Overview

The Office of Research and Innovation (OoRI) seeks reviewers to serve a one-year term – beginning January 2025 – as a reviewer of internal funding and limited submission competitions. Selected reviewers will assess internal OoRI applicants and provide a numerical ranking based on pre-determined criteria using the OAR portal. Limited submission competitions are held throughout the year and are dependent on agency funding opportunities. Internal funding programs are reviewed primarily in spring, with some programs offered year-round.

Award Information

• Reviewers will receive $1,500 for their research and scholarly pursuits.
• The duration of the reviewer term is 12 months beginning January 1, 2025.
• Internal funding reviews will primarily take place from March 1 – May 30.

Submission Deadline: November 15, 2024

Program Guidelines

There will be 8 internal funding programs requiring review in Spring 2025. The reviews will be conducted online only. Additionally, throughout the year, reviewers will be asked to review open deadline internal funding applications and agency specific limited submission competitions (NSF MRI, CPRIT HIHR, etc).

INTERNAL FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES ONLY:   Reviewers may not submit applications or be named as a Principal Investigator (PI), co-principal investigator, co-investigator, collaborator, current mentor, or have any other form of substantial contribution on applications that are being considered for research support through internal funding opportunities through the Office of Research and Innovation.

Substantial contributions include those that entail input into the design or writing of the applications, intellectual involvement in data interpretation or analysis, or those in which the reviewer would reap monetary, professional, or personal gain from the involvement in the application.

Required Submission Materials

In the OAR portal, complete the following:

• Project Title: Enter “Office of Research and Innovation Reviewer”
• School: Choose from the dropdown menu
• Abstract: Enter your relevant technical expertise and list federal agencies with which you are familiar.  Provide a list of 3-6 keywords
• Attachments: Upload biosketch or CV.

Other Terms and Conditions

• Failure to comply with any of the Terms and Conditions will result in termination of the reviewer agreement and future payments. The reviewer will become ineligible for future internal funding competitions from the Office of Research and Innovation.

Conflict of Interest Requirements:

Reviewers must avoid not only conflicts of interest (COI) ad defined in UTD PP1029, but also the appearance of such conflicts. A reviewer has a COI when: 

• Have a personal, family, or business relationship that would hinder their ability to serve as a reviewer.
• Have a direct and predictable financial interest in the outcome, or whose immediate relatives have such an interest.
• Have a professional or advisory role in the proposal.
• Have been the graduate (doctoral/masters) advisor or an advisee of an individual named in the proposal.
• Have been, or are, a collaborator or had any other professional relationship (e.g., served as a mentor) with any person on the application within the past 48 months.
• Have been a co-editor on a publication or book with any person on the application within the past 24 months.

Reviewers with a conflict of interest/apparent conflict of interest are obligated to notify the Office of Research and Innovation of such conflict before the review and must excuse themselves from the review of the applicant’s proposal. When in doubt about a possible conflict, the reviewer should discuss the circumstances with the Office of Research and Innovation in order to arrive at a determination.

A conflict of interest is a situation where reviewers outside financial interest, obligation or bias affects or appears to affect the deliberative discussion and ranking of an application.

Confidentiality Expectations:

All materials furnished for review purposes, discussions held during the meetings, and materials generated during meetings are considered privileged information. The contents of all materials and the contents and outcome of all discussions in any way related to applications and/or applicants may not be disclosed nor exploited by reviewers.