This mechanism provides the committee with a feeling for the merit of the grant and the degree of agreement between primary and secondary reviewers. If both reviewers rate the application very highly or very poorly, the Chairman will request that the discussion be kept brief. The primary reviewer will present a full review. The reader will be asked to do the same. The full committee will be invited to discuss the proposal.
Disagreement needs to be discussed adequately.
At the end of the discussion, applications will be considered approved unless scientific or ethical disapproval is in order. The primary and secondary reviewers restate their score range. If there is a motion for scientific or ethical disapproval, a hand vote is taken. A unanimous vote is required for disapproval. Primary and secondary reviewers will then be asked to comment on the appropriateness of the budget.