The NSHRF is committed to research excellence and supports exceptional and innovative research with significant aims and the potential to positively impact the health and wellbeing of Nova Scotians. A key component of accomplishing this mission is awarding research funds based on expert review committee determination of excellence through review of the knowledge, expertise, and experience of the team; feasibility of the overall research plan; and adherence to the objectives of the funding opportunity.
Since its inception in 2001, the NSHRF has established a track record for excellence in application review. The NSHRF is continuously evolving its review processes to ensure transparency, accountability, impartiality, and fairness. The information available below is an introduction to current polices, definitions, scales and guidelines.
Peer review in the academic arena is the evaluation of a scholar or a scholarly work by peers - typically qualified members of the scholar's discipline or profession with similar or greater competence, expertise, or rank. It is intended to be a mechanism of a self-regulation within a field or an institution in order to assure that standards of quality are met, demonstrate credibility, and encourage improvement. Peer review may be applied to a product of scholarship (e.g., manuscript, book, creative work, or performance), other scholarly activities such as grant proposals, conference abstracts, and ethics review submissions, and scholars and their bodies of work (e.g., for awards, hiring, annual review, and promotion and tenure). Peer review may also apply to programs and organizations (e.g., accreditation).
Rating Scale and Scoring Rubric
The NSHRF is committed to excellence and will only fund applications that achieve an overall committee rating of 3.0 or higher. The following scales are used by reviewers to rate applications. Final funding decisions are made based on the review committees' final ratings, NSHRF Legislation and Regulations and funding availability.
- NSHRF Policies, Legislation and Ethical Requirements (PDF Attachment)
We use a roster system to optimize the alignment of reviewer expertise with competition submissions. When applications are submitted, reviewers from the roster will be confirmed for participation in the review process based on their expertise and availability; all other reviewers will remain on the roster for future competitions.
If you would be interested in joining the NSHRF Reviewer Roster please contact the Manager, Research Programs
 Gelmon, S.B, Jordan, C.M, & Selfer, S.D. (2013). Rethinking Peer Review: Expanding the Boundaries for Community-Engaged Scholarship. International Journal of Research on Service-Learning and Community Engagement, 1(1), 1-10.