peer Review pages where you will find information and resources to assist you to succeed in producing quality peer review assessments for the ARC National Competitive Grants Program (NCGP). The contribution of ARC Assessors is extremely valuable in ensuring that the ARC funds the highest quality research as well as providing applicants with useful, constructive feedback for future applications. The ARC is very grateful to all researchers who provide assessments as well as to members of its selection committees. As such, the ARC has released a ‘Statement of Support for Assessors within the National Competitive Grants Program’. The ARC seeks to identify and support high quality and innovative research and the core business of peer review relies on its assessors to provide rigorous assessments of applications submitted to the ARC that are within their expertise. While many of the ARC external assessors are volunteers, all researchers supported by the ARC are expected to participate in peer review for the NCGP. Please take some time to read the material provided on the following pages which includes: an explanation of the comprehensive assessment processes for ARC funding schemes; links to important policies and guidelines that assessors must be familiar with; handbooks to help assessors use the Research Management System (RMS); links to educational resources for peer review training; and a definition of what a quality assessment is along with examples of what is good, bad and what should be avoided in assessments. NCGP Peer Review Framework The Australian Research Council’s (ARC) National Competitive Grants Program (NCGP) supports the highest-quality fundamental and applied research and research training through national competition. It comprises two funding programs, Discovery and Linkage. These programs are each made up of several schemes that provide a structured pathway for researchers to build the scope and scale of their work and collaborative partnerships. Peer review is fundamental in the selection process for funding decisions under the NCGP. Peer review—sometimes called merit review—ensures that government funding is spent on the highest quality research that will advance knowledge and benefit the community. The Global Research Council, of which the ARC is a member, has agreed on seven principles underpinning peer review—Statement of Principles for Scientific Merit Review (Global Summit on Merit Review), 2018. These seven principles underpin the ARC’s policies and processes regarding peer review: Expert assessment: assessors should possess knowledge and expertise in the broad context of the research field; and be able to assess specific methodologies and objectives of an application. Transparency of the review process: applications will be treated equally through a consistent process aligning with documented procedures and assessment criteria; and applicants will receive appropriate feedback from assessor reviews. Impartiality: assessments must be free from bias achieved through strict conflict of interest policies, assessor training and rigorous processes; and applications will be assessed on their merit and in regards to national and international research. Appropriateness: selection processes should be consistent with the complexity of the objectives of the funding scheme; and be appropriate for the size of the scheme. Confidentiality: assessors must keep all material in applications confidential, including intellectual property (IP) and data. Integrity and Ethical considerations: responsible conduct of research to maintain society’s trust in science. Gender, Equality and Diversity: the quality of the review process will be enhanced by the inclusion of all the finest minds in our society incorporating the vast talents and resources offered from underrepresented groups. Additional considerations which may not be universal and may vary depending on the scope of an individual scheme are also recognised by the Global Research Council. Additional criteria may include: Consideration of the broader impacts of the research; A balanced approach to risk, accounting for potentially transformative and high risk/high reward research; and Inclusion of international reviews especially where research is addressing global challenges. Contact We encourage every active researcher to apply to become an assessor for the ARC.If you are not currently an assessor for the ARC and would like to become one, send your CV to ARC-Peer_Review@arc.gov.au. ARC Executive Directors will review all applications in particular, applicant qualifications, employment history, publications, previously held grants and overall experience and standing in the research field of speciality. For further information regarding: Updating your contact details Updating your availability Assessing an application Please contact the ARC Peer Review Team. All queries relating to the use of RMS, please email the Systems Support team or call +61 2 6287 6789.