Audit of Applicant Feedback – Long Descriptions
Figure 1: Quality of Peer Reviews by Criteria
| Approach | Originality | Applicant | Environment | Impact | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pillar 1 | 68% | 21% | 72% | 21% | 20% |
| Pillar 2 | 72% | 45% | 61% | 39% | 47% |
| Pillar 3 | 79% | 40% | 61% | 36% | 48% |
| Pillar 4 | 63% | 39% | 60% | 32% | 42% |
| Combined pillars | 70% | 36% | 64% | 32% | 38% |
Figure 2: Quality of Peer Review - Report Format
| Synopsis | Feedback | Professional | Budget | Appropriate | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pillar 1 | 62% | 79% | 90% | 52% | 98% |
| Pillar 2 | 73% | 81% | 94% | 57% | 98% |
| Pillar 3 | 73% | 88% | 98% | 64% | 100% |
| Pillar 4 | 65% | 79% | 89% | 50% | 96% |
| Combined pillars | 68% | 81% | 92% | 55% | 98% |
Figure 3: Quality of Scientific Officer Notes
| Str/weakness | Greatest impact | Discussion | Encouragement | Feedback | Budget | Organized | Tone | Appropriate | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pillar 1 | 78% | 83% | 61% | 91% | 72% | 67% | 96% | 100% | 100% |
| Pillar 2 | 75% | 77% | 46% | 88% | 71% | 46% | 88% | 100% | 98% |
| Pillar 3 | 79% | 89% | 57% | 93% | 71% | 57% | 93% | 96% | 96% |
| Pillar 4 | 71% | 76% | 38% | 93% | 71% | 31% | 86% | 100% | 95% |
| Combined pillars | 76% | 80% | 50% | 91% | 71% | 50% | 90% | 99% | 98% |
- Date modified: