CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY FOR

INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL REVIEWERS

The William T. Grant Foundation has established the following conflict of interest policy for internal and external reviewers with the intention of ensuring that reviews and deliberations meet high ethical standards, and are impartial and fair.

A conflict of interest is defined as an interest or concern of a reviewer that competes or coincides with the interests or concerns of the Foundation.

This policy applies to staff, Senior Program Associates, and review committees (e.g., William T. Grant Scholars Selection Committee, Youth Service Improvement Grants Committee), and others who review applications for funding. (This policy supplements the Conflict of interest policies for Board and Executive Officers, and Foundation staff.)

The following situations constitute a conflict of interest*:

  • The reviewer would be advantaged or disadvantaged as a result of the award.
  • The reviewer is employed at, or otherwise affiliated with, the sameinstitution as the investigator.
  • The reviewer is a close colleague of the investigator.
  • The reviewer has published with the investigator in the past five years.
  • The reviewer has been a primary mentor for the investigator in the past ten years (e.g., dissertation committee member, mentor for a postdoctoral fellowship, etc.).
  • The reviewer is being considered for Foundation funding in the same cycle as the investigator.
  • The reviewer is a project team member,consultant, advisor, or mentor on theapplication.

The following situations do not in and of themselves constitute a conflict of interest:

  • The reviewer has provided the investigator general information on the Foundation’s funding programs, research interests, application and review processes, and selection criteria.
  • The reviewer is familiar with the investigator or investigator’s work.

Disclosure and recusal procedures when there is a conflict of interest:

  • The reviewer should disclose the nature of the real, perceived, or potential conflict to the Foundation staffmember directing the grants program. Staff will disclose to the President and the President to the Vice President, Finance and Administration.
  • If a real or perceived conflict is determined to exist, the review will not be solicited or used.
  • Staff, Senior Program Associate, and committee reviewers with a conflict will be recused from deliberations and decision-making regarding the application. This generally entails nonparticipation in the application reviews, discussions, ratings, and recommendations, and not being present during deliberations and interviews.The recusal should be noted in all applicable minutes regarding the decision-making process.

The following guidance applies to the William T. Grant Scholars Program:

  • Selection Committee members should abstain from providing specific guidance regarding the content of an application. This includes reading a draft of and providing feedback on the proposal.
  • Selection Committee members should abstain from assisting the applicant in preparing for the interview.
  • Selection Committee members cannot serve as proposed mentors.
  • External reviewers may not be references or proposed mentors on another Scholar application under consideration.

*This applies to principal and co-principal investigators.Developed: 10/24/13