(1) These Rules are formulated in accordance with the Measures for the Administration of Operating Subsidies for Open Laboratories.
(two) the evaluation of operating subsidies for open laboratories shall follow the following principles:
1. Seek truth from facts, promote democracy, be fair and reasonable, and support on the basis of merit.
2. Qualitative evaluation is combined with quantitative evaluation, with qualitative evaluation as the main one.
(3) The formulation of the evaluation index system and the design of the scoring weight of data statistics in these rules take into account the long-term and continuous characteristics of basic research work and the differences of laboratories in different disciplines, making it more applicable.
(four) the evaluation results will be used as the main basis for merit-based support. Two. Application procedures and application materials
(a) where the laboratory applying for operating subsidies should first apply to the competent ministries, and attach a brief introduction of the laboratory of about 2000 words, including:
Laboratory name
Subordinate unit
Approved opening hours
Subject category
The director and deputy director of the laboratory
Chairman and Deputy Director of Academic Committee
Main research contents
Basic conditions for opening to the outside world
Attachment: Approval of public documents
List of permanent personnel (including name, age and title)
List of members of academic committee (including name, age, professional title and unit)
(II) The competent ministries and commissions shall, according to the application conditions stipulated in Article 4 of Chapter II of the Measures for the Administration of Operating Subsidies for Open Laboratories formulated by the State Science and Technology Commission, examine the qualifications of the laboratories applying for this system, and report the list of laboratories that meet the application qualifications together with a brief introduction to the State Science and Technology Commission for approval. The State Science and Technology Commission will notify the relevant ministries and commissions and the National Natural Science Foundation of China of the list of laboratories approved by the ministries and commissions.
(3) Laboratories approved by the State Science and Technology Commission to participate in the review shall provide an Application Report for Operating Subsidies for Open Laboratories in sixteen copies and submit it to the competent ministries. The contents of the application report are as follows:
(1) laboratory work in the relevant review year:
1) and its main achievements; (Brief introduction of each achievement is limited to 1000 words)
2) Measures to cultivate talents and introduce outstanding young and middle-aged talents;
3) Opening of laboratories;
4) Academic exchanges and cooperation at home and abroad;
5) Activities and functions of academic committees;
6) Main scientific research management and rules and regulations;
7) the future development direction of the laboratory and the research focus in the next three years;
(2) 3-5 papers or summary reports representing the research level of the laboratory in recent three years (full text and abstract, whether published or not).
(3) List of application reports.
(4) The competent ministries and commissions shall, after reviewing the materials of each laboratory, submit one copy to the State Science and Technology Commission, fourteen copies to the National Natural Science Foundation of China, and one copy to the competent ministries and commissions for the record.
note:
1) The materials submitted by each laboratory must reflect the real situation of the laboratory within the specified evaluation period, and the data filled in shall not be expanded to include everything. If there is any falsehood, once it is discovered, it will be regarded as an improper style of study, and if the circumstances are serious, the qualification for participation will be cancelled.
2) The subject category filled in the laboratory profile is an important basis for grouping in the subject evaluation, and each laboratory should fill it in carefully. Third, expert evaluation.
(A) Expert evaluation index system
┌ ─ The research direction, significance, innovation and difficulties of topic selection.
│
┌ ── Research achievement level
│ Level │
Technical support capability
│
│ ┌ ── The rationality, overall quality and structure of the research team
├-Team Building
│ and personnel training-style of study
│ Improve the level │
│└ ── Measures and effects of cultivating and absorbing talents
│
Comprehensive index-zeta
Foreign academic exchanges and cooperation
│ │
├-Opening to the world-┤ Suburb
│ Level │
│ └ ─ Open.
│
│┌ ── Scientific organization and management
│ │
└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└└949
│
└ ─ Rules and regulations and indoor environment
Description of expert evaluation index system
Description of expert evaluation index system
1. Research direction, significance, innovation and difficulties of the topic.
Research direction: refers to whether the work of the laboratory belongs to the frontier of this discipline, the emerging growth point of interdisciplinary subjects or the field that needs priority development in national economic construction and social development.
Significance of topic selection: it refers to the subject significance, starting level and application prospect of the topic selection (including national key projects, "863", major national basic research projects, natural science foundation projects and major ministerial scientific research projects).
Innovation: refers to whether the conception, academic thought and research method of the topic are novel and original.
Difficulty: refers to the equipment conditions, knowledge level and exploratory and pioneering degree needed to carry out research in this field.
2. The level of research results
Refers to the academic value of research achievements (including papers, monographs, award-winning achievements, appraisal achievements and invention patents) initiated in our laboratory and formed within the limited review year, and their application value or social benefits in national economic construction (compared with the current international and domestic advanced level).
3. Technical support unit
Refers to the ability and level of the laboratory to design and develop the equipment by itself, and to maintain, transform and develop the functions of the existing equipment in combination with the research work in this field.
4. The overall quality of the research team and the rationality of the structure.
Comprehensive quality: refers to the academic level of academic leaders (maybe a group of people) and the whole team, as well as their dedication and patriotic enthusiasm for scientific undertakings.
Structural rationality: refers to whether the age and knowledge structure of the research team meet the needs of current research work and future development.
5. Style of study
It refers to the rigorous and realistic, democratic and active academic atmosphere and the cooperative spirit of unity and mutual assistance.
6. Measures and effects of cultivating and attracting talents
Refers to the training plan, measures, conditions and outstanding talents formulated in recent years for the rapid growth and emergence of young scholars (including graduate students); Training and stabilization measures for technical team; The conditions and effects created in recent years to attract returned scholars and outstanding talents from other units to work in the laboratory.
7. Academic exchanges and cooperation with foreign countries
Refers to the scale and level of international and domestic academic conferences sponsored or participated by the laboratory, and the level and breadth of academic exchanges and cooperation at home and abroad.
8. Degree of openness
Refers to whether the laboratory is really open at home and abroad; Whether there is a published topic guide; The number of visiting researchers accepted and the level of research topics they are engaged in; Whether the scientific research facilities provide preferential treatment and convenience for the scientific and technical personnel of other units.
9. Organization and management of scientific research
Refers to whether the laboratory's scientific research plan, academic activities, project management, scientific research archives management, equipment management and logistics support work are to ensure the normal operation of laboratory scientific research work.
10. the role of leading institutions and academic committees
The role of the leading group refers to whether we can handle the unity and cooperation within the laboratory, the good cooperation between the laboratory and the supporting units, and the mutual cooperation with the academic Committee in research work and academic direction.
The role of the academic committee: whether the important research work and academic direction of the laboratory and the open topics really play the role of the academic committee, especially the training of visitors and young people.
1 1. Rules and regulations and room environment
Refers to the laboratory's various management systems, safety measures and operating procedures of instruments and equipment are perfect; Whether the laboratory is clean and tidy, and has a relaxed and democratic academic environment and academic atmosphere.
(2) Evaluation procedure
Expert review is divided into two stages:
The first stage: grouping assessment by discipline.
The approved laboratories are divided into several subject groups, and each group consists of several peer scientists who are responsible for evaluating the laboratories in the group.
The evaluation procedure is as follows:
1. Review the written materials provided by each laboratory;
2. Listen to the oral report and reply of the laboratory representative;
3. Comprehensively evaluate the laboratories according to the evaluation index system, and give written opinions to the laboratories;
4. Each expert evaluates and scores each laboratory (see Annex II for the scoring table of subject experts);
5 according to the qualitative score and quantitative score and the proportion of funding, initially determine the list of laboratories to be funded;
6. Recommend a certain proportion of Class A candidate laboratories among the laboratories to be funded;
7. For individual laboratories that are really difficult to make accurate evaluation, submit them to the second stage for reconsideration.
The second stage: comprehensive evaluation
The evaluation at this stage is conducted in two steps:
Step 1: Field investigation
An investigation team composed of academic experts and management experts will conduct on-the-spot investigations on the Class A candidate laboratories and laboratories to be reconsidered recommended by various disciplines in the first phase, and put forward written opinions on the review, including:
1. Listen to the work report of the person in charge of the laboratory
2. Inspection of laboratory work
3. Talk with laboratory staff, visitors and graduate students.
4. Listen to the opinions of academic committee members.
5. Listen to the opinions of the leaders of the supporting units.
Step 2: Comprehensive evaluation
A review committee composed of a number of academic experts and an appropriate number of management experts will conduct a comprehensive review:
1. Review and confirm the list of funded laboratories determined in the first stage;
2. According to the results of the first-stage evaluation and the opinions of the second-stage on-the-spot investigation, and according to the necessary conditions of Class A laboratories, comprehensively evaluate the Class A candidate laboratories recommended by various disciplines, and vote to determine the list of Class A funded laboratories.
3. Determine whether to provide funds to a single laboratory submitting reconsideration.
As an excellent laboratory, you must meet the following four conditions:
1. Have high-level research work and research results;
2. Training high-level talents is effective and effective;
3. Have a good style of study;
4. Good management.