BLACK THRIVING INITIATIVE FACULTY CLUSTER HIRING PROGRAM PROPOSAL RATING *Required fields Step 1 of 2 50% REVIEWER NAME* First Last Your Affiliation*Please select your affiliationEquity AdvisorDeanAPG MemberEmail* Acknowledgement of Recusal Policy*Each reviewer is expected to read and acknowledge this policy indicating their awareness of this recusal policy and their intention to abide by it. Reviewer Recusal Guidelines: In general, the term “conflict of interest” refers to financial or other personal considerations that may compromise a reviewer’s professional judgment in administration, management, instruction, research, or other professional activities. Conflicts of interest have the potential to bias, directly or indirectly, important aspects of the review and attendant recommendations. There are additional circumstances in which recusal is necessary. The need for recusal may arise from the nature of academic review, the structure of the review process, and the importance to the campus of maintaining the integrity of the review of the proposals. Reviewers must recuse themselves in the following circumstances: • The reviewer is the author or a coauthor of the proposal. • The reviewer has, or has had, a family relationship with an author of the proposal, such as that of a current or former significant other, partner, spouse, child, sibling, or parent. • The reviewer has, or has had, a sexual relationship with an author of the proposal. • The reviewer has, or has had, a personal financial interest in the outcome of the proposal. • The reviewer has, or has had, a formal, significant mentor/mentee relationship with an author of the proposal. • The reviewer believes that their recusal is necessary to preserve the integrity of the review process. In carrying out their work, reviewers are expected to rely on their academic expertise, experience, and judgment. Having professional disagreements or differences of opinion do not constitute a basis for recusal. Indeed, reviewers, like all members of the academic community, are expected to understand the standards of their disciplines and to judge the work of others in light of these standards. In “grey areas” where a reviewer is uncertain regarding recusal, they are expected to disclose the potential grounds for recusal to the Acting Vice Provost for Academic Planning and Institutional Research, Valerie Jenness, so she can advise whether the reviewer should recuse. In making a determination regarding recusal in grey areas, the Acting Vice Provost for Academic Planning and Institutional Research will take into account the fact that, by design, each reviewer brings valuable and unique expertise to the review process. I agree to the recusal policy. PROPOSAL TITLE*Please select one proposal to reviewAddressing the Harm and Invisibility of Black LGBTQ+ PersonsBlack Expression in Media and Digital CultureBlack Political Experience in AmericaBlack Theatre ScholarsBlack Thriving Education CommitmentBlack Thriving through Behavioral MedicineClosing the Gap on Health Inequities in Chronic DiseaseData JusticeDiversity Corporate Governance, Business Practices and the Law in the Digital EconomyEnvironmental Health DisparitiesInterdisciplinary Black UrbanismInterrogating Racial CapitalismPremodern Black and Critical Race StudiesThe Center for Black HealthTransdisciplinary Research into Cardiovascular Health in Black AmericansTrauma Resilience and HealingUniting Political Philosophy, Law, and Critical Race TheoryEvaluation CriteriaIdentified as the criteria on the call for proposals, please evaluate the proposal on the items below. Score (4 pt. scale: 4-excellent; 3-good; 2-fair; 1-poor)Advance the university's standing and impact*ExcellentGoodFairPoorBuild on existing strengths and/or pave new paths*ExcellentGoodFairPoorCatalyze new interschool or campus wide collaborations and attendant initiatives*ExcellentGoodFairPoorEnhance graduate and undergraduate education*(i.e., contribute directly to undergraduate education in the classroom in addition to mentoring undergraduate and graduate students in the generation of new knowledge)ExcellentGoodFairPoorRespond to extramural funding opportunities*ExcellentGoodFairPoorContribute to the diversification of our faculty community and scholarship*ExcellentGoodFairPoorOverall assessment of proposal to meet the criteria above and achieve the overarching BTIFCHP goal.*Note: As indicated in the call for proposals, the goal of this initiative is "to build on the hiring priorities of academic units; pave new paths for research and creative expression, teaching and learning, and community engagement; generate interdisciplinary work and convergent thinking across academic units; and manifest our commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion in research, teaching, and service.”ExcellentGoodFairPoorReviewer's Comment (required)*Recommendation: Fund or Don't Fund* Fund Don't fund If 'Don't fund' selected, do you recommend proposer(s) revise and resubmit in response to a later call?* Yes No If you recommend resubmission, what in particular should the authors do to improve the proposal?*EmailThis field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
