Advice for Project Reviewers
IUPAC operates using a project-driven system. This is done to ensure
that only high quality projects bear the IUPAC label, to encourage participation
by the worldwide chemistry community, to optimize the use of IUPAC's
limited financial resources, and to simplify management and accountability.
As part of the procedure the Union asks experts in the field of chemistry
to review proposals for new projects. These reviewers should be experts
in the appropriate field and are, in general, chosen to avoid the appearance
of conflict of interest. The reviews are kept anonymous, with the exception
that the names of the reviewers are disclosed to the members of the
funding body(ies) (Division or Standing Committee, Project Committee).
For your guidance, IUPAC does not fund original research. It does support
projects of importance to the international scientific community, for
example, in the areas of nomenclature, terminology and symbols; validated
and compiled data; standard methods and procedures; education and the
public understanding of chemistry; or any subject requiring the development
of a consensus among chemists worldwide. More detailed criteria for
suitable IUPAC projects can be found in the document 'Guidelines
for IUPAC Projects', available at <www.iupac.org/projects>.
Your critical assessment of the accompanying proposal, based on your
expertise in the field, will be a significant determining factor in
the project approval process. Please evaluate the Project application
for its qualitative and quantitative information content. An overall
assessment of the Project's scientific soundness and quality should
also be provided in one or two paragraphs.
The following questions should be considered: (rev
1. What is your judgement on the value of the project? Should changes
be considered to improve the project?
2. Will the results of this project have the stated impact as suggested
by the proposers?
3. Is the Dissemination Plan adequate?
4. If this project falls into the category Nomenclature or Standard
Methods and Procedure, are there adequate processes to ensure international
5. Should the project be supported by a different organization or is
it duplicative of efforts by other organizations?
6. Is the expertise of the Chair and Task Group Members ideally suited
to carry out this project? Should additional members or experts be recruited?
Is the proposed group suitably diverse?
7. Is the budget appropriate and justified? Do the benefits justify
8. Are there any possible conflicts of interest or copyright problems?
9. Overall rating.
Very Suitable - Suitable but should be improved - or - Not Suitable
Please describe, if not covered previously.