Intention: This document sets out performance standards and operational guidelines for peer reviews of research to be supported by the West Virginia Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station (WVAFES). The intention of the document is to facilitate the multi-state activities required to comply with the provisions of the federal Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998. These standards and guidelines have been adopted by reference in the West Virginia Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station’s Plan of Work.

Definition: Peer review of an individual research project proposal is defined as the evaluation of the conceptual and technical soundness of the intended activity by individuals qualified by their status in the same discipline, or a closely related field of science, to judge the worthiness of the proposal. Peer reviewers may also be asked in some cases to assess a project proposal for its likelihood for achieving the intended objectives and the anticipated outcomes.

Scope: The topics covered by this document pertain to research project proposals that are to be sanctioned and funded as part of the federal-state partnership in agricultural research. These standards also have been adopted by State Agricultural Experiment Stations at other institutions. These standards and guidelines do not apply to proposed research that is subject to peer review by competitive grant agencies, peer review of research publications, or merit review of extension activities. However, in the aggregate, all research projects sponsored by subscribing stations and the regional association will have been formally peer reviewed, before the expenditure of any federal funds.

Process: Prior to the initiation of any research project (to be supported wholly or in part by federal formula funding or by a special research grant), the Director of WVAFES (or, in the case of multi-state projects, the administrative advisor) will call for a peer review of the proposed research activities. A minimum of three peer scientists (i.e., individuals qualified by their status in the same discipline, or a closely related field of science), will be asked to read and provide written comments on the proposed activities.

Terms of Reference: The terms of reference for the reviewers will focus their attention on questions of the quality of the proposed science, technical feasibility of the research, the validity of the scientific approach, and likelihood for completing the stated objectives. Additional comments may be requested on a project’s relevance to a station’s (or a region’s, or national) priorities, the degree of integration with extension (as appropriate), responsiveness to stakeholder needs, and the accuracy of any claims for multi-disciplinary and multi-state collaboration.

Responsibility: All peer review activities for proposed station projects are the responsibility of the station’s Director, and the administrative advisor for a proposed multi-state project. However, this responsibility may be delegated to others by the station director or administrative advisor.

Appointment of Reviewers: Peer review scientists may be selected from the same campus or from another institution, at the discretion of the WVAFES Director (or administrative advisor), or by the person delegated this authority. Consideration will be given in the selection of peer reviewers to the expenses associated with reviewing individual project proposals.

Additional consideration will be given to appointing reviewers who are without any apparent conflicts of interest and who are without personal or professional bias. Consideration may also be given in selecting reviewers that can protect confidential business information.

The anonymity of reviewers will not be preserved except in very special circumstances.

Documentation: Reviewers will be asked to present their findings in writing, and records of the reviewers’ comments will be preserved for the life of the project, or for a period of three years in the event that a project is not initiated. Document storage will, for the most part, be electronic.

Research not Covered: Projects funded by competitively awarded grants, federal contract research projects, and federal cooperative agreements are not subject to these provisions, as they would be peer reviewed under other authorities.

Performance Standards: Peer review of proposed projects is expected to provide the following performance outcomes:

• increase the quality of science funded by the federal-state partnership,
• better assure relevance to institutional priorities and mission,
• provide more responsiveness to stakeholder needs, and
• identify more opportunities to partner with other states, federal research agencies, and our Cooperative Extension counterparts.