How to review, validate, and manage submissions from researchers. Includes workflow actions, evidence verification, and reporting period management.
Who is this guide for? ORIC staff members with the oric_staff role who process research submissions, verify evidence, and manage workflow approvals.
1. Your Core Responsibilities
Review Queue Management: Process submissions in your review queue
Evidence Verification: Validate supporting documents for each submission
Workflow Actions: Begin review, request revisions, approve, reject
Data Integrity: Ensure data accuracy for HEC reporting
Reporting: Generate exports for HEC scorecard preparation
2. Review Queue Overview
Your dashboard shows submissions needing attention. Each module has a queue:
Module
Queue Shows
Your Actions
Publications
Submitted publications awaiting review
Begin Review, Request Revision, Approve, Reject
Grants
Submitted grant proposals
Begin Review, Request Revision, Approve, Reject, Lock
Policies
Submitted institutional policies
Begin Review, Request Revision, Approve, Reject, Publish
IP Disclosures
Submitted IP disclosures
Begin Review, Request Revision, Approve, Reject, File, Register
Revenue
Submitted revenue lines
Begin Review, Request Revision, Approve, Reject, Lock
Capacity Building
Submitted activities
Begin Review, Request Revision, Approve, Reject
3. Universal Review Workflow
Researcher Creates→Submitted→You Begin Review→You Approve→Locked
3.1 Review Actions Available
Action
From State
To State
When to Use
Begin Review
Submitted
Under Review
You start processing the submission
Request Revision
Submitted, Under Review
Needs Revision
Researcher needs to fix something
Approve
Under Review
Approved
Submission meets all requirements
Reject
Submitted, Under Review
Rejected
Submission invalid or out of scope
Lock
Approved
Locked
Admin only - freeze for reporting
Important: When requesting revisions or rejecting, you must provide a comment explaining your decision. This comment is visible to the researcher and is logged in the audit trail.
4. Module-Specific Processing Guides
4.1 Publications (ICT-2)
Evidence Verification Checklist:
☐ Verify journal is recognized (W/X/Y category validation)
☐ Check publication date is within reporting period
☐ Validate DOI format (if provided)
☐ Verify paper URL is accessible (if provided)
☐ Check author affiliations include PIDE
☐ Validate PDF (if provided) - correct format, not corrupted
Journal Category Validation:
W Category: Journals in Science Citation Index, Social Sciences Citation Index
X Category: Journals in Arts & Humanities Citation Index, Emerging Sources Citation Index
Y Category: Other recognized journals
Important: Only Administrators can lock publications. ORIC staff can approve but cannot lock.
4.2 Grants (Annex-B)
Evidence Verification Checklist:
☐ Verify funding programme is valid and active
☐ Check requested amount matches proposal budget
☐ Validate thematic area is appropriate
☐ Verify PI is affiliated with PIDE
☐ Check partner institutions (if any) are valid
☐ Verify timeline is realistic
☐ Check attachments (proposal, budget, letters of support)
Full Lifecycle: Draft → Submitted → Under Review → Approved → Filed → Registered → Commercialized → Closed
4.5 Revenue Lines (Annex-D)
Evidence Verification Checklist:
☐ Verify scope (national/international)
☐ Validate revenue type (grant overhead, industry collaboration, royalty, consultancy)
☐ Check grant label matches an approved grant
☐ Verify funding amounts
☐ Check overhead amounts
☐ Verify audited statement is attached
☐ Validate PI details
Critical: Revenue lines require audited financial statements. Without proper evidence, the submission cannot be approved.
4.6 Capacity Building (Annex-D)
Evidence Verification Checklist:
☐ Verify activity type is valid (workshop, seminar, training, etc.)
☐ Check title and description are complete
☐ Validate dates are within reporting period
☐ Verify participant count
☐ Check budget and expenditure (if provided)
☐ Verify evidence of conduct (photos, certificates, agenda)
5. Reporting Periods
Each submission belongs to a Reporting Period (typically fiscal year). Key concepts:
Active Period: Currently open for submissions
Locked Period: Closed for submissions, data frozen for HEC
Unlocked: You can still add data to open periods
When a period is locked, all submissions in that period are frozen and cannot be edited. This ensures data integrity for HEC reporting.
6. Dashboard & Analytics
Your ORIC staff dashboard shows:
Review Queue: All submissions awaiting your action
Recent Activity: Submissions you recently processed
Module Stats: Publication counts by category, grant amounts, etc.
Export Tools: Generate reports for HEC submission
7. Common Processing Scenarios
Scenario 1: A researcher submits a publication without a DOI. Should I approve? DOI is optional. Check other mandatory fields (title, date, journal, category, authors). If all required fields are present and evidence is satisfactory, you can approve.
Scenario 2: A grant proposal has incorrect financial figures. What do I do? Request revisions. Explain in the comment what needs to be corrected. The researcher will be notified and can update the amounts.
Scenario 3: A revenue line is missing the audited statement. Can I approve? No. Audited statements are mandatory for revenue lines. Request revision until the evidence is provided.
Scenario 4: The researcher submitted to the wrong funding programme. Reject with an explanation. The researcher can create a new submission with the correct programme.
8. Audit Trail
Every action you take is logged in the audit trail. This includes:
Your user ID and timestamp
Action performed (review started, revision requested, approved, etc.)
State changes (from → to)
Comments provided
Your actions are visible to Administrators and can be exported for compliance reporting.