University of Gondar

Research and Technology Transfer Vice President Office

Research and Publication Guideline (Revised)

July, 2023

Gondar, Ethiopia

1
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 4
1.1. General Provisions ............................................................................................................................. 5
Short title................................................................................................................................................... 5
2. RESEARCH GUIDELINE ................................................................................................................... 9
2.1. Research Call Types .......................................................................................................................... 9
2.1.1. Postgraduate Research Strengthening Award (PReS-Award) .................................................... 9
2.1.2 Regular Staff Research............................................................................................................... 11
2.1.3. Special call ................................................................................................................................ 11
2.1.4. Center-led research ................................................................................................................... 12
2.2. Research Proposals .......................................................................................................................... 12
2.2.1. Initiation of research proposal ideas ......................................................................................... 12
2.2.2. Call for research proposal ......................................................................................................... 13
2.2.3. Proposal review process ............................................................................................................ 13
2.3. Roles and responsibilities of reviewers ............................................................................................ 14
2.4. Selection of reviewers ...................................................................................................................... 15
2.5. Research project pre-screening criteria ............................................................................................ 17
2.6. Research projects evaluation............................................................................................................ 18
2.7. Review weight ................................................................................................................................. 18
2.8. Complaint Handling Process............................................................................................................ 19
2.9. Research Granting ............................................................................................................................ 20
2.10. Budget allocation to research projects ........................................................................................... 21
2.11. Research Extension ........................................................................................................................ 22
2.12. Grant Administration ..................................................................................................................... 23
2.13. Monitoring and Evaluation ............................................................................................................ 25
2.14. Output, Outcome and Impact Assessment of the Research Result ................................................ 27
2.15. Postgraduate Student Research Management Process ................................................................... 27
2.16. Research Audit ............................................................................................................................... 28
2.17. Credit Calculation .......................................................................................................................... 29
2.18. Benefits .......................................................................................................................................... 29
2.19. Ethical and Environmental Considerations .................................................................................... 29
2.20. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) ........................................................................................... 30
3. PUBLICATION ...................................................................................................................................... 34
Responsibilities ....................................................................................................................................... 34
3.1. University Journals .......................................................................................................................... 35
3.2 Journals in the University ................................................................................................................. 35

2
4. CAPACITY BUILDING ........................................................................................................................ 42
4.1. Facilities ........................................................................................................................................... 42
4.2. Knowledge and Skill Development ................................................................................................. 42
5. INCLUSION ........................................................................................................................................... 43
5.1. Involvement of Women and Persons with disabilities in Research ................................................. 43
6. ACADEMIC AND RESEARCH DISCOURSE ..................................................................................... 43
7. SOURCES OF FINANCE FOR RESEARCH........................................................................................ 45
Annex

3
 1. INTRODUCTION

Higher Education institutions are mandated to teaching-learning, research and community

services including University-Industry linkage &technology transfer activities. Research is a
systematic way of collecting and analyzing data for seeking solutions to problems, discovering
new technologies, and paving ways to the development of a country. It enables people in diverse
circumstances to apply solutions. Research provides us with new inventions (technological
methods, products, etc.) and generates new knowledge to tackle problems as well as utilize
unexploited potentials.

For counties like Ethiopia, much is expected from research in terms of alleviating economic
problems, reducing poverty, attaining food security, preventing and controlling problems of
multifaceted nature, and introducing new technology. Within its overall plan of alleviating
widespread poverty, Ethiopia aims to become middle-income country in the next 20 to 30 years;
and the government has issued Higher Education proclamation No. 1152/2011 taking into
account the pressing need for well-educated and skilled manpower in various disciplines. The
Ethiopian government is also pursuing an ambitious plan to expand and reform higher education
in the country.

University of Gondar is currently classified into research intensive university due to its academic
and research capacities and productivity. In its 10 years strategic plan, the University of Gondar
strives to achieve academic and research excellence. More specifically, the Research and
Publication Office (RPO) of the University is striving towards enhancing research culture.
Alongside the academic training, the RPO of the University is coordinating and promoting
research works in and outside of the University. It also provides consultancy services and
disseminates research results on an ongoing and sustainable basis.

Given the pressing need to strengthen the university research endeavor and enhancing the
research productivity in line with the envisaged research excellence, this research and
publication guideline revision was highly demanded. Thus, the basic consideration of the
guideline revision was embodied on to the current differentiation of the University of Gondar
into research university and the expected research excellence contributing to both the teaching as
well as social problem solving. To accomplish the aforementioned tasks, the Research and

4
Publication Directorate Office of University of Gondar has revised the research and publication
guideline for effective and efficient research projects implementation and publication.

1.1. General Provisions

Short title

This document can be cited as the University of Gondar Research and Publication Guideline.

Gender references

Where the context requires otherwise, the provisions of this Guideline set out in the masculine
gender shall also apply to the feminine gender.

Definition of terms

In this guideline, unless the context requires otherwise:

1. „Academic staff’ means a member of a higher education institution employed in the

capacity of teaching, research, community services, and technology transfer activities of
the institution, and includes any other professional of the institution who shall be
recognized so by the institution‟s internal legislation.

2. „Academic unit’ refers to colleges, faculties, schools, institutes, departments or

programs.

3. „Activities‟ means actions taken or tasks performed from proposal development up to

dissemination of outputs through which inputs such as funds, technical assistance and
other types of resources are mobilized.

4. „Applied Research’ means an original investigation undertaken in order to acquire new

knowledge which is directed primarily toward specific practical aims or objectives.

5. „Author‟ means a writer, designer or originator of an article, book or any other scholarly
work, and who makes a substantial participation in the conception and design, or analysis
and interpretation of data, drafting the scholarly work or revising it critically for
enhancing its intellectual content and in the final approval of the version to be published.
There can be more than one author of a single scholarly work.

6. „Basic Research’ means an original investigation with the primary aim of developing a
more complete knowledge or understanding of the subject under study.

5
7. „Center-led Research‟ means a research project that is in line with the aims and priority
areas of the research center. The funding and implantation are managed by the respective
research centers.

8. „Co-Investigator/s’ shall mean member/s of a research team who participate in the

research undertakings with specified responsibilities other than the Principal Investigator;

9. „Collaborative Research’ or „Joint Research’ means a scientific investigation or

research and development project undertaken jointly by a higher education institution,
industry or other governmental and non-governmental organizations based on a research
partnership agreement;

10. „College Review and Ethics Committee(CREC)means a group of academic staff

selected based on their research and publication profile to review, mentor and evaluate
the College‟s research activities;

11. „Completed Research’ means research projects that used the planned time and budget;

12. „Conflict-of-interest’ means a divergence between an individual‟s private interests and

his professional obligations to the higher education institution such that an independent
observer might reasonably question whether the individual‟s professional actions or
decisions are determined by considerations of personal gain, financial or otherwise;

13. „Copyright‟ means a protection provided by the laws of Ethiopia to its owners;

14. „Dean and Director’ refers to the dean of a college or a faculty and the director of an
institute/directorate or a school respectively;

15. „Discontinued Research Projects’ mean the research projects that terminated before the
planned time due to poor performance or uncontrollable problems or research
misconducts

16. „Extended Research Projects’ mean conducting research projects with a permitted
duration extension due to justifiable reasons;

17. „Higher Education Institution’ or „Institution‟ means a university, university college

or college as defined by Higher Education Proclamation No. 650/2009.

6
18. „Intellectual Property’ is a phrase often used to refer generically to property rights
created through intellectual and/or discovery efforts of a creator that are generally
protectable under patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret or other law/s;

19. ‘Regular Staff Research’ means a research project that aims to solve societal problems
and/or build knowledge

20. Ongoing Research‟ means active researcher project with the planned duration;

21. „Patent‟ means a title that confers to its owner the rights recognized by the intellectual
property laws of Ethiopia;

22. „Person‟ means natural or juridical person;

23. „Plagiarism‟ means claiming or insinuating ownership of another person‟s intellectual

and/or academic contribution, which includes;

a. word-for-word copying or paraphrasing of sentences or whole paragraphs from

one or more sources without clearly indicating their origin or source,

b. using of another person's ideas, work or research data without acknowledgement,

c. copying computer files, algorithms or computer codes without clearly indicating

their origin,

d. submitting work which has been derived, in whole or in part, from another
person's work, or

e. submitting work which has been derived, in whole or in part, from another
person's work by a process of mechanical, digital or other transformation.

25. „Principal Investigator‟ means an individual designated by a higher education

institution or a funding organization to direct a project or program being supported by the
fund;

26. „Research‟ is a systematized investigation carried out to create new knowledge or

technology and/or to use existing knowledge or technology in a new and creative way so
as to generate new concepts, methodologies, understandings, and to solve new or existing
problems.

7
27. „Research Center/Institute‟ refers to research-focused centers or institutes established
by the university;

28. „Research Grant‟ means a financial contribution by an industry or foundation or

governmental or non-governmental organization to a scientific research project
conducted by a higher education institution;

29. „Research Staff‟ means an academic staff who is required to devote 75% of his/her
workload on research, community service, UIL, and technology transfer activities and
25% on teaching;

30. „Postgraduate Research Strengthening Award (PReS-Award) means large scale

research that is led by a researcher and aims to solve societal problems and/or build
knowledge which involve postgraduate students (with their own ) and junior researchers;

31. „Special Call‟ means a research project which aims to solve timely prioritized emerging
and cross-cutting issues. The funding and implantation are managed by the RPDO.

32. „Stakeholders‟ mean governmental and/or non-governmental organizations, industries

and person that take part with the university;

33. „Student Research‟ means research by students of higher education institutions designed
and undertaken in line with the research thematic areas of the institutions for the purpose
of partial fulfillment of the requirements of master‟s or PhD degrees, supervised and/or
co-supervised by academic staff member, regardless of the source of funding.

34. „Teaching staff‟ means an academic staff who is required to devote 75% of his/her work
load on teaching and 25% on research, community service, UIL and technology transfer
activities;

35. „University‟ means University of Gondar

36. „University Research Advisory Council‟ means senior academic staffs representing the
respective colleges/institutes and schools organized to advise the research and publication
endeavors of the University of Gondar.;

37. „University Research Council‟ means team consisting of RTTVP (Research, CE, &TT)

8
 1. RESEARCH GUIDELINE

As a research-intensive university, all academic staff are expected to be engaged in research

works for knowledge generation and dissemination using internal and external research funding.
The available internal research funding shall be handled in a competitive base for the priority
thematic areas.

2.1. Research Call Types

Based on their scope- breadth and expected outcomes, the University of Gondar shall solicit
research projects with the following four basic categories.

2.1.1. Postgraduate Research Strengthening Award (PReS-Award)

Postgraduate program Strengthening Research Call aimed to support PhD students and advisors with
dedicated funding for research. Postgraduate research strengthening call is a research call led by PhD
student supervisor and includes Post-docs (recent PhD graduates), PhD students and Masters Students
working on large scale research project with the inclusion of students‟ dissertation research work
within the project themes as a component. It is designed to promote the postgraduate programs at the
University of Gondar, as Research University, through granting academic staff that are supervising or
are qualified to supervise doctoral students and postdoctoral researchers.
A. The Principal Investigator( PI):

 shall be main supervisor of the PhD students under consideration. In case the primary
supervisor is out of UoG, the co-supervisor can apply provided that he/she satisfies the
criteria hereunder.
 shall have an academic rank of a PhD with an Associate Professor position & above.
 Should apply as PI only on one application in this funding scheme.
 Anyone who is a PI in one application, cannot be Co-PI for more than one application
in this scheme.

9
B. The team members:

 Should include at least the PI as well Co-PI (PhD holder)

 The application should consist of at least five PhD and two post-doc components. All
those research topics need to be described in the proposal even though students are not
yet recruited.
 For this year, 2 PhD advisees registered in the University of Gondar and who are ready
to do their data collection this academic year need to be included.
 If 2 post-docs are not available, it is possible to include 2 recent PhD graduates (< 5
years).
 2 masters students (recommended but not obligation) to support the PhDs and Postdocs
for effective implementation of the project
 The Post-doc and PhD research areas should be clearly described in the research area
and the budget will be released when the student get recruited. On the proposal, we
anticipate the clear connection as well as differences of each of the interconnected
Postdoc (2 topics) and PhD student (5 topics). The students should be the first Author
and primary advisors as last authors. The authorship of any other member should be
only through the approval of this project PI.
 For each active Post-doc or PhD student, a reasonable amount of cost should be
requested but the budget will be administered by only the professor with all the
responsibility. The budget will be proportional to the number of students and the
professor should use this opportunity to have his/her own research group so that PhD
students have the opportunity to practically work with their PhD supervisor.
 This is not a fixed term funding, the funding will be renewed based on performance in
terms of achievement of milestones (publication, patent, and postgraduate education).
 Field of specialty of the PI should be in line with the project main objectives
 Budget proposal should be divided in a yearly basis.
 Financial liquidation and research report should also be accomplished every year.

10
C. Roles and responsibilities
Colleges/Institutes/Schools/ Departments: Furnish working space (computers, tables, chairs,
printer, ICT support, and other relevant materials and equipment) and support, monitor and
evaluate the project. The college research and publication coordination officeshould support
and monitor the project.
The Principal Investigator (PI):

 Initiates research idea and submit the project proposal

 Organizes the research group
 Leads the research project
 Recruits doctoral students and postdoctoral researchers
 Reports the progress to the college postgraduate and research and publication
coordination office
 Liquidates all financial issues

D. Review process:

The Postgraduate Research Strengthening Award (PReS-Award) projects shall be evaluated by a

Ad-hoc committee established by the RTTVP and peer reviewers.

2.1.2 Regular Staff Research

It is a research project that aims to solve societal problems and/or build knowledge. The duration
of the project would be 1year. Ongoing projects shall be evaluated by the CRECs before funding
in the coming year. The budget will be updated and reviewed accordingly.

2.1.3. Special call

It is a research project which aims to solve timely prioritized emerging cross-cutting problems. If
it is a multi-disciplinary issue, the funding and implementation shall be managed by the RPDO.
If the issue is college-based, the financial management shall be managed by the respective
colleges.

11
2.1.4. Center-led research

It is a research project that is in line with the aims and priority areas of the research center. The
funding and implantation shall be managed by the respective research centers.

2.2. Research Proposals

It is important to note that in all categories research funding shall be handled in a competitive
manner and based on the merits of the research proposals. The research proposal should be a
detailed plan of study that indicates a specific course of action to be followed. It shall be
prepared in a standard format with the contents outlined in this guideline.

In the efforts made so far, we will have two types of research proposal submission formats:
anonymous and non-anonymous. The non-anonymous format will comprise the whole
components of research proposal starting from the title page to annexes, whereby anonymous
format will contain the whole elements of the proposal starting from title to annexes except all
identifiers of authors (name and address of PI and Co-PIs at the title page, role and
responsibilities, declaration and CVs)

2.2.1. Initiation of research proposal ideas

The following guiding principles shall be used for initiation of research ideas:

1. All research ideas shall originate from the existing thematic areas;

2. Multidisciplinary research is appreciated;

3. In multidisciplinary research proposals, the contribution and use of research funds may
be agreed upon by each side during the planning stage;

4. In multidisciplinary research proposals, there shall be 3-4 themes. The number of

researchers in any research project shall be from 5-8. For merged researches, the number
of researchers should not exceed 12.

5. In the research proposal initiation, women and persons with disabilities should be
included taking into account their real contribution in the project. In case there are no
females and persons with disabilities with a real contribution in the issue, the proposal
should be considered with sound justification.

12
 6. In the research proposal initiation, one stakeholder should be included in a project and the
stakeholder should have credible written evidence to be included;

7. At the submission stage, a staff shall not be involved in more than four multidisciplinary
researches as co-investigator or three co-investigators and one PI in one year.

8. Research projects shall be prepared, reviewed and made ready in the previous fiscal year.

9. In the research proposals, the role and responsibility of each investigator should be
clearly indicated or included so as to avoid duplication of efforts or resources.

10. The team of researchers should choose one of the researchers in the list as the principal
investigator with consensus, or other ways, and the rest as co-investigators.

11. Contents of the research proposal shall follow the research proposal format in the
guideline.

12. All proposals involving human and animal subjects should be submitted to the
Institutional Review Board Office using the ethics formats for review.

13. A student and a stakeholder cannot be principal investigators for research projects.
However, PhD students who submitted their final dissertation and were fully reinstated
are allowed to be PI.

14. Previously submitted proposals may be resubmitted only with the consent of the team.

2.2.2. Call for research proposal

The call for proposal is announced annually for regular research projects and when necessary for
emerging issues. The call for project proposals shall be in consideration of the university‟s
thematic areas.

2.2.3. Proposal review process

All eligible research proposals to be funded and implemented by the university shall pass
through a review process to ensure their qualities as well as managing the available research
funding on a competitive basis. Proposals shall pass through different levels by a wide range of
experts.

1. Special call research: Special call projects shall be evaluated by centrally nominated ad-
hoc committee selected from CREC members and two peer reviews whereas, college-
13
 based special call research projects shall be evaluated by two peer reviewers and the
respective CRECs.

2. Postgraduate Research Strengthening Award (PReS-Award): This shall be evaluated

by a committee established by RTTVP and three peer reviewers.

3. Regular Staff Research: This shall be evaluated by the college review and ethics
committee and two peer reviewers.

4. Center-led research: This shall be evaluated by college review and ethics committee
and two peer reviewers.

2.3. Roles and responsibilities of reviewers

A. University Research Council

The University Research Council that involves the RTTVP, directors, officers, coordinators in
consultation with the college research councils shall accomplish the following tasks.

1. Determining date of call for proposal submission

2. Checking financial settlement and pending research outputs

3. Leading the research budget allocation and transfer to colleges

4. Monitoring and evaluation from inception to end of the research process

5. Settling appeals that are not settled at college level

6. Checking researchers involved in more than the allowed number of projects

7. Filtering similar and previous projects across the colleges

B. University research advisory council

1. Consult reviewer selection for a special call

2. Determine the share of budget for each research type

C. College Review and Ethics Committee (CREC)

The College Review and Ethics Committee (CREC) is expected to carry out the following duties
and responsibilities.

1. Screening and reviewing proposals (both document and oral)

14
 2. Selecting and assigning peer reviewers

3. Ranking proposals

4. Ensuring if comments are incorporated

5. Allocating budget to proposals for college proposals

6. Doing follow-up and monitoring research work performance and budget utilization

7. Ensuring research code of conduct

8. The CRECs shall organize the oral defense together with the respective coordinator and
discipline.

9. The CRECs shall rate the proposals during the evaluation time.

10. 10. The CREC shall report the progress of every research in the respective colleges.

D. Peer Reviewers

The peer reviewers are expected to evaluate the technical or subject matter aspect of the
proposal. Some of the roles and responsibilities include:

1. Evaluating and scoring the proposal based on the given criteria (both the document and
oral defense)

2. Checking any academic malpractice including plagiarism

2.4. Selection of reviewers

a. Ad hoc reviewers committee

It works for center-led researches and special calls. Members of the committee shall be selected
by the RD office in consultation with deans among CREC members.

b. College Review and Ethics Committee selection:

The College Review and Ethics Committee (CREC) will be selected and approved by the
respective college AUC to serve for two years. The number of CREC members shall be as
follows.

 Colleges with less than 6departments, will have 5 CREC members,

 Colleges with 6-10 departments will have 6 CREC members,

15
  Colleges with 11-15 departments will have 7 CREC members

 Colleges with more than 15departments will have 8 CREC reviewers.

In the selection of College Review and Ethics Committee (CREC), the proportion of discipline
representation shall be in consideration to cluster and related disciplines. Coordinators shall be
members of the council without a decision voice to facilitate the activity as it is part of their
office duty. The coordinators shall be secretaries for respective proposals. College level research
directors or V/Deans shall provide continuous supervision and manage complaints.

Note: The postgraduate coordinator shall be a member of the review committee in the
Postgraduate strengthening research program.

The AUC shall consider the following criteria to select CRECs.

 MA/MSc and above

 More publication in MoSHE accredited journals, Indexed journals (Scopus, web of science
and pubMed), University of Gondar Journals and patent

 Good review track and research performance evaluation by the college

 It is encouraged to involve females and persons with disabilities.

 More consideration shall be given to those who fetched external grant.

c. Peer reviewers selection

The peer reviewers should be selected from the same field of specialization and/or related fields.
If it is very relevant, it is encouraged to select one of the peer reviewers from other colleges in
the university.

The peer reviewers are selected by the College Review and Ethics Committee (CREC)based on
the following criteria. Accordingly, a peer reviewer:

 shall hold MA/MSc and above

 shall have good review track and research performance evaluation by the college

 shall have at least equivalent academic rank with the PI of the project to be reviewed. If
persons with equivalent rank are not available, it can be reviewed by a person with a
lower academic rank

16
  More considerations shall be given to those who fulfill the above criteria, and won
external grant& reviewed articles in indexed journals (Scopus, Web of Science, and
PubMed).

2.5. Research project pre-screening criteria

The College Review and Ethics Committee (CREC)is responsible to conduct pre-screening
before proposals pass for peer review. Based on the following criteria, the College Review and
Ethics Committee (CREC) rejects a proposal if:

a. It is not in line with the university‟s identified thematic areas and priorities

b. It fails to follow the research proposal submission guideline

c. It is a duplication/ repetition of previous works

d. It is plagiarized (CREC decision until plagiarism checker is implemented)

e. If the PI is inappropriate in terms of expertise

f. It is not feasible in terms of resources (not available in the local market), technical
feasibility and time

g. It fails to submit terminal report and manuscript for completed previous projects based on
the format.

h. It fails to publish at least one article in MoSHE recognized national journals, University
of Gondar Journals, Scopus, WOS and PubMed indexed journals or /Patent /utility
model/technology package from University funded project after one year of completion.
Those who cannot publish in one year should report evidence of the review process track
(at least two correspondences) in the journals listed above. But, all University funded
projects should be published or changed into patent /utility model/technology package
within a maximum of two years after completion.

i. For similar projects, if the teams are not willing to merge, each project shall be evaluated
and the project/s with low score will be rejected and one with a high score shall be
considered for further grant competition.

j. A researcher will be excluded if she or he engages in more than any four projects as Co-
Investigator in the same year (TT, CS and Research).

17
 k. A researcher will be excluded if he /she engages in three projects as a Co-PI and one
project as PI in the same year (TT, CE and Research).

l. A researcher will be excluded if he /she engages in two projects as a PI and two Co-PI in
the year (TT, CE and Research).

m. A researcher will be excluded if he/she engages as a PI in more than any two projects
(TT, CE and Research). Note that the RTTVP may decide the number of projects a staff
can engage when the demand arises.

n. A research project involves any of the members without their involvement and consent.

Project that could pass the prescreening criteria with compulsory consideration of the comments
of the CREC for funding:

a. If it fails to involve a stakeholder, women, people with disability and student when the
research demands and availability of the above personnel are confirmed by CREC

b. If it has inadequate number of experts and inappropriate team composition (in terms of
expertise and experience: unnecessary inclusion and exclusion of professional).

NOTE: Projects that fail to consider these and other comments on the final version of the
proposal shall not be funded.

2.6. Research projects evaluation

It is a fact that each proposal document of special call, Postgraduate Research Strengthening
Award (PReS-Award), regular staff research, and center-led research shall be evaluated. To
make it more clear, the proposal document evaluation criteria are appended at the back of this
guideline.

2.7. Review weight

The review weight given to reviewers varies according to the type of research call.

Special call weight: The centrally nominated ad-hoc committee evaluates both the oral
presentation (40%) and document (60%).
Postgraduate Research Strengthening Award (PReS-Award): This shall be evaluated by
three peer reviewers out of 70%,of which 60 % is dedicated for document evaluation and 10 %

18
for oral evaluation ) and a committee established by RTTVP will evaluate it out of 30%,of which
20 % accounts for document evaluation and 10 % is for oral evaluation.

Regular Staff Research and center-led researches: The weight given to College Review and
Ethics Committee (CREC) evaluation is 60 % (all document) and 40 % of the evaluation will be
carried out by peer reviewers (10% oral and 30 % document).

 The document review results and comments should be submitted before the oral defense.

 The scores given to the proposal shall correspond with the number and depth of
comments.

 All the comments and suggestions raised by the reviewers should be incorporated for
consideration for funding.

2.8. Complaint Handling Process

Regular staff Research

 Any complaint on college-level researches shall be reported to coordination offices.

 If the issue is not solved by the coordination office, it shall be applied to the dean‟s
office. The college dean shall present complaints to the college AUC. If necessary, the
AUC shall establish a committee for further investigations to solve the problem.

 If the issue is not solved by AUC, or if the applicant is not satisfied by the AUC decision,
he/she may apply to RPD (RPD shall either solve complaints by itself or establish a
committee to solve it), and it may also be reported to VPRTT for final decision.

 Out of the 40 % peer reviewer score, if the difference between the two peer reviews‟
score is greater than or equal to 10, the CREC score will be converted into 40. After
conversion, the CREC result will be compared with the two peer reviewers‟ results and
the average will be done with the score close to CREC result.

 If the average score of the peer is deviating by 10 or more points from the CREC results
(after converted to 40%), the CREC average score and the peer average score shall be
converted 50% and then summed up.

19
Special Call and Center-Led Researches

 Any complaint on University-based Special Call shall be reported to VPRTT for final
decision.

 RPD/ Center coordinator shall either solve a complaint by itself or establish a committee
to solve it.

2.9. Research Granting

The fund release for proposed research projects shall be done based on the following guidelines:

1. The College Review and Ethics Committee (CREC), the respective AUCs, Center
Coordinators, and RD shall approve the budget, the research progress, and final
accomplishment. Hard and soft copies (final copies) of funded projects shall be submitted
to the concerned bodies.

2. All projects scoring an average of less than 50 % shall not be granted.

3. Fund release for approved research proposals is authorized by the RTTVP in situations
whereby funds are centrally administered or by deans of respective Academic Units when
the budget allocated is decentralized.

4. A research contract shall be signed between the researchers and the University as well as
the funding agency when the project has been approved irrespective of the source of
funding.

5. When there is an interest of joint ownership of research results, the contract shall be
between the researcher as one party and joint financiers as the other party and the
University.

6. Funds are released for approved research proposals in two installments in two options for
researches to be completed in one fiscal year. The first option is that 75% of the budget is
released in the first installment and 25% of the budget is released in the second
installment. The second option is that 50 % of the budget is released in the first
installment and 50 % of the budget is released in the second installment. The College
Review and Ethics Committee (CREC) decides either of the installment options based on
the milestone in the proposal.

20
 7. Second installment shall be released upon submission of sufficient and sound physical
and financial progress reports to the Research and Publication Director or Research and
Publication Coordinator, and expenses from the previous installment payment shall be
settled in accordance with the relevant financial procedures of the University;

8. Before the release of the second phase of the budget, the progress report shall be
presented to the college staff which shall be facilitated by the Research and Publication
Coordinator and the respective Dean. The progress report is presented only if more than
half of the research project members are available and should be evaluated by the College
Review and Ethics Committee. The council may use a checklist based on the milestone.
The next installment will be released based on a satisfactory evaluation of the first
installment work.

9. If a research project is conducted for more than a year, the budget allocation shall be
only for each year based on the budget breakdown in the proposal, and the next year‟s
budget shall be released based on the performance of the previous year which is justified
by the open presentation.

10. Special bank account shall be created by the PI and one or more team members
nominated by the research team.

2.10. Budget allocation to research projects

After ranking the proposals, the College Review and Ethics Committee (CREC) shall allocate a
budget to research proposals by considering the following points.

1. Recommendation of peer reviewers

2. Number of relevant and related themes

3. Geographical location and importance

4. Sample size

5. Number and appropriateness of data collection tools

6. Research material requested (e. g., lab, re-agent)

21
 General Key issues for consideration:

a. Promoting problem-solving and innovative research than basic research,

b. Scaling up problem-solving research findings,

c. Focusing on thematic areas so far identified or that could be potentially identified,

d. Ensuring the relevance of research proposals and projects to the university‟s vision,
mission, goals and strategic plan,

e. Ensuring the relevance of research proposals and projects to priority issues of national
and regional development policies,

f. Linking the research focus with regional, national, and international research and
development institutions,

g. Contributing to the university‟s endeavor for qualified human resource and building
research facility capacity,

h. Contributing to a wider participation of the university‟s staff and students in research,

i. Ensuring that postgraduate students‟ theses are in line with the strategic objectives of the
university,

j. Contributing to regional and national capacity building and development endeavors,

k. Contributing to the national and regional self-reliance through the application of

knowledge and technology,

l. Promoting collaboration among national, continental and international organizations in

education, research and publication,

m. Ensuring the participation of stakeholders in all research projects

n. Promoting research ethics in the university

2.11. Research Extension

The research team can request to RPD or the dean‟s office to extend the research undertaking but
this will be accepted if the research activities are not completed within the planned period and if
there are concrete and convincing reasons such as the conditions that are beyond the control of

22
the researchers. The researcher team is entitled to request an extension for a reasonable period of
time.

2.12. Grant Administration

The research activities in the university shall be administered based on the following guidelines:

1. The progress of each research activity shall be reported by the Principal Investigator (PI)
after getting signatures from all researchers on the regular biannual reports and submitted
to the Research and Publication Coordinator and the Research and Publication Director
with minutes.

2. Both the progress report and the terminal reports with manuscripts based on the
agreements shall be presented to the College/Faculty/University‟s community and
evaluated by the CRECs.

3. Progress reports shall be prepared following the format prepared by the University.

4. If the monitoring and evaluation indicates that a project has not been going as planned or
if there exist some fraud, the Research and Publication Director or the College/Faculty
Dean or Research Directors may enforce the return of previously taken budget, and if
necessary, pursue lawsuit.

5. The financial administration of research funds shall be governed by the existing financial
policy and procedures of the University and such other relevant guidelines as maybe
issued by the RTTVP upon approval by the Senate.

6. Researchers of other organizations working with the university staff shall not be assigned
as Principal Investigators; they shall not withdraw research budget or shall not request
ownership of intellectual property rights arising from the research output unless clearly
stated initially.

7. The university teaching staff, studying their graduate program in the same university,
shall be involved in research projects only in topics related to their dissertation and the
students should get involved only in one project.

8. Academic staff with an accepted research proposal shall inform the department head to
get the stipulated exemption of classes in a given semester and adjust teaching loads.

23
9. Completed research report shall be submitted to the Research Coordinator and the final
approval shall be made by CRECs and submitted to the Research and Publication
Director.

10. For special call and university-based center-led research projects, the completed research
report shall be submitted to Research and Publication Director and RTTVP.

11. The Deans shall facilitate the research activities, support the Research and Publication
Office and incorporate research and publication activities in the main report.

12. Research results shall be communicated to responsible community members and

implementers or other concerned stakeholders.

13. If a research project is discontinued due to justified reasons, or if the work is not properly
carried out within the planned time table, the researcher should return the unutilized
money to the university;

14. All projects funded by the University shall produce at least one publication (MOSHE
recognized national journal, University of Gondar Journals, Scopus, Web of Science, and
PubMed indexed journals) or Patent/utility model/technology package after one year of
completion. Once a research project is approved and budget is secured, the researcher
cannot change the approved location, the work plan, methodology or objective of the
study without informing and getting permission from the Research and Publication
Director and the Dean.

15. When a Principal Investigator (PI) leaves the university, without completing a research
work, the research members shall delegate a person from the co-investigators or other
professionally relevant researcher and be approved by the AUC.

16. A researcher who has received research funds either from the University or other funding
agencies which have an agreement with the university is obliged to submit a hard and soft
copy of the final result and settle financial matters. Unless these are proven, the
individual shall not receive another university grant; shall be denied clearance when
leaving the University in any manner (scholarship, transfer, pension, etc…).

24
2.13. Monitoring and Evaluation

Within each project and management system, monitoring and evaluation (M &E) are essential
for two reasons. They provide information on how the project is functioning to supervisors and
executives, and they help illustrate the lessons learned in a project. Often, one function is
stressed above the other, but both are equally important and need to be given the appropriate
level of importance. Besides, monitoring and evaluation are key instruments to encourage
ongoing learning for the improvement of interventions. The benefits of conducting good M & E
include improvement in management and performance in terms of effectiveness, efficiency and
value for money and an increased accountability and transparency. The ultimate aim of
monitoring and evaluation is yet to learn what has worked and what has not. Hence, monitoring
and evaluation of research in the University shall be made based on the following guidelines:

1. Proper implementation/execution of each project is the responsibility of those involved in

the research.

2. The Research and Publication Coordinator or the Dean office or RC Director or the
Research and Publication Director shall ensure the steady implementation of research
proposals on a regular basis.

3. Submitting regular progress reports to Research and Publication Coordinator or RC

Directors or Research and Publication Director is mandatory;

4. The researcher shall submit progress report using the format to the Research and
Publication Coordinator or RC Director or Research and Publication Director twice or as
required using a software application.

5. Any concerned body in the University shall supervise research activities in the field
and/or laboratory at any time for appropriate utilization of funds, correct use of methods,
location, etc.; therefore, the researchers should submit updated schedule of the file work
to the coordination office.

6. The results of each project should be presented as a progress report in seminars,

conferences and eventually, every effort shall be made to publish it in peer-reviewed
reputable MoSHE recognized or indexed journals.

25
7. Successfully completed and verified results shall be transferred to end users through
training, demonstration, community service and technology transfer projects,
communication using various media, etc. This shall be decided by a joint discussion by
the researcher, Research and Publication Coordinator or the Research and Publication
Director in consultation with the UIL-TT Director and Community Engagement
Director.

8. Written feedback shall be provided for reports presented on the progress of researches by
the Research and Publication Coordinator. Any good and bad practices and challenges of
research activities will be documented and communicated for future use.

9. Researchers shall present their terminal report to the University community before
submission.

10. The Research and Publication Coordinator or Research Center Directors or Research and
Publication Director or the Respective Dean shall regularly assess/evaluate the planned
research activities based on the outcomes of the evaluation.

11. For completed researches, forums/conferences shall be organized at AU or RC or

university level to select potential research works which are competent enough to be
presented at national or international conferences organized by the University.

12. All research project winners should submit their data to the University‟s research
Directorate data bank to be stored with confidentiality. After five years the data will be
made available to the university staff for further academic and research purpose.

13. At least one article should be published in MoSHE recognized national journals,
University of Gondar Journals, Scopus, WOS and PubMed indexed journals or Patent
/utility model/technology package from University funded project after one year of
completion. Those researchers who cannot publish in one year should report evidence of
the review process track in reputable indexed journals after one year of completion. All
University funded projects should be published or changed into patent /utility
model/technology package within a maximum of two years after completion.

26
2.14. Output, Outcome and Impact Assessment of the Research Result

The University shall use the following two alternative approaches to monitor and evaluate the
effects of its research activities:

1. Tracking for wards: It is an assessment made basing the completed research to see
where and how it is communicated, and to what effect. Tracking forwards, the university
will decide where to look for effects and use the under-listed five categories to capture
the multi-dimensional nature of its research output.

a. Knowledge production (e.g. peer-reviewed papers, proceedings, abstracts, patent,

modules, teaching materials)

b. Research capacity building (e.g. career development, working papers, methodological

guidelines )

c. Policy recommendations and product development (e.g. policy brief and product )

d. Sector benefits (e.g. impacts on specific client groups)

e. Wider societal wellbeing (e.g. socio-cultural, institutional, economic, environmental,

political, health, and productivity benefits)

2. Tracking background: examining policy choices, organizational management and

professional practice to explore how research is sought out and used in these areas, and to
what effect. For tracking backgrounds, the university may undertake interviews with
research end users by deploying different mechanisms.

2.15. Postgraduate Student Research Management Process

1. The Department Graduate Council shall check and approve the appropriateness of the
research titles to their disciplines, and the selected titles shall be inline with the
University of Gondar research mandate areas if students are recipients of grants from the
University.

2. The Department Graduate Council shall assign advisor appropriate to the selected titles.

3. The department head shall follow up students‟ progress and advisors‟ support.

4. Advisors shall seriously follow up the data collection process by any means.

27
 5. Researches shall get advisors approval for submission for defense.

6. The Department Graduate Council shall approve the thesis/dissertation which is free from
plagiarism before the final defense.

7. The evaluation of thesis/dissertation shall be based on the postgraduate guideline.

8. Students shall submit one manuscript to the department together with the final research
report based on the manuscript submission guideline.

9. Authors of the articles shall only be the student himself/herself and the thesis advisors.

10. All graduate students‟ research involving human and animal subjects should get approval
from IRB. MA level proposals shall be reviewed by CREC at the college and the PhD
proposals shall be reviewed by the central IRB.

2.16. Research Audit

A research audit shall be conducted by RTTVPO twice every five years to assess how well the
college/faculty/school, research centers/institutes met the University‟s research vision and
mission. The areas in which the audit should focus on include:

1) The scope and extent of the research activity

2) The strengths and weaknesses of the research activity

3) The effectiveness of the training provided to the emerging/ junior researchers

4) A financial report on revenue and expenditure-the report should also include the names
of major sponsors, clients and stakeholders

5) The focus and future direction of the research activity

6) The quality and quantity of outcomes of the research outputs

7) Linkages/ relations to other clusters of the university and other research

institutes/stakeholders

8) On the basis of the findings, a strategy to improve their research performance is drawn
up. The audit report and strategy are submitted to the Senate for approval.

28
2.17. Credit Calculation

When the university staff are engaged in research activities, the credit calculation for the
research task shall be as follows:

1) Credit calculation shall be based on MOSHE directives.

2) Credits are counted every semester throughout the life of the project.

3) Credit benefits shall be considered only when the Research and Publication Coordinator
or the Dean or Director receives sufficient confirmation that the research activity is
carried out as originally planned.

4) For suspended or delayed researches with justifiable reasons, the credit benefit shall be
offered when the work resumes.

5) Credit benefits shall not be considered for terminated, suspended, delayed or improperly
executed research proposals.

2.18. Benefits

1. Peer reviewer benefit: peer reviewers shall receive payment for reviewing proposals
as per MOSHE/MOF directives.

2. College Review and Ethics Committee (CREC): the benefit shall be decided by
MOSHE directives and University guideline which will be approved by University
Administration Council.

2.19. Ethical and Environmental Considerations

In the development of strong research culture, auniversity and academic staff should observe the
ethical and environmental considerations in research undertakings. Hence, the ethical and
environmental considerations of research in the University shall be governed by the University
of Gondar Research Ethics, National Ethics committee, National and international standards,
procedures, conventions and treaties, which shall be respected to minimize/avoid negative
impacts of research on the environment. College Review and Ethics Committee (CREC) shall
be established in each college and the scope and the papers referred to the research ethics
committee shall be determined by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the University.

29
2.20. The Institutional Review Board (IRB)

1) The IRB is accountable to the RTTVP.

2) The IRB shall consist of representatives from various disciplines such as: Health, Social
Science, Science, Law, Agriculture and Environment and also concerned community
representatives.

3) The IRB members should not consist entirely of men or entirely of women.

4) The Board can also nominate other members or consult other bodies for specific reviews.

5) The RTTVP assigns the chairperson and secretary of the IRB.

6) Quorum: the quorum will consist of 5 of the 9 members including the Research and
Publication Director and the Vice President for Research and Technology Transfer. In the
absence of the Chairperson, the secretary acts on his/her behalf. Moreover, professional
qualifications of the quorum requirements should consist of: at least one member whose
primary area of expertise is in a non-scientific area, one medical scientist and at least one
member who is independent of the institution/research site.

7) Meeting: The committee meets once a month. The chairperson, however, will call an
extraordinary meeting at any time as deemed necessary.

8) Ethical clearance procedures follow international laws such as the Declaration of

Helsinki and the Ethical Clearance Guideline developed by the Ethiopian Science and
Technology Agency.

9) Deadline for ethical clearance: The Committee shall declare project proposals cleared in
less than 1month period.

10) Ethics of the IRB: All documents that reach the IRB shall be strictly confidential.

11) The RTTVP represents the IRB in the Senate meeting.

Mandates of the IRB

 Organize and deliver research ethics training to researchers in the region or the
institutions
 Develop SOPs that govern the IRB‟s research review procedures
 Submit progress report of the IRB‟s functions annually to the NRERC

30
 Inform the NRERC on the occurrence of frequent, unexpected severe adverse effects
(SAEs) related to research reviewed and approved by the IRB,
 Review and approve research protocols similar to the NRERC except:
Genetic research, stem cell research
 Review research involving human biological material transfer outside of Ethiopia
provided that the IRB notifies the NRERC Multicenter international collaborative
research of experimental nature
 Investigate new devices, drugs or vaccines not registered for use in Ethiopia
 Review trials that are funded by manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies
 Solicit funds to build its own capacity
 Inform and assist the investigators and advisors on ethical and procedural standards
related to the use of human participants in research, to facilitate compliance with this
guideline, Ethiopian law, and international regulations
 Ensure that research studies conducted under its jurisdiction are designed and
conducted in a manner that protects the rights, welfare and privacy of research
participants
 Approve, require modification in, or disapprove all research activities that fall within
its jurisdiction
 Conduct continuing review as it deems necessary to protect the rights, welfare, and
privacy of research participants, including requiring progress reports from
investigators
 Suspend and terminate approval of a study not being conducted in accordance with
the NRERC and IRB‟s requirements or that has been associated with unexpected
serious harm to participants or others
 observe or have a third party observe the informed consent process and/or audit the
progress of any study in its jurisdiction as it deems necessary to protect the rights and
welfare of human participants
 IRB may place restrictions on a study.

31
 Membership requirements for IRB

1) New members shall be nominated by members of IRB and approved by RTTVP

2) The RTTVPO is responsible for handling the appointment of committee members

proposed by the ethical committee.

3) Members are selected based on their personal capacities, based on their interest, ethical
and/or scientific training, knowledge and expertise, as well as on their commitment and
willingness to devote the necessary time and effort for the IRB work.

4) Members must disclose in writing any interest or involvement-financial, professional or

otherwise – in a project or proposal under consideration.

5) The IRB will decide the extent to which members that might have a conflict of interest
may participate in bringing out an advice/decision, refer to SOP (Standard Operating
Procedure) of the University-Confidentiality/Conflict of Interest Agreement.

6) Members shall be required to sign a confidentiality agreement at the start of their term.

7) The confidentiality agreement protects the privacy and confidentiality of all parties
whose information may be disclosed to the IRB in the course of its work.

8) Members are appointed for a period of 3 years.

9) Their appointments may be renewed by the RTTVP for up to two consecutive terms.

10) The Ethical Committee will include some rotation after a period of threeyears for up to
two consecutive terms, but it will also strive to ensure continuity within the university
IRB by staggering replacement of members.

Resignation, Disqualification and Replacement of Members

1) Members may resign their positions by submitting a letter of resignation to the

Chairperson.

2) Members may also be disqualified from continuance. The Chairperson should provide
written arguments to the (other) members and there should be unanimous agreement.

3) Members that have resigned or have been disqualified may be replaced by selection and
appointment of new members proposed by the ethical committee.

32
Duties and Responsibilities of Institutional Review Board (IRB)

The Institutional Review Board (IRB) shall:

1) Administer and execute the ethical clearance aspects of the research projects at the
University and request local clearance funded by other agents;

2) Facilitate the establishment of representative pools of eligible College Review and Ethics
Committee(CREC)

3) Support and guide the College Review and Ethics Committee(CREC);

4) Consider appeal of author (s) in case of discontent with the rejection of paper by the
CERC;

5) Consult experts in relation to Ethical aspects and updates on national and international
standards;

6) Develop working ethical guideline (directives);

7) Facilitate capacity building trainings for members of IRB, CRRC, staff members and
other relevant stakeholders;

8) Refer research proposals to the College Review and Ethics Committee.

Duties and Responsibilities of College Review and Ethics Committee (CREC)

The CREC shall be established in the relevant college and it is accountable to the IRB. The
committee shall;

 Be responsible for reviewing the ethical issues of research projects

 Be responsible to implement directives prepared by the IRB based on national and

international standards;

 Assess whether or not the research project is within the procedural and ethical standards
of the IRB directives;

 Review research proposals of ethical concern, issue clearance certificate and copy for
IRB,

 Monitor each project for its ethical implementation in consultation with the IRB,
Research and Publication Coordinator and the Dean or Research Center Directors;

33
  Protecting the participants from harm related to research, and ensuring
individual/community benefits and fairness;

 Organize and deliver research ethics training for researchers;

 Review and approve postgraduate student proposals (MSc, PhD, post-doc ) at the college
level;
 Review and approve university-funded research proposals;
 Collect progress report from the investigators;
 Refer proposal to IRB when it‟s beyond its scope

N.B. The payments to IRB and College Review and Ethics Committee (CREC) shall be
made based on the MOSHE/MOF directives.

3. PUBLICATION

The main purpose of publication is to disseminate research output to the scientific community, to
enable career/ professional development of staff, and then to increase the university‟s national
and international visibility. It should be a culture for full-time academic staff at University to
conduct researches and publish articles in peer-reviewed reputable journals (MoSHE recognized
indexed journals). However, as mentioned earlier, University-funded researches should be
disseminated through publication, patent. Each publication should be reported to the research and
publication coordinator within one month based on the publication reporting format. Otherwise,
the staff will not claim any associated rights and incentives.

Responsibilities

a) The researchers should publish their research findings from funded projects (University
and external funded projects).

b) Any published article should not violate scientific integrity and ethical principles.

c) All University of Gondar staff should properly indicate their affiliation (department,
college/ institute/ school and University of Gondar).

34
 d) All published articles from UoG funding should mention project code and funding
acknowledgement as “ ….this research was financed by University of Gondar in the
framework of (write project title here) and (write the code here )”

Note: Any publication that does not meet the above provisions will not be considered for
academic promotion and claims associated to the publication.

3.1. University Journals

The major objectives of establishing journals, bulletins, working papers and proceedings in the
university are:

1. To encourage, stimulate and promote research among members of the academic

community,

2. To provide scientific and technological information for the staff of the University at
national and international level,

3. To disseminate research results to the scientific community and other end users,

4. To arrange a forum to share observations, experiences and ideas,

5. To serve as a platform for researchers active involvement in various development fields,

6. To introduce the various academic and scientific activities of the University to academic
and other organizations,

7. To nurture the research culture among academic staff at the University

3.2 Journals in the University

Procedures of establishment

a. Establishing a journal can be initiated by departments/ schools/institutes/ colleges.

b. The AUC and the RTTVP office examine the relevance and proceed with detailed
need assessment and journal guideline preparation.

c. A workshop will be conducted to review the journal guideline by internal and

external reviewers.

35
 d. The AUC endorses the journal establishment guideline and the guideline is
approved by the Senate of the University.

Editorial Board

1) Each journal published in the University shall have its own Editorial Board, Advisory
Board, Editor-in-chief, Associate Editor (s), Managing Editor and policies that go in line
with the overall University‟s rules and regulations.

2) Individual publications (journals) established in different AUs shall report to the Office
of Research and Publication Directorate and shall be deposited in the institutional
repository system.

3) The minimum number of manuscript per issue for a journal publication is ten full-length
articles.

4) The journals may announce a special call for addressing a chosen topic which will be
published in a special issue.

5) The journals shall receive manuscripts based on their aims and scopes throughout the
year.

6) A journal shall publish a minimum of two issues (one volume) per year; unless
otherwise special permission is obtained.

7) Online publication of journals should be encouraged.

8) Publications shall be peer-reviewed original articles, review articles, brief

communications, case reports, book reviews and letters.

9) Affiliation of the author or authors shall be written properly as “the University of

Gondar”

Election of the Editorial Board (EB) Members

Editorial Board (EB) members include the Editor-in-chief, Associate Editors and Managing
Editor (optional). The minimum requirement to be elected as anEB member is to have a master‟s
degree and publication of at least 3 articles in MoSHE recognized indexed journals or PhD with
publication of minimum of 2 articles in MoSHE recognized indexed journals. The election of the
Editorial Board members shall be based on the following guidelines:

36
1) The Dean or the Director of Research shall invite or nominate its potential faculty staff
members to apply for Editor-in-Chief election.

2) AUC shall select the Editor-in-Chief based on their research experience as PI, history of
winning external grant, publication, experience as a journal article reviewer and editor in
indexed journals.

3) The Editor-in-Chief shall invite and nominate potential Associate Editors based on their
research experience as PI, history of winning external grant, publication, experience as a
journal article reviewer and editor in indexed journals. Volunteer international editors are
highly encouraged.

4) The Editor-in-Chief and the dean shall decide the number of relevant Associate Editors;
and the minimum number of associate editors should be five and the maximum shall be
eight and possible to add international volunteer editors.

5) If the publication office becomes larger, a full-time managing editor can be hired.

6) The number of associate editors shall be determined by the number of issues per year.

 For journals which publish 4 issues per year- 10 Associate editors

 For journals which publish 3 issues per year- 8 Associate editors
 For journals which publish 2 issues per year- 6 Associate editors
 For journals which publish 1 issue per year- 4 Associate editors and
should upgrade to publish two issues within two years
For those who publish more, it will be calculated proportionally with a factor of 2 for
each issue. Additionally, each journal will have 1 language editor and 1 layout editor and
webmaster who will be counted as associate editors to give all the needed support for the
journals. Those language and layout editors will work not only on the journals, but they
will support different activities as a pool of language and layout experts to support
additional conference and publication editorials.

7) The term of office for the editorial board members shall be five consecutive years
provided that the performance is satisfactory. However, an EB member could be elected
for a second term.

37
Duties and Responsibilities of the Editorial Board (EB)

While the Editorial Board (EB) shall be accountable to the dean/director of the Academic Unit,
Research Centers, or Research and Publication Director, it shall have the following duties and
responsibilities. Accordingly, it:

1) Approves layout of the journal;

2) Reviews and/or edits all received manuscripts that would be published as original articles
or short communication;

3) Decides on whether a manuscript should be rejected or be reviewed as an original article

or short communication;

4) Chooses two or more reviewers;

5) Assigns an Associate Editor-in-Chief from Associate Editors;

6) Selects topics for review articles and invites experts in the field to prepare a review
manuscript;

7) Works to improve the quality and regularity of the journal;

8) Designs ways of improving the dissemination or circulation of the journal;

9) Searches financial support for the journal

Duties and Responsibilities of the Editor-in-Chief

The Editor-in-Chief of a journal ofthe University shall have the following duties and
responsibilities:

1) Calls and chairs EB meetings

2) Develops draft formats of the journal to be approved by the EB;

3) Receives and registers all manuscripts;

4) Reviews the manuscript‟s conformity and its scope, then decides rejection or sends it
to an associate editor for a review process;

5) Is responsible for communications with the corresponding author;

6) Maintains the quality and regularity of the journal, and its availability online and in
print;

38
 7) Is responsible for all communications regarding the journal;

8. Reports the journal‟s publication activities to the Editorial Board or deans, directors of
Research Centers or Research and Publication Director;

9. Sends reminders to corresponding author/s;

10. Sends manuscripts to associate editors for reviewers;

11. He/she shall be paid as per the Guidelines of MoSHE.

Note: The chief editor shall not hold any office position.

Duties and Responsibilities of Associate Editor(s)

The Associate Editor (s) of a journal shall have the following duties and responsibilities:

1. The associate editors shall carry the functions of the editor-in-chief in his/her absence.

2. Associate editors shall secure potential reviewers.

3. Once reviewers are selected by the Editorial Board (EB), the associate editor in his/her
respective discipline shall communicate (send manuscripts and receive comments) with
reviewers.

4. The associate editor sends reminders to reviewers.

5. The associate editor receives manuscripts from the Editor-in-Chief and sends comments
of reviewers to the Editor-in-Chief.

Advisory Board Members

Experts living in Ethiopia or abroad shall be selected (based on national and international
experience in research) by the EB as editorial consultants after they agree to work in that
capacity. They shall have the following duties and responsibilities:

1. The Advisory Board evaluates the quality of the journal and assesses whether it meets
acceptable standards.

2. The Advisory Board gives feedback to the editorial board on ways of improving the
standard of the journal.

3. Board members shall popularize the journal in their own and other institutions.

Note:The editorial board of the journal shall be paid as per the guideline of MoSHE.
39
Manuscript Review Procedures

When manuscripts are submitted for journal editors, they shall pass through the following
rigorous review procedures:

1. The Editor-in-Chief acknowledges the receipt of a manuscript within one week.

2. Review form shall be prepared which the reviewers fill and return along with the articles.

3. The EB shall have three options of decisions: „accept manuscripts for external review‟,
„return it to author for revision‟, or „reject it‟.

4. The EB also decides on whether a manuscript is to be accepted as an original article, brief

communication, case report or review article etc…

5. Once accepted for external review, the associate editor in the respective discipline
identifies one reviewer (for brief communications /case reports etc…) and at least two
reviewers (for original articles) with appropriate expertise.

6. Reviewers will be requested to review and return the manuscript within four weeks of
their receipt.

7. Reviewers shall report their decisions based on the evaluation form as to „accept as it is‟,
„accept with minor revision‟, „accept with major revision‟, or „reject‟.

8. If a manuscript is accepted with modifications, it will be returned to the author for

revision.

9. Rejected manuscripts will be returned to the author(s).

10. Manuscripts accepted without modification and with minor revision, revised by the
authors to the best satisfaction of the editorial board shall be accepted for publication.

11. Manuscripts accepted with „major revision‟ revised by authors shall be sent to previous
reviewers for proper incorporation of comments. If approved by reviewers and the EB,
the manuscript shall be accepted for publication.

12. For incorporation of comments for „minor revision‟ a maximum of two weeks will be
given.

13. In the review process, the authors' and reviewer's anonymity is preserved (double-blind
process);

40
 14. Manuscripts accepted by both reviewers with or without minor editorial revision shall be
edited by one EB member and then presented to the Editor-in-Chief.

15. Manuscripts accepted with major revision by one or more reviewers will be sent to the
author (s) for revision. Authors should resubmit the revised manuscript in four weeks‟
time.

16. If a manuscript is rejected by one of the reviewers but accepted (with minor or major
revision) by the other reviewer, the final decision shall be made by EB.

17. A manuscript rejected by two reviewers shall be rejected, and rejected manuscripts will
be returned to authors.

18. Galley proofs will be sent to the corresponding author. They should be checked and
returned to the Editorial Office as soon as possible within two weeks after receipt. Delay
in returning corrected proofs may result in the paper being held over to the next issue. At
this stage, corrections must be limited only to essential and editorial mistakes.

19. The priority of articles for publication shall be decided by the EB based on the order of
submission of the manuscripts to the Editor-in-Chief;

20. Volumes and issue numbers may be posted online as well as printed on paper;

21. Electronic copies of the published paper will be sent to the author(s);

Reputability of Journals Published in the University

Journals published by the University shall be given the status of reputability based on the
following guidelines:

1. Reputability of a journal published in the University shall be officially declared by the

University Senate.

2. An Academic Unit or Research Center, after publishing its second volume consequently
or above, can request reputability status for the journal it administers.

3. The request for journal reputability shall be presented to the RTTVPO.

4. The RTTVPO shall rate the journal against the criteria stated in MOSHE guideline for
evaluation of journals published in Ethiopia (Guideline no Research 01/2019).

41
 5. The RTTVPO shall reveal the list and status of all reputable journals published in the
University.

6. An Academic Unit or Research Center shall present a request to the RTTVPO for the
renewal of reputability of its journal before three months of its due date of conditional
acceptance expires;

4. CAPACITY BUILDING

4.1. Facilities

In order to create a strong research culture that would help the University to realize its vision, the
necessary research facilities should be put in place. Hence, the university shall:

1. Facilitate the availability of important research resources such as laboratories, equipment,

consumables and fieldwork logistics such as vehicles and boats;

2. Facilitate the availability of experimental or demonstration sites (for agriculture,

aquaculture, tissue culture etc…);

3. Facilitate the availability of better offices, computers and internet access for researchers;

4. Facilitate the subscription of some important publications;

5. Facilitate the establishment of museums to keep safely the collections brought during
some research works/expeditions;

6. Establish research village for its Research Centers as deemed necessary;

7. Establish linkage with other regional, national and international research institutions.

4.2. Knowledge and Skill Development

A thriving research culture can be developed in the University when the research capacity of the
staff (knowledge and skills) is continuously improved. Hence, the university shall:

1. Organize short term and long term training on research methodology, research proposal
writing, large grant writing, data analysis techniques and utilization of statistical
software, skills of writing for publication, and computer skills for researchers;

2. Organize training on project management skills for researchers and grant winners;

42
 3. Organize training on skills of writing manuscripts for publication and research ethics;

4. Organize workshops, seminars and conferences and encourage its staff to present their
findings in these avenues;

5. Support its staff members to present their findings in national and international
workshops/conferences;

6. Organize or assist short term study/research visit scholarships (locally and abroad) for the
staff;

7. Assist, when requested by AUs/Research Centers, PhD students for short term
study/research visit scholarships (locally and abroad) and when approved by the
RTTVPO and the University President;

8. Facilitate networks among researchers in the university and outside through the formation
of institutional collaborations among various research institutions;

9. Encourage joint (multi-institutional) grant proposal developments;

10. Organize training (for researchers) on Intellectual Property Right (IPR);

5. INCLUSION

5.1. Involvement of Women and Persons with disabilities in Research

In order to address the longstanding developmental problems of women and persons with
disabilities and bring them on board to the development arena, and maintain equity at all levels,
the university shall;

1. duly consider gender and disability issue during the thematic area preparation;

2. strongly encourage women and persons with disabilities staff involvement during project
developments;

6. ACADEMIC AND RESEARCH DISCOURSE

In a university where the staff and students (mainly graduate students) are expected to be
engaged in research activities, there should be different avenues (like seminars) for academic and
research discourses. Hence, academic and research discourses should follow the following

43
guidelines so that such discourses will contribute to the development of thriving academic and
research culture:

1. Seminar calendar shall be put in place as applicable (e.g. every week or 2 weeks) in all
Academic Units and Research Centers.

2. Seminar participants shall include staff, students (especially postgraduate) and guest
speakers.

3. The Research and Publication Coordinator shall encourage all academic staff and
graduate students to submit presentation topics to the department or Academic Units.

4. The departments or AUs shall select presenters and the Research and Publication
Coordinator shall then prepare a seminar calendar for a semester. The seminar calendar
shall be posted online and on notice boards for all staff members and graduate students.

5. At least three days before each seminar, the department head or the Research and
Publication Coordinator shall announce (remind) the presenters and their topics for
presentation to all staff members and graduate students.

6. On each seminar day, one or more research outputs or other relevant issues for academic
discourse shall be presented.

7. All full-time academic staff and PhD students shall present a seminar topic at least once a
year.

8. All academic staff and postgraduate students shall attend regular seminars; department
heads or the Research and Publication Coordinator or RC Directors are responsible for
documenting the attendance.

9. All staff members and graduate students shall be free from classes on seminar days
throughout the semester.

10. The Research and Publication Coordinator or RC Directors shall keep record of seminar
presentations and collect staff attendance from the department heads and report to the
Research and Publication Director of the University.

11. Postdoctoral/ PhD/ MSc/ MA/ returnees shall present their work in weekly seminars.

44
 12. RCs shall conduct their own seminar sessions on a day other than the seminar day of the
AU.

13. Each Academic Unit and Research Center shall have a Research Week every year to
review research proposals, evaluate research project progress or final reports or to make
an exhibition of technology outputs.

14. The University shall organize annual international or national research conference/s.

Conference paper presenters shall be paid as per MOSHE directives for staff from another
institution provided that the presenters are willing to submit their full article before presentation
so that it will be published in the proceeding of the conference or the paper presented is already
published in Science Indexed Journals in the year of the conference or a year before. In addition,
staff from another institution shall be given accommodation and transportation cost. If the
conference organizers generate funds from sources other than the host university regular budget,
they may decide on the payment amount.

Keynote speakers shall be paid as per MoSHE directives. In a conference, a maximum of two
keynote speakers shall be selected, one of which shall be the University staff. The conference
organizing committee shall nominate keynote speakers based on merit and appropriateness to the
theme of the conference. The selection of keynote speakers shall be approved by the Academic
Commission of the respective AU and by the RTTVPO for research centers.

7. SOURCES OF FINANCE FOR RESEARCH

Ethiopian Government/Ministry of Finance

The University receives research budget from the Federal Government of Ethiopia and it shall
allocate annually a considerable amount of budget for research. This budget is utilized by staff,
students (for thesis research) and for publications of journals, proceedings, and for administration
of research. The source of these funds may be from Government treasury or from externally
searched research and development grants. Other governmental organizations may also fund
some of the projects according to agreements reached. Especially RCs are highly required to win
externally funded projects, for (in principle) the research grant from the university will gradually
diminish and ultimately stop.

45
External Sources

Individual researchers also receive grants from different organizations and other partnership and
linkage programs with sister universities overseas. The university should solicit funding
organizations or encourage and facilitate researchers to compete for local, national and
international funding calls. Depending on the nature of the project, the university shall look for
funding from external or international sources and encourage individual researchers to look for
funding from external and international sources;

1. This shall apply to researches that are going to be financed by sources other than the
University (maybe in the country or abroad);

2. All research and development project proposals to be submitted to funding agencies for
financial support other than the University may pass through the relevant Academic Unit
(or Research Center) and the progress reportshall be copied and submitted to RTTVPO of
the University. This is important for legal conditions, follow up, documentation issues,
information exchange, facilitation for request of authorities for the conduct of the
research, ethical clearance, etc.;

3. After completion the results of such studies shall be communicated to the relevant bodies
such as AUs, RCs, or RTTVP.

4. The RTTVPO shall facilitate externally funded projects.

5. A reasonable rate of benefit may be authorized to researchers who secure research funds
from external sources. The details shall be worked out based on the incentive policy of
the University.

6. Detailed procedures outlined under „Administration of Research‟ section of the guideline

shall be observed.

7. Once the research project is approved by the grant provider, the researcher(s) shall
receive an official letter from the Academic Unit or Research Center through the
RTTVPO, individually or in a group. The researcher(s) then will be able to get financial,
personnel and procurement services from the University.

8. Unless the donor strictly forbids, the University will charge a maximum of 10% of the
total project cost for project administration costs (overhead cost).

46
9. If the contractual agreement does not show the percentage of the overhead cost clearly,
the RTTVPO shall decide the percentage of the overhead cost to be charged in
consultation with project developers, donors and the University Legal Service;

10. Unless specified in the project contractual agreement document otherwise, the ownership
of intellectual property rights for results of externally funded joint projects belongs
entirely to the University.

8. Procedures Governing Misconduct in the Research and Publication Process

Research Misconducts

Each staff member of the University has a responsibility to foster an environment which
promotes intellectual honesty and integrity and which does not tolerate misconduct in any
aspect of research or scholarly endeavor. The following are considered to be research
misconducts:

1. Failure to meet lines of accountabilities stated in this document

2. Failure to provide progress reports and open presentations for the respective
office within agreed time;

3. Misuse of research fund and materials; Delaying of research projects without

convincing reason(s);

4. Failure to complete research works within a scheduled time without convincing

reason(s);

5. Failure to submit the final research documents in a required format;

6. Failure to disseminate his research findings to the target community;

7. Any form of plagiarism and mischief in research;

8. Any form of corruption and injustice in research and research administration;

9. Failure to respond to research administration instructions;

10. Any form of using forged, trimmed, tortured and cooked data;

11. Failure to work in collaboration with others when need arises.

47
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Vice President for Research and Technology Transfer Office would like to appreciate the
following committee members who prepared this guideline.

Dr. Asmamaw Alemu (Chairperson)

Prof. Tadesse Awoke

Dr. Missaye Mulatie (Secretary)

Dr. Lemma Derseh

Dr. Getachew Assefa

Dr. Tefera Berihun

Mr. NahomEyasu

48
 Annex : Formats

UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate and Postgraduate Directorate
Proposal Submission Format for Postgraduate Research Strengthening Award(RPD 01)
1. Title Page

Project title
The project title shall reflect the main components/working packages of the project
constituting it. It should be relevant to the PhD program from which students are
envisaged to be engaged

Name, qualification and academic rank of the PI, and address (institutional email
account, tel. No)

Name, qualification and academic rank of the CoI/COIs

Name and thesis topic, program of the PhD and MSc students

Hosting department, college/institute

Project duration Start -----------------

End:----------------
Project fund requested from UoG

Matching fund ( if any)

Project collaborators

2. Executive Summary (800 words maximum)

Provide a succinct summary of the Project. Note that this summary will be provided to the
evaluators for review and should provide a clear summary of the project including rationale,
objectives, outputs to be delivered by the project. Please clearly indicate the number components
engaging PhD and MSc students.

3. BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE ( 3 pages maximum)

Provide background information relating to the problem your research will address. Your
background should also introduce readers/evaluators to the „niche‟ issue(s) which your project
seeks to address and how this will lead to the outcomes that are envisaged. Clarify alignment of

49
your proposal to local, national and development as well as at the University of Gondar thematic
areas. Demonstrate how this builds on previous related initiatives in knowledge generation and
problem solving.

4. Problem statement (1 page Maximum)

Clearly justify why the study need to be conducted at this time and place. Indicate the theoretical
and empirical gaps, inconsistencies and controversies.

5. OBJECTIVES ( 2 pages maximum)

What are the overall and specific objectives of your proposed research against which success or
failure can be assessed. The project specific objectives should be packed per component or
working packages linked to PhD thesis research works.

6. ASSOCIATED POSTGRADUATE TOPICS and CURRENT STUDENTS(6 pages

maximum)

Provide details of Postdoc and PhD project objectives (minimum of 2 postdoc topic and 5 PhD
topic) and postgraduate (PhD & MA/MSc) programs related to the proposal upon which
extensive experience in project delivery is visualized. Clarify how your projects is associated
with these previous initiatives and postgraduate (PhD &MA/MSc) and/or builds on them. How
will your project complement the existing knoswledge?

7. LITERATURE REVIEW ( 5 page maximum)

Provide the body of knowledge related to your research and highlight how your research will add
value to existing knowledge. In particular outline earlier research that underpins what your
project will be doing; and why it should be done. The literature review needs to be focused to
the specific research to be addressed in this proposal and provide evidence of understanding of
the main issues to be researched, and of the current literature on the topic. Please provide at least
three citations from patented work relating to your research and identifying gap areas that your
project will build on.

8. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK (Maximum 3 pages)

Outline how you will approach the problem, where the students, researchers and partner agencies
50
are involved and in particular identify the main concepts that underpin your approach to carrying
out the research, relating this to the literature review. You need to specifically outline the
participation of graduate students and how this is related to the problem framework. Provide an
illustration of your conceptual framework.

9. Working package and components( 3 pages Maximum )

Clearly indicate the working packages/components and their logical flows.

10. METHODOLOGY ( 5 pages maximum)

Provide the methodology. Highlight how and what research will be undertaken; including the
roles of graduate students and describe what each graduate student will do.
11. DELIVERABLES

These can be described in the knowledge that can be created (possible number and types of
publications: journal articles, conference papers, working papers, methodological guideline,
public lectures, etc.) and usable technologies such as patent, and the like that could be achieved
during and after the completion of the project years.

12. DISSEMINATION AND COMMUNICATION (1 page)

Indicate how the results of your research will be disseminated tothe various stakeholders and
how you plan to ensure increased visibility of your project and that of the University of Gondar.

13. IMPACT (2 pages)

Describe the beneficiaries of the project and how they will benefit and the potential impact of the
project with clear identification of target development milestones. Applicants should justify their
approach and economic feasibility. You need to indicate here the expected publications, policy
briefs, pamphlets, radio broadcasts etc. Be realistic and not overambitious and show that the
dissemination strategy is linked to the available budget or other support sources. Most
importantly, how the project supports Doctoral and post-doctoral students for successful
accomplishment.

51
 14. FEASIBILITY

cclearly state the feasibility of the project in terms of time, finance and resources

15. SUSTAINABILITY (2 pages)

Describe the financial, environmental and social sustainability of the project. Include an analysis
of risks and management strategies to address each risk. Describe the continuity and growth of
the research group.

16. TEAM ORGANIZATION AND QUALIFICATION

How do you propose to organize your team in order to achieve your project objectives? The roles
and responsibilities of each team member including graduate students must be clearly described.
Clearly describe the role and broad activities to be delivered by the PhD students and postdocs
identified (present using Table). Include CVs for the project team as annex.

17. MONITORING, SUPERVISION AND EVALUATION ( 2 pages maximum)

How will the project‟s achievements be monitored, supervision and evaluated to ensure proper
management and enable early corrective action where necessary? Indicate clear milestones that
will demonstrate progress whilst describing how the project will (a) monitor progress towards
milestones; (b) evaluate the impact of the research, including the effectiveness of the
partnerships and sustainability of the solutions; and (c) monitor and demonstrate development
outcomes of the project interventions.

18. TIMELINE( clear time breakdown)

19. FINANCIAL BREAKDOWN AND JUSTIFICATION

Give the anticipated cost of your project, with explanatory notes where necessary. The budget for
each working package/component handled by PhD/MSc students shall be clearly specified.

20. REFERENCES

52
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate
Non-anonymous Proposal Submission Format for Regular Staff Research, Special Call
Research and Center-Led Research (RPD02)

1. Project Title

This includes the title, name, affiliation, specialization and address of the PI, Co-Is, and
stakeholder/s. It should include the duration of the project. The tile should state the topic exactly
in the smallest possible number of words (Not more than 3 lines). It should be within the
thematic areas of University of Gondar‟s priority areas.

2. FULL NAME, TITLE AND ADDRESS OF THE PRENCIPAL AND CO-INVESTIGATORS

No Name Sex Educational Academic Email Telephone Department Specialization Signature

level Rank
1(PI)
2
3
4
5
6
7

3. THEMATIC AREA: _______________________________________________

4. SUB-THEMATIC AREA: _______________________________________________

5. DURATION OF THE PROJECT

Date of Commencement: _______________________________________________

Date of Termination: _______________________________________________

6. Executive summary (max 1 page)

It should clearly describe the background, purpose, objectives of the project,key

methods/approaches, activities, the expected results, estimated budget, and timeframe. (max 1
page)

53
7. Background and justification (max 3 pages)

It should give sufficient background information to allow the readers to understand the context
and significance of the question the project is trying to address. It requires to acknowledge the
previous work on which the project is building and to identify gaps (practical, theoretical, and
methodological).

The proposal should clearly answer why does the research needs to be conducted. The rationale
should be placed within the context of existing research or within the researchers‟ own
experiences and/or observations.

8. Objectives and/or Research questions (max 1.5 pages)

The objectives of the research should delineate the aim in which the researchers seek to bring
about as a result of completing the research undertaken. It may be thought as either a solution to
a problem or a step along the way toward achieving a solution; an end state to be achieved in
relation to the problem. The objectives should summarize what is to be achieved by the study
and closely related to the statement of the problem. After statement of the general objective,
specific objectives shall be mentioned. The objectives should be simple (not complex), specific
(not vague), stated in advance (not after the research is done), and stated using “action verbs”.
Each specific objective should be categorized under sub-themes.

9. Significance (max 0.5 page)

It should describe contribution of the study for body of knowledge and practical significance for
policy and practice. It should indicate who will benefit what and how.

10. Literature review (conceptual, theoretical and legal review) (max 7 pages)

It should describe the literature relevant to a particular field or topic to give an overview of what
has been said, who the key writers are, what are the prevailing theories and hypotheses. The
researchers should use database reports of primary or original scholarship. The types of
scholarship may be empirical, theoretical, critical/analytic, or methodological in nature that seeks
to describe, summarize, evaluate, clarify and/or integrate the content of primary reports. It should
be organized around and related directly to the research question you are developing, must
synthesize results into a summary of what is and is not known, identify areas of controversy in
the literature and formulate questions that need further research.

11. Methods (max 8 pages)

It should rigorously describe and clearly explain the following but not limited to:

54
  The study area,
 Research approach and design,
 Sampling technique and sample size,
 Data collection methods or tools
 Data analysis plan and
 Ethical considerations

It should also include methodological metrics based on the following table

Theme Objective Variables/ Data Sampling data Analytical Deliver

indicators sources techniques and collection techniques ables
sample size method

12. Deliverables and dissemination plan (max 2 pages)

These can be described in the knowledge that can be created (possible number and types of
publications: journal articles, conference papers, working papers, methodological guideline,
public lectures, etc.) and usable technologies such as patent, and the like that could be achieved
during and after the completion of the project years.

13. Benefits and Beneficiaries (max 1 page)

Clearly indicate what are the benefits or contribution of the study and who will benefit from the
results of the study. Describe how the study benefits them.

55
14. Impacts of the study (max 0.5 page)

Clearly mention the outputs of the study. Besides, it is expected to describe the impacts of the
study.

15. Timeline and phases (max 1 page)

The duration of the project should be clearly and reasonably prepared.

16. Budget with phases (max 3 pages)

There should be item by item budget allocation with a budget summery. Budget shall be
allocated to each sub-theme.

17. Study Team Roles and responsibilities (max 2 pages)

This part shall indicate the roles and responsibilities of all the research members with the
following table.

Theme/ sub-theme Responsible team members Remark

18. References

Researchers should use latest up-to date references and follow APA, Harvard, or Vancouver or
based on the college preferred referencing style.

19. Declaration of the Investigators (Max 0.5 page)

20. Appendices/Annexes

The researchers should annex data collection tools, information sheet, stakeholder support letter,
informed consent, if applicable and their CV.

Note: The proposal should be indented 1.5‟ left margin and 1‟ right margin, 1.5 spacing, 12 font
size, and Times New Romans and headings should be bold.

56
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate

Anonymous Proposal Submission Format for Regular Staff Research, Special Call
Research and Center-Led Research (RPD03)

NOTE: Inclusion of any identifier of investigators will result in disqualification of the proposal!

1 Project Title

This includes the title, name, affiliation, specialization and address of the PI, Co-Is, and
stakeholder/s. It should include the duration of the project. The tile should state the topic exactly
in the smallest possible number of words (Not more than 3 lines). It should be within the
thematic areas of University of Gondar‟s priority areas.

2. THEMATIC AREA: _______________________________________________

3. SUB-THEMATIC AREA: _______________________________________________

4. DURATION OF THE PROJECT

Date of Commencement: _______________________________________________

Date of Termination: _______________________________________________

5. Executive summary (max 1 page)

It should clearly describe the background, purpose, objectives of the project,key

methods/approaches, activities, the expected results, estimated budget, and timeframe. (max 1
page)

6. Background and justification (max 3 pages)

It should give sufficient background information to allow the readers to understand the context
and significance of the question the project is trying to address. It requires to acknowledge the
previous work on which the project is building and to identify gaps (practical, theoretical, and
methodological).

57
The proposal should clearly answer why does the research needs to be conducted. The rationale
should be placed within the context of existing research or within the researchers‟ own
experiences and/or observations.

7. Objectives and/or Research questions (max 1.5 pages)

The objectives of the research should delineate the aim in which the researchers seek to bring
about as a result of completing the research undertaken. It may be thought as either a solution to
a problem or a step along the way toward achieving a solution; an end state to be achieved in
relation to the problem. The objectives should summarize what is to be achieved by the study
and closely related to the statement of the problem. After statement of the general objective,
specific objectives shall be mentioned. The objectives should be simple (not complex), specific
(not vague), stated in advance (not after the research is done), and stated using “action verbs”.
Each specific objective should be categorized under sub-themes.

8. Significance (max 0.5 page)

It should describe contribution of the study for body of knowledge and practical significance for
policy and practice. It should indicate who will benefit what and how.

9. Literature review (conceptual, theoretical and legal review) (max 7 pages)

It should describe the literature relevant to a particular field or topic to give an overview of what
has been said, who the key writers are, what are the prevailing theories and hypotheses. The
researchers should use database reports of primary or original scholarship. The types of
scholarship may be empirical, theoretical, critical/analytic, or methodological in nature that seeks
to describe, summarize, evaluate, clarify and/or integrate the content of primary reports. It should
be organized around and related directly to the research question you are developing, must
synthesize results into a summary of what is and is not known, identify areas of controversy in
the literature and formulate questions that need further research.

10. Methods (max 8 pages)

It should rigorously describe and clearly explain the following but not limited to:

 The study area,

 Research approach and design,
 Sampling technique and sample size,
 Data collection methods or tools
 Data analysis plan and
 Ethical considerations

58
 It should also include methodological metrics based on the following table

Theme Objective Variables/ Data Sampling data Analytical Deliver

indicators sources techniques and collection techniques ables
sample size method

11. Deliverables and dissemination plan (max 2 pages)

These can be described in the knowledge that can be created (possible number and types of
publications: journal articles, conference papers, working papers, methodological guideline,
public lectures, etc.) and usable technologies such as patent, and the like that could be achieved
during and after the completion of the project years.

12. Benefits and Beneficiaries (max 1 page)

Clearly indicate what are the benefits or contribution of the study and who will benefit from the
results of the study. Describe how the study benefits them.

13. Impacts of the study (max 0.5 page)

Clearly mention the outputs of the study. Besides, it is expected to describe the impacts of the
study.

14. Timeline and phases (max 1 page)

The duration of the project should be clearly and reasonably prepared.

15. Budget with phases (max 3 pages)

There should be item by item budget allocation with a budget summery. Budget shall be

16. References
Researchers should use latest up-to date references and follow APA, Harvard, or Vancouver or
based on the college preferred referencing style.
17. Appendices/Annexes
The researchers should annex data collection tools, information sheet, stakeholder support letter,
informed consent, if applicable.

Note: The proposal should be indented 1.5‟ left margin and 1‟ right margin, 1.5 spacing, 12 font
size, and Times New Romans and headings should be bold.

59
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate
Document Review Criteria (RPD04)

Postgraduate Research Strengthening Award ( Ad-hoc committee = 30%)

Project Title: _______________________________________________________________

Project Code: ___________________________ Date of defense: ______________________
Reviewer Name: _________________________ Signature: ___________________________

S/N Section Criteria Weight Score

1. Project idea  Originality of the idea 15
2. Relevance of  Background and Rationale 25
the project  Problem statement
 Objectives
3. Team  Team organization, qualification and associated 8
postgraduate program
4. Research  Conceptual framework 25
approach and  Working package and components
methodology  Methodology
 Deliverables/milestones
 Dissemination and communication
5. Feasibility  Financial justification, timeline, and others resources 10
6. Project  Sustainability 10
management  Supervision
 Monitoring
 Evaluation
7. Impact Social, economic, environmental and other impacts of the 7
project
Total score ___/100
The total score shall be converted to 60% ____/30

General comments :--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: ------------------------------Signature---------------------------------Date:-------------------------

60
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate

Document Review Criteria (RPD05)

Postgraduate Research Strengthening Award (peer review =50%)

Project Title: _______________________________________________________________

Project Code: ___________________________ Date of defense: ______________________
Reviewer Name: _________________________ Signature: ___________________________

S/N Section Criteria Weight Score

1 Project idea  Originality of the idea 15
2 Relevance of  Background and Rationale 25
the project  Problem statement
 Objectives
3 Team  Team organization, qualification and associated 8
postgraduate program
4 Research  Conceptual framework 25
approach and  Working package and components
methodology  Methodology
 Deliverables/milestones
 Dissemination and communication
5 Feasibility  Financial justification, timeline, and others resources 10
6 Project  Sustainability 10
management  Supervision
 Monitoring
 Evaluation

7 Impact Social, economic, environmental and other impacts of the 7

project
Total score ___/100
The total score shall be converted to 20% ____/50

General comments :--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: ------------------------------Signature---------------------------------Date:-------------------------

61
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate
Oral Presentation Review Criteria (RPD06)

Postgraduate Research Strengthening Award by the Ad-hoc committee, external peer

reviewer and internal peer reviewer (10%)

Project Title: _______________________________________________________________

Project Code: ___________________________ Date of defense: ______________________
Reviewer Name: _________________________ Signature: ___________________________
S/N Criteria Weight Score
1 Coherence of presentation ( clear and logical ) 2.5
2 Understanding of the subject matter and methodology 3
3. Proper reflection and active participation of team members 3.5
4 Time management 1
Total score ___/10

62
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate
Research Project Document Review Criteria (RPD07)

Proposal document peer review criteria for regular staff research, special call research and
center- led research (30%)

Project Title: _______________________________________________________________

Project Code: ___________________________ Date of defense: ______________________
Reviewer Name: _________________________ Signature: ___________________________
S/ Section Criteria Weight Score
N
1 Topic (12) Innovativeness and Urgency 5
Feasibility and Applicability 4
Appropriateness to thematic areas 3
2 Executive Does it include purpose, background, objectives and 5
summary(5) methods
3 Background and Doe it gives sufficient background information, 5
justification (15) acknowledge the previous work and identify gaps
Does it justify the gaps and explain why the study is needed 10
to be investigated at the specific time and place and how
will the gaps be addressed
4 Themes and Clearly state objective (SMART) which are in line with the 3
objectives (10) topic
Alignment of the sub-theme to the main research thematic 7
area
5 Significance of the Clear description of the significance including practical 5
project (5) (solving societal problems), theoretical (body of
knowledge) and policy (inform and influence) and
relevance of the project.
6 Literature review Latest references, organized in related to the research topic, 8
(8) synthesize previous studies, identify gaps, and areas of
controversies, critical review of previous works and existing
theories.
7 Methodology (30) Appropriate description of the study area 2
Appropriate research design with justifications 4

63
 Selection of appropriate source and study population, 6
sample size and sampling technique with justification
Appropriate data collection tools and tool validation 4
Appropriate Method of data analysis with respect to each 4
objective.
Expected outputs/ Impact of the research 5
Dissemination and deliverables 5
8 Budget & Reasonable budget with justification 10
justification (10)
9 Logical Clear and workable logical framework based on timeline 5
framework (5)
Total score ___/100

General comments :--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: ------------------------------Signature---------------------------------Date:-------------------------

64
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate

Research Project Oral Presentation Review Criteria (RPD08)

Proposal Oral Presentation Peer Evaluation Criteria for regular staff research, special call
and center led research (10%)

Project Title: _______________________________________________________________

Project Code: ___________________________ Date of defense: ______________________
Reviewer Name: _________________________ Signature: ___________________________
S/N Criteria Weight Score
1. Proper reflection for questions 14
2. Time management 6
3. Availability of at least 60% of team members 6

4. Coherence of presentation ( clear and logical ) 10

5. Understanding of the subject matter and methodology 14

Total score ___/50

The total score shall be converted to 10% ____/10

65
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate
Document Review Criteria (RPD09)

For regular staff research, special call research and center led research (College Review
and Ethics Committee = 60%)

Project Title: _______________________________________________________________

Project Code: ___________________________ Date of defense: ______________________
Reviewer Name: _________________________ Signature: ___________________________
S/N Criteria Weight Score
1 Topic (7) Innovativeness and Urgency 2
Feasibility and Applicability 4
Appropriateness to thematic areas 1
2 Executive Does it include purpose, background, objectives and 3
summary (3) methods
3 Background and Doe it gives sufficient background information, 4
justification (10) acknowledge the previous work and identify gaps
Does it justify the gaps and explain why the study is 6
needed to be investigated at the specific time and place and
how will the gaps be addressed
4 Themes and Clearly state objective (SMART) which are in line with the 3
objectives (6) topic
Alignment of the sub-theme to the main research thematic 3
area
5 Relevance of the Relevance of the study in terms of addressing the 7
study (7) University‟s priorities
6 Literature (10) Latest references, organized in related to the research topic, 10
synthesize previous studies, identify gaps, and areas of
controversies, critical review of previous works and
existing theories.
7 Methodology (30) Appropriate description of the study area 2
Appropriate research design with justifications 4
Selection of appropriate source and study population, 7
sample size and sampling technique with justification
Appropriate data collection tools and tool validation 4
Appropriate Method of data analysis with respect to each 6
objective.

66
 Expected outputs/ Impact of the research 5
Dissemination and deliverables 2
8 Budget and Reasonable budget with justification 10
justification (10)
9 Logical Clear and workable logical framework 3
framework (3)
10 Publication One point for one publication on MoSHE accredited 6
record (6) journals, University of Gondar Journals, indexed journals
(SCOPUS, Web-Science, and PubMed) by the research
team members in the last budget year.
Note: one article shall be counted only once in same
proposal but can be considered more than once in different
proposals
11 External grant (5) One point for one research grant in the last budget year 5
12 Potential of the The potential of the proposal to be extended to CS and TT 3
project to be
transferred to
CS&/ or TT (3)
Total score ____/100
The total score will be converted to 60% ____/60
Note: If the PI of the Project is female or persons with disabilities add 3 extra points
on the total mark (after CREC and Peer evaluation is completed)

General comments :--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: ------------------------------Signature---------------------------------Date:-------------------------

67
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Coordination Office
Action Plan Submission Form (RPD10)
College/Institute/Faculty/School: ______
Phase Objectives Activities Expected Time Budget Remark
outcomes /duration/

Data Progress
collection report 1 75 % or
phase 1 50 % budget
Data Progress report 2
collection 25 % or 50 %
phase 2 budget
Report Terminal report
Dissemination Conference,
publication

68
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate
Terminal Report Format (RPD11)

College/Institute/Faculty/School: ______

Terminal report submitted to research and publication coordinate office

Project title: -------------------------------------------

I. Project code: ------------------------------------------

II. Budget:------------------------------------------
III. Duration:------------------------------------------
IV. Name and signature of research team members
N Name Educational Gender Email Telephone Department Signature
o level
1
(PI)
2
3
4
5
6
7

iii. Data availability statement

All researchers are expected to submit their raw data to the RD office for documentation.
Researchers shall show how the data will be available to the community. Select the appropriate
option of data availability.

a. Free access in the university‟s repository

b. Accessible with permissions of the researchers
c. The data will not publicly available due to ethical restrictions (attach letter from IRB).

69
iv. Conflict of interest disclosure

Assure absence of conflict of interest by stating the following

We declare that we have no conflict of interest with respect to the research and authorship.

Vii. Abstract with key words

This is an overview of the intentions of the project; the actions that lead to the desired outcomes
(250-300 words). This section includes: background, research objectives, methods, methods of
data analysis, main findings, conclusions and implication.

Abstract

It should clearly describe the background, purpose, and objectives of the project in 250-300
words. Besides, it should highlight key methods/approaches and activities implemented to
achieve the stated objectives and the expected results.

Background and justification (1-3 pages)

It should give sufficient background information to allow the readers to understand the context
and significance of the question the project is trying to address. It requires to acknowledge the
previous work on which the project is building and to identify gaps (practical, theoretical, and
methodological).

The proposal should clearly answer why does the research needs to be conducted. The rationale
should be placed within the context of existing research or within the researchers‟ own
experiences and/or observations.

Objectives and/or Research questions (1.5)

The objectives of the research should delineate the aim in which the researchers seek to bring
about as a result of completing the research undertaken. It may be thought as either a solution to
a problem or a step along the way toward achieving a solution; an end state to be achieved in
relation to the problem. The objectives should summarize what is to be achieved by the study
and closely related to the statement of the problem. After statement of the general objective,
specific objectives shall be mentioned. The objectives should be simple (not complex), specific
(not vague), stated in advance (not after the research is done), and stated using “action verbs”.
Each specific objective should be categorized under sub-themes.

70
Significance (1-2 page)

It should describe contribution of the study for body of knowledge and practical significance for
policy and practice. It should indicate who will benefit what and how.

Literature review (conceptual, theoretical and legal review) (5-8 pages)

It should describe the literature relevant to a particular field or topic to give an overview of what
has been said, who the key writers are, what are the prevailing theories and hypotheses. The
researchers should use database reports of primary or original scholarship. The types of
scholarship may be empirical, theoretical, critical/analytic, or methodological in nature that seeks
to describe, summarize, evaluate, clarify and/or integrate the content of primary reports. It should
be organized around and related directly to the research question you are developing, must
synthesize results into a summary of what is and is not known, identify areas of controversy in
the literature and formulate questions that need further research.

Methods (4- 6 pages)

Study area: The researchers should clearly describe the geographic area/s, the context and
justification for selection.

Research approach and Design: the researchers should describe the research approaches/
methods (qualitative, quantitative, and mixed) with appropriate design with justification for
appropriateness.

Sampling technique and sample size

The research proposal should provide information and justification about sample size to get a
representative sample.

Data collection methods or tools

The research proposal should clearly show the method of data collection and should describe
about how to assure reliability and validity.

Data analysis plan

The proposal should specify the analysis procedures to be used, and label them accurately. Each
research theme will usually require its own data analysis technique. Thus, it should be stated how
to analyze data for each research objectives in respective themes.

71
Ethical considerations

Researches that involve humans and animals should state how to ensure ethical standards such as
informed consent, voluntary participation, confidentiality, and anonymity and privacy issues.

Results (10-15 pages)

Present the results of the research based on each theme with the respective research objectives
with proper presentation of Tables and Graphs as necessary. Annex all supplementary materials.
Discussion (4-7 pages)

Describe the main findings of a project in line with other works of literatures, growing body of
researches and theoretical frameworks.

Research, theory, and policy implications (1-2 pages)

Portray about the implication of the main findings of a stud for other researches, theoretical
development or emerged theories, and policy making processes or enacted policy at national or
international levels.

Conclusion and recommendation (1-2 pages)

Based on the main findings of a research and its implications for theory, policy, and research,
the present research will be expected to make a conclusion and put in place for reaching out a
recommendation for other researchers, policy makers, and practitioners.

Acknowledgement

References

Appendices

Note: Terminal report and manuscript submission approval sheet shall be signed with four
copies and submitted to research and publication/center coordination office,
faculty/college/school/ institution, RPD office and the researcher

72
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate
Publication Reporting Format (RPD12)
College/Institute/Faculty/School: ______

Autho Date Tit Jour Volu Inde Publis DOI/ISBN/ISS Imp h- Fund
r(s) /year of le nal me xer her N/web-link act ind ing
publica nam and facto ex sourc
tion e issue r e &
proje
ct
code

Note: all publications shall be reported to the RPD and RP coordination office within one month
of its publication. Failure to do so will have a consequence in consideration for promotion and
related incentives

73
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate
Fieldwork Form (RPD13)
College/Institute/Faculty/School: ______

Full title of the project :

______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
Name of the PI:
____________________________________________________________________________
Study area of the project:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Duration of the field work (for how many days):____________________________________
Date of starting data collection/leaving for field work:________________________
Date of completion: _____________________________________________________
S/N Specific place, or site Activities to be performed Date
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Name of the PI: __________________________ Signature: _______________________

Name of Research coordinator_________________ Signature _______________________

74
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate
Manuscript Submission Format (RPD14)
College/Institute/Faculty/School: ______

Title page

This includes the title, name, affiliation and address

Conflict of interest disclosure

Assure absence of conflict of interest by stating the following

Abstract with key words

This is an overview of the intentions of the project; the actions that lead to the desired outcomes
(150-200 words). This section includes: background, research objectives, methodology main
findings, conclusions and implication.

Introduction

It should give sufficient background information to allow the readers to understand the context
and significance of the question the project is trying to address. It requires to acknowledge the
previous work on which the project is building and to identify gaps (practical, theoretical, and
methodological).

The proposal should clearly answer why does the research needs to be conducted. The rationale
should be placed within the context of existing research or within the researchers‟ own
experiences and/or observations.

Objectives

The objectives of the research should delineate the aim in which the researchers seek to bring
about as a result of completing the research undertaken. It may be thought as either a solution to
a problem or a step along the way toward achieving a solution; an end state to be achieved in
relation to the problem. The objectives should summarize what is to be achieved by the study
and closely related to the statement of the problem. After statement of the general objective,

75
specific objectives shall be mentioned. The objectives should be simple (not complex), specific
(not vague), stated in advance (not after the research is done), and stated using “action verbs”.
Each specific objective should be categorized under sub-themes.

Methods (4- 6 pages)

Study area: The researchers should clearly describe the geographic area/s, the context and
justification for selection.

Research approach and Design: the researchers should describe the research approaches/
methods (qualitative, quantitative, and mixed) with appropriate design with justification for
appropriateness.

Sampling technique and sample size

The research proposal should provide information and justification about sample size to get a
representative sample.

Data collection methods or tools

The research proposal should clearly show the method of data collection and should describe
about how to assure reliability and validity.

Data analysis plan

The proposal should specify the analysis procedures to be used, and label them accurately. Each
research theme will usually require its own data analysis technique. Thus, it should be stated how
to analyze data for each research objectives in respective themes.

Results

Present the results of the research based on each theme with the respective research objectives
with proper presentation of Tables and Graphs as necessary. Annex all supplementary materials.
Discussion

Describe the main findings of a project in line with other works of literatures, growing body of
researches and theoretical frameworks.

Implications

76
Portray about the implication of the main findings of a stud for other researches, theoretical
development or emerged theories, and policy making processes or enacted policy at national or
international levels.

Conclusion and recommendation

Based on the main findings of a research and its implications for theory, policy, and research,
the present research will be expected to make a conclusion and put in place for reaching out a
recommendation for other researchers, policy makers, and practitioners.

Acknowledgement

References

Appendices

77
 UNIVERSITY OF GONDAR
Research and Publication Directorate
Contractual Agreement Form (RPD15)

Section One: General

Article 1. This Research grant agreement is made as between the University of Gondar
(hereinafter “University”) and the Researchers or investigators (hereinafter the “Researchers”)
for the scientific and technical conduct of the research project entitled:
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________”.
Accordingly, undersigned herby agrees to undertake the following obligations:
Section Two
Obligation of the University
Article 2. The University agrees to award _______________amount of money (ETB) for the
total project duration in three phases per fiscal year (upon release of the first grant up to the date
of abstract submission for the staff student annual research conference) in the form of research
grant for the scientific and technical conduct of the research from the period of ___________to
______________as per the details indicated in the project proposal. The first phase of the budget
is released upon completion of the contractual agreement. The second phase of the budget is
released after the first phase of the project activities are completed and the financial and physical
reports are also submitted to the office. If the research is longitudinal in nature, the amount
budget allocated is:

 The first year ____________ (______________________________________________)

 The second year __________(_______________________________________________)
 The third year __________(_______________________________________________)
 The forth year __________(______________________________________________)
 The fifth year __________(______________________________________________)
Article 3. The University also agrees to provide appropriate assistants for researcher to complete
the research project including but not limited to the use of library sources, available laboratory
facilities (non consumables and chemicals) and facilitation of financial settlement unless
precluded by uncontrollable factors.

78
Section Three
Obligation of the Principal Investigator and Co- Investigators
Article 4. The Researchers accept the responsibility for the scientific and technical conduct of
the research project, the provision of progress report (on biannual bases) and the presentation of
research reports at an annual research conference or workshop organized by the University or the
grant awarding project or office.
Article 5. The Researchers must complete the research project on the specified time and submit
terminal report and ---------------manuscripts/ patent /utility model/technology package to the
respective college/school/faculty research and publication coordinator
office/Department/Research centre/ or to any other appropriate offices within a maximum of one
month after the completion of the specified period.
Article 6. The Researchers accept the responsibility to acknowledge Gondar University for its
financial and technical support during all scientific presentations, publications or any other
similar activities related with this research output.
Article 7. The Researchers shall have the responsibility to disseminate the output of the research
to scientific community by publishing in peer-reviewed and reputable national or international
journals as well as to relevant development oriented or extension institution, stakeholder and the
intended community through manuals, easily understandable local language texts, leaflets and
any other similar mechanisms.
Article 8. The Researchers accept the responsible for the proper utilization of the fund for the
scientific and technical conduct of the proposed project as per the approved budget breakdown.
Article 9. Researchers accept the obligation to present valid documents on utilized fund for
settlement before the end of the fiscal year according to the legal requirements indicated in the
applicable Financial and Property Administrative Proclamations or Regulations or Directives of
the Federal Government of Ethiopia or any other similar applicable laws.
Article 10. After the completion of the proposed research, the Researchers should return
unutilized funds or any other equipment or materials or chemical and other consumables
acquired from this research fund to the University.
Article 11. The Researchers without any delay accept the responsibility to hand-over the
research project to one of the senior team members upon informing Office of Research and TT
Vice President, research and publication directorate, his /her
college/faculty/school/institute/research centre and research and publication coordinator if he/she
leaves the University during the project phase or before dissemination of the research output or
unable to commence the research project for any other reason.
Article 12. Team members accept the responsibility to diligently perform the scientific and
technical aspects of the research assigned to them under the project proposal. The team member
who is assigned by the Researcher as per the requirements of Article 11 of this section shall also
assume the responsible to take-over the research as a principal investigator or Coordinator.
Article 13. Any changes in the objective(s) or methodology or work plan or any other similar
conditions capable of altering the original project proposal shall be reported to the office of

79
Research and TT Vice President or other appropriate offices to acquire further approval. That is,
contemplated changes in research site or key personnel, or major changes in Grant focus or
direction must have prior written approval from the office of research and publication directorate
or VPRCS.
Article 14. The PI should engage all the co-investigators in the project activities (physical and
financial) so that all the responsibilities specified above equally work for co-investigators as
well. Whenever the office needs, the researchers shall allow onsite visits.
Article 15: When and if the university believes that purchasing the items required for this project
is more efficient to be purchased centrally, the university can decide to buy and provide the items
to the research team. In this case, the university is entitled to deduct the amount equivalent to the
cost of the purchased items from the budget allocated for this research project.
Article 16: For longitudinal study, the next year(s)‟ budget is released if and only the previous
year(s)‟ financial and physical reports are properly settled. Every year must have its output
which will be disseminated/ presented in the annual staff-students conference
Article 17: A researcher must accomplish all the activities mentioned in the project proposal
submitted during contractual agreement.
Article 18: The PI and the research teams agreed submit quarterly progress report, terminal
report and ----------------------manuscript within the study period.
Section Four
Effect of Breach of Obligations
Article 18. The Researchers who failed to complete the research and submit the result(s) on the
specified time shall be obliged to return the allocated money in addition to its legal interest to the
University.
Article 19. Notwithstanding the contractual liability indicated under Article 18 of this section the
researchers or team members in the absence of good cause shall be liable to administrative
disciplinary measures under the relevant laws or the code of conduct of the University for the
failure(s) to undertake the responsibilities listed under Articles (4-17). Deceitful practice by a
member(s) of the team will be borne by the remaining team member (s) unless s/he reports in
advance and prove the case to the office.
Section Five
Effective Date of the Contract
Article 20. This contract shall come into effect on the date of its signature this day of
__________________________
Article 21. The Principal investigator/Project Coordinator
Name ___________________________Signature ______________Address ____________Date
___________
Article 22. Co-investigators/Team Members
1. Name ______________________________Signature ___________Address
_________________Date _____________
2. Name ______________________________Signature ___________Address
_________________Date ________________

80
3. Name ______________________________Signature ___________Address
_________________Date ________________
4. Name ______________________________Signature ___________Address
_________________Date ________________
5. Name ______________________________Signature ___________Address
_________________Date ________________
6. Name ______________________________Signature ___________Address
_________________Date ________________
7. Name ______________________________Signature ___________Address
_________________Date ________________
8. Name ______________________________Signature ___________Address
_________________Date ________________
9. Name ______________________________Signature ___________Address
_________________Date ________________
10. Name ______________________________Signature ___________Address
_________________Date ________________
11. Name ______________________________Signature ___________Address
_________________Date ________________
12. Name ______________________________Signature ___________Address
_________________Date ________________
Article 23. Approved by the Dean or RP Director

Name:___________________Signature:________________Date:______________________

Article 24. Witnesses

1. Name_______________Signature__________Address____________Date____________

2. Name______________Signature__________Address____________Date_____________

3. Name_______________Signature__________Address____________Date___________

81