those shown in Annex A. The panel will have a range of disciplines within it but expertise in a field is not a prime requirement for a reviewer. Equally, the reviewer is expected to address the report dispassionately and regardless of whether he or she agrees with the conclusions.
Reviewers will remain anonymous and will not be named in the published report.
The report from each reviewer will be sent to the Chairman of the review panel who will pass on the comments, without attribution, to the chairman of the working group. The group must then consciously address each point which is made and record its decisions. Only when the chairman of the review panel is satisfied that the reviewers’ comments have been fully and seriously addressed may the report be sent for final approval by the sponsoring standing committee.
Once the report has been reviewed to the satisfaction of the chairman of the review panel he or she will present it to one of the regular meetings of the sponsoring standing committee. The chairman of the working group responsible for the report shall not be present on this occasion, though he or she may have been present to give progress reports on previous occasions.
The standing committee will be invited to give (or withhold) its approval to the report, taking into account the views of the independent reviewers and forming its own judgement about the suitability of the report as an Academy publication.
Where significant changes are requested in a report by a sponsoring standing committee the amended report shall be sent back to the chairman of the committee for final approval.
No set of procedures can cover all possible reports which might be produced by the Academy. However, the underlying principles are clear enough and should be followed when the procedures are found to be wanting or inappropriate.