Guidelines	
for Reviews for the Establishment of Priority Programmes

	
 	
I	Programme Information
The Priority Programme is a form of strategic research funding involving an open call for proposals. The aim of the programme is to promote work on topics that can be expected to have a formative impact on a field of science or the humanities. This impact can be achieved both by discovering new areas of research and also by rethinking known areas, working on them from a new perspective or based on a new approach, and providing momentum for this to happen. Interdisciplinary proposals offer particular potential here. Under the Priority Programme, individual research projects are funded that contribute to the network as a whole achieving the objectives formulated in the establishment proposal with regard to knowledge gain.
Another particular feature of the Priority Programme is that it promotes collaboration between researchers across different locations. Measures tailored specifically to the Priority Programme are pursued in order to promote researchers in early career phases and also equity. 

The Senate negotiates once a year on the setting up of Priority Programmes for submitted proposals arising from science and the humanities.

Selection panels of the review boards for establishment proposals for Priority Programmes prepare a recommendation for decision by the Senate. This process brings together members of different review boards who review and assess proposals similar in subject and make a recommendation to the Senate as to which proposals should be established. The meeting of the selection panel is normally chaired by a member of the Senate from an unrelated subject area (see the Guidelines for Priority Programmes - DFG form 50.05).
www.dfg.de/formulare/50_05
Preparation for the meeting:
Please prepare for the meeting such that you can express an opinion on all the establishment proposals. For those on which you have been asked to comment, please prepare a brief written statement which you can bring to the meeting (in digital form) or submit via elan to the DFG Head Office immediately prior to the meeting.
elan.dfg.de
Please note:

General guidelines for reviews (DFG form 10.20) are available at:
www.dfg.de/formulare/10_20
In addition to the guidelines mentioned there on issues of bias, favouritism and conflicts of interest, please note the following special guidelines for dealing with the appearance of bias/conflicts of interest:

Please check whether you have any academic/scientific or other connections with the members of the programme committee.

If you and a member of the programme committee belong to the same department, this does not in itself give rise to an appearance of bias. If the department is divided into institutes, an appearance of bias is only considered to exist for the purposes of this process if you both belong to the same institute.

If you are considering the possibility of submitting your own proposal within one of the proposed Priority Programmes, please notify the DFG Head Office immediately of this potential conflict of interest.

Once you have disclosed the conflict of interest at the start of the meeting of the selection panel, you may participate in the review and evaluation process.

The review should not exceed two pages in length. 
II	Structure of the Review
1.	How would you assess the quality of the project, especially with regard to originality and the anticipated contribution to knowledge? To what extent can the topic to be addressed be expected to have a formative effect on the relevant field of science or the humanities?
2.	Are the plans for organising the interdisciplinary and multi-location collaboration/networking convincing? 
3.	Are the research objectives coherent and clearly achievable over the course of the planned timeframe (six years)? How do you rate the explanations on the handling of research data?
4.	Is the coordinator qualified to manage a major interdisciplinary and multi-location research group? 
5.	To what extent do measures designed to support researchers in early career phases and equity (in particular measures to promote female researchers as well as family-friendly provisions) exceed the usual standards?
6.	How would you assess the planned integration of the envisaged research activities into the international research system? 
7.	Are the envisaged activities sufficiently and convincingly distinct from other current DFG programmes with a direct thematic connection (e.g. Collaborative Research Centres, Research Units) or programmes offered by other funding organisations (including those out-side Germany)?
8.	To facilitate the structuring of the discussion in the selection panel, please provide an initial appraisal using the categories below:
•	Category A: The Priority Programme can be recommended for establishment without reservation.
•	Category B: The Priority Programme is largely convincing but requires discussion.
•	Category C: The Priority Programme is not convincing and therefore its establishment should not be recommended.