This video is to provide Investigator Grants peer reviewers assistance on the content of the score descriptors and how to best use them to provide consistent, fair and robust assessments.
This video was recorded in October 2025.
- Video transcript
Speaker
- Nick Fairbairn - Assistant Director Investigator Grants, NHMRC
Introduction – 0:09
Hello and welcome to this peer reviewer training video on the Investigator Grant score descriptors.
In this video, you're going to learn why the score descriptors look like they do, what they're trying to say and how you can best use them to provide consistent, fair, and robust assessments.
Score descriptor appendix – 0:24
From the 2026 round going forward, all key information required to perform your assessments is consolidated into a single score descriptor appendix.
And it's important to remember as you're using this appendix that this information is designed to ensure the Investigator Grant scheme can achieve its objective; to fund high-performing researchers relative to their career stage and area of research, because these are the researchers most likely to have future impact with their NHMRC grant and contribute to the agency's mission through its funding program to build a healthy Australia.
Score descriptor ‘one-stop-shop’ – 0:58
There are 3 key components to the Score Descriptor Appendix; the assessment criteria, the score descriptor tables and the performance indicators.
The assessment criteria - 1:08
The assessment criteria frame the assessment; what's in and what's out.
They also outline what's expected of applicants in addressing the criteria and what's expected of you, the reviewer, when considering your scores.
Assessment elements – 1:21
The score descriptor tables link directly to the assessment criteria text by taking these instructions to applicants and to peer reviewers and framing them as the assessment elements.
These elements are what occupy the left-hand column of each score descriptor table and what the applicant is assessed against.
Remember, your job as a reviewer isn't to think about whether a particular applicant does or doesn't deserve to be funded.
Your job is to assess the applicant's performance against each assessment element using the score descriptors.
NHMRC has included additional detail in its score descriptors from the 2026 round to help you, the reviewer, better understand the expectations of applicants at each score.
This includes standardising phraseology across the different score descriptor tables and introducing consistent adjectives at each score to describe performance.
Despite this, we acknowledge that words can mean different things to different people, and that you may not interpret the words in the score descriptors the same way other reviewers might.
Your job isn't to guess or assume how other reviewers might interpret the score descriptors.
It is instead to establish your own baseline of expectations of applicants at each score, and to be internally consistent with applying those expectations to the applications you're assigned.
This is a necessary and beneficial part of the inevitable subjectivity that is at the heart of effective, fair and robust independent peer review.
Remember, not all descriptions for a particular score need be met for you to award the applicant that score.
Where an applicant's performance doesn't meet all descriptions for a single score, you need to use your best judgement on the most appropriate score to give, using the performance indicators to assist where necessary.
Performance indicators – 3:07
Supporting the score descriptors are the performance indicators.
These indicators sit above the score descriptors and provide peer reviewers with descriptions that address 3 broad elements of independent assessment.
Quality of the proposed research, its potential for impact and the demonstrated capability of the applicant.
In short, they provide a general description of what each score means.
Performance indicators are designed to be used together with the score descriptors to assist peer reviewers to anchor their expectations of applicants around the objectives of the scheme.
As we've said, Investigator Grants fund the highest performing researchers at all career stages.
Therefore, these indicators are primarily framed around the expectation that awardees will be leaders in their research fields, relative to the career stage, and where relevant, there are opportunities to conduct research.
You are not required to use these indicators.
They exist to provide additional support to you, the reviewer, where you may not be certain of the most appropriate score to give.
Application-centric peer review – 4:11
Application-centric peer review allows NHMRC to match you with applications that you have declared the highest suitability to review in almost all instances.
It is your responsibility to realise this advantage by drawing upon your subject matter expertise, experience and your knowledge to fairly account for, where relevant, the opportunities an applicant has had for research and to apply appropriate expectations of their performance, based on their career stage and in their area of research.
Thank you and please contact your secretariat – 4:40
If you have any questions about the score, descriptors, or any other element of peer review, please reach out to your secretariat in the first instance.
Good luck with your assessments and thank you for your ongoing support of, and commitment to, independent peer review.
End of transcript.
