
Research Based University Chairs of Excellence
Universities of Paris
Independence, no conflict of interest and confidentiality of evaluators
Scientific expert evaluators are required to commit themselves by a declaration on the acceptance of the Guide for peer-reviewers related to a specific project, stating that they will conform with the principles outlined therein and will follow the rules and procedures set by UniverSud Paris. This includes keeping all information gained during the evaluation process confidential and not retaining (and/or copying) any materials that pertain to proposals or the evaluation.
Scientific expert evaluators shall not contact any person connected to a proposal that he/she has received for evaluation.
Scientific expert evaluators having a link with a proposal are not allowed to participate in its evaluation and are required to declare such links. Should for instance be declared any of the following situation (list non exhaustive):
a) Scientific expert evaluators who are members of one of the institutions chosen as a host institution in one of the proposals they are evaluating;
b) Scientific expert evaluators who had relevant scientific collaborations with one of the candidates they are evaluating;
c) Scientific expert evaluators who are research directors, administrators, managers, and /or owners, even with minority stakes, of foundations, public institutions or private companies which participate to the programme as host institutions;
Should scientific expert evaluator have a conflict of interest in any of the proposals, he/she shall declare it immediately to UniverSud Paris administration and prevent oneself from evaluating the proposal.