External Review | 618-453-7653

Main Content

Selection of Reviewers

According to the State Officials and Employees Ethics Act (5ILCS 430), units must avoid nominating reviewers with potential bias or conflicts of interest with the program or its faculty.  Current or former collaborators, colleagues, mentors, and students, faculty, and staff of unit are inappropriate, as are past reviewers of the unit.  If you have any questions about possible conflicts of interest, contact the APAP (apap@siu.edu).

  • In the spring term prior to the year of the review, the center/institute should identify a potential external reviewer, including an alternate, and informally ask if they are willing and available to serve.  It is acceptable to nominate a reviewer from industry. 
  • Provide the names, contact information and affiliation of the reviewers to the APAP office.
  • The APAP office sends list of all nominated reviewers to the Faculty Senate and Graduate Council for review and approval as appropriate.
  • The APAP Office will notify the center/institute of the results.
  • An official letter of invitation should be sent to the reviewer (see appendix).
  • In the event that a scheduled reviewer cancels, the program should use the alternate reviewer approved.  If the list is exhausted, an alternate should be nominated by the program and approved by the APAP Office.  A change in reviewers should be reported to the APAP Office.   


In general, centers/institutes have a desk top review as opposed to an on-site visit.  The material for the review will include the self-study.  Virtual meetings with faculty, staff, or administrators can be scheduled as needed.  If an on-site visit is requested, the logistics and cost of hosting the site review will need to be negotiated in advance.  Contact the APAP office for additional information.

Reviewer’s Report

The report must follow the center/institute reviewer template (pvcaa.siu.edu and in the appendix).  This allows us to comprehensively evaluate the review across different programs.  Submit the report electronically to the APAP Office (apap@siu.edu).  The report will be reviewed for completeness.  Once accepted, the APAP Office will distribute it to the appropriate administrators.

The external reviewer will receive a stipend of $250 after the submission and acceptance of the report.  The center/institute is responsible for preparing documentation necessary to release payment from SIU for the honorarium.  All documentation should be submitted to the APAP Office for processing.  The stipend should not be augmented. 

Template: Reviewer Report for Centers and Institutes

Meeting to Discuss Reviewer’s Report

Depending on the reporting line of the Director of the Center/Institute, a meeting to discuss the results of the review should be scheduled with the Dean, Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs or Vice Chancellor for Research.  A draft of the IBHE Report template should be submitted by the Director to the respective administrator prior to the meeting.  During this discussion, a decision on the outcome of the review will be finalized (center/institute in good standing, flagged for priority review, suspended).  A revised and final IBHE Report should then be prepared and submitted to the APAP office.

Template for IBHE Report