|Charge||To support and assist the committee chairs in the review of career development and project support applications. |
- Regular members are appointed to staggered terms of three-four years beginning July 1 through June 30.
- After completion of four (4) consecutive years of total service, the member must complete a one year hiatus, before returning to a peer review committee.
PC or Apple laptop with wireless internet access.
- Time commitment for critiques of application reviews and pre-meeting orientations.
- Depending on the review cycle, peer review groups meet once or twice a year.
- If the review group is meeting face-to-face, 1 to 2.5 days may be required for peer review meetings and travel time. Less time may be required for a web-based meeting, though members are expected to dedication a full day on the established meeting date.
- Reviewer workload should not exceed 10 application assignments.
- Evaluate merit of assigned applications relative to the peer review criteria.
- Assign a preliminary score and prepare a written critique on the Grants@Heart (G@H) system which will be provided to applicants. The critique should be fair, objective, scholarly, and offer positive constructive criticism to the applicant.
- Post all preliminary scores and critiques on the Grants@Heart website within the allotted timeframe.
- Attend and participate in peer review meetings.
- During or following peer review meetings, modify critique as necessary, to reflect the discussion and recommended scoring at the meeting.
- Minimum Assistant Professor career level or equivalent.
- Nationally recognized competence in one or more fields of biomedical research.
- Prior peer review experience of extramural grant applications at the regional or national level.
- Current or recent independent peer reviewed funding typically at the national level; or equivalent research funding for reviewers employed in industry or government.
- Consistent record of peer reviewed publications within the past 5 years.
- Knowledge of the AHA and commitment to its mission.
- Mature judgment and objectivity.
- Ability to work effectively in a group.
|Method of Appointment|
- Peer Reviewers can be nominated by the study group chairperson, study group members, Research Committee members and self nominations through G@H.
- Prior to appointment, the candidate’s credentials must be reviewed by the unified steering committee.