Refereeing of scientific research projects is governed by the following rules and procedures:
1. Referees are identified on the basis of their specialization, which matches the subject area of the research project. They are first contacted to seek their willingness to evaluate the research proposal. At this stage, only an abstract is sent to them. After receiving their approval, copies of the research proposal, together with necessary documents, are made available electronically to each of the referees.
2. On receiving the completed evaluation forms electronically from the referees, they are ratified by the Assistant Vice President for Research, and forwarded to the PI through the VDR, so that he/she can duly respond to the points raised by the referees, and make the requested modifications (if any) in the research proposal.
3. For Projects under the first category (with grants up to KD. 4000/-):
- Both the referees' report and PI's response are presented to RS Implementation Committee, to insure that the PI has responded to the comments of the referee, and made all requested modifications.
- The Implementation Committee takes appropriate decision concerning the approval of funding, or request re-evaluation of the modified proposal by the same referee or a new one, after requesting the PI to reform the research project proposal, taking care of the referees comments.
4. For Projects under the second or third categories (more than KD 4000/-):
- Both the referees' reports and PI's response are forwarded to the Faculty Research Committee (FRC), through the VDR, to ensure that the PI has responded to the comments of the referees, and made all requested modifications.
- The FRC makes the appropriate funding recommendation, which is then forwarded by the VDR to RS. This recommendation should be based on the importance of the research project, the reports of the referees, and the response of the PI. The FRC recommendations may be one of the following options:
a. Funding the research project, with the requested budget or an amended budget.
b. Asking RS to send the response of the PI to the referee(s) for re-evaluation.
c. Asking the researcher to modify the research proposal, taking into consideration the points raised by the referee(s). The modified proposal, together with the PI's response to the referees' comments, will be sent back to the same concerned referee(s), for re-evaluation and re-rating.
d. Requesting re-evaluation of the research proposal by an additional referee. In this case, the FRC must provide an acceptable justification for this request. RS sends the research proposal for re-evaluation following approval of the Funding Committee (for project budgets above KD 10,000/-), or the Implementation Committee (for project budgets below KD 10,000/-).
5. The FRC is not authorized to reject funding of a research project, or its cancellation after the project has been refereed with acceptable average scoring. The PI is required to submit a detailed response to the referees' comments, for the committee's approval.
6. The FRC should not recommend funding a research proposal if one of the referees' evaluation ratings is below 70%. In this case, the PI is given the option of re-submitting a modified version of the proposal, in which the comments and points raised by the referee have been considered and addressed.
7. On receiving the recommendations of the FRC, RS forwards the research proposal to the Funding Committee (the third category, with budget above KD 10,000/-), or the Implementation Committee (the second category, with budget less or equal to KD 10,000/-) for the final grant approval.
8. It is not permissible to apply for a research grant for research work that has already been undertaken, or for which good progress has been made in generating the results and outputs.
9. The internal or external referee is rewarded KD 100/- for the refereeing of a research project, and project final report.
10. The internal referee is rewarded KD 50/- for refereeing the annual or progress report of the project.
11. Deans and Vice Deans must not act as referees for projects submitted by investigators from the same faculty.