====== Peer Review Process ======

===== Overview of the Peer Review Process =====

The Peer Review Process represents the scientific evaluation phase of Research Proposals submitted by Fellows.

This phase aims to verify the quality, coherence, and feasibility of research proposals, ensuring a transparent selection process based on scientific criteria.

The Peer Review process involves multiple actors and follows a structured workflow governed by system-defined statuses and transitions.

----

===== Submission of the Research Proposal to Peer Review =====

After submission of the Research Proposal by the Fellow, the TNA Manager verifies the formal completeness of the application.

If the proposal is compliant:

  * the TNA Manager selects the Send to Peer Review action;
  * the Research Proposal transitions to the Under Peer Review status;
  * one or more Peer Reviewers are assigned to evaluate the proposal;
  * the system automatically sends notifications to the involved actors.

At this stage, the proposal is no longer editable by the Fellow.

----

===== Activities of the Peer Reviewer =====

The Peer Reviewer accesses the platform to view the assigned Research Proposals.

For each proposal, the Peer Reviewer may:

  * consult the content of the Research Proposal;
  * evaluate the project according to the defined scientific criteria;
  * complete the required evaluation fields;
  * provide comments and judgments supporting the evaluation.

The Peer Reviewer operates exclusively in consultation and evaluation mode and cannot modify the content of the Research Proposal.

----

===== Completion of the Peer Review =====

Once the evaluation is completed, the Peer Reviewer selects the Complete Peer Review action.

When all assigned reviews have been completed:

  * the system updates the internal status of the proposal to Peer Reviews Completed;
  * the TNA Manager is notified of the completion of the reviews;
  * the proposal becomes ready for the decision-making phase.

The Peer Reviews Completed status represents an internal system status and is not displayed as a dedicated section within the user interface.

----

===== Return to Peer Review =====

In certain cases, the TNA Manager or the Host Coordinator may consider it necessary to request further verification or clarification.

In such situations:

  * the proposal may be returned to the Under Peer Review status;
  * the Peer Reviewers are notified again;
  * evaluations may be supplemented or modified.

This mechanism ensures an accurate evaluation process consistent with the objectives of the programme.

----

===== Cancellation of the Application During Peer Review =====

During the Peer Review process, the Fellow retains the possibility of withdrawing their application.

In case of cancellation:

  * the Research Proposal assumes the Cancelled status;
  * the evaluation process is interrupted;
  * all involved actors (TNA Manager, Peer Reviewer, Host Coordinator) are informed through notification.

The cancellation is recorded by the system for historical traceability and audit purposes.

----