Preliminary Application Assessment Questions

SEA DREAM uses these preliminary assessment questions to support a fair and consistent initial review of submitted applications. The questions are structured around four categories: research quality and appropriateness, contribution to SEA DREAM objectives, appropriateness of indicative budget and milestones, and the Principal Investigators and team’s high-level skill set and capabilities.
 

Research Quality and Appropriateness:

• Does the proposed research contribute significantly to address SEA DREAM thematic areas and capture ASEAN Health Priorities?
   
• Is there likely potential for the research findings to lead to advance science and discovery, lead to new solutions and products, or serve as a basis to inform health policies or interventions?
   
• Does the proposed research include clearly defined research questions, objectives, and methodologies that are ethically sound and consistent with accepted standards?
   
• Does the proposed research demonstrate contextually relevant innovation in approach, methodology, or technology?
   

Contribution to SEA DREAM Objectives: 

• To what extent does the proposal demonstrate a deliberate and credible approach to ensuring research impact and uptake (e.g., meaningful engagement of patients, communities, policymakers, and other users throughout the research lifecycle including dissemination and output management)?
   
• Is there a clear indication of equitable, well-structured pathways to develop research talent and leadership in Southeast Asia, including early- and mid-career researchers and associated research staff?
   
• To what extent does the proposal demonstrate equitable and meaningful regional collaboration (e.g., shared agenda-setting, resource-sharing, and partnerships that strengthen research linkages and enable impact at scale)?
   
• To what extent does the proposed consortium contribute to strengthening inclusive, sustainable research ecosystems (e.g., fostering a supportive research culture, institutional capacity, and long-term conditions for innovation and excellence in the region)?
         

Appropriateness of Indicative Budget and Milestones:

• Is the proposed budget appropriate for the scale and scope of the proposed research and project activities?
   
• Is the budget distributed equitably and fairly among consortium partners, considering the proposed research activities and the geographical and economic contexts in which the research is conducted in?
   
• Have the expected milestones been clearly defined with an appropriate timeline and sequence relevant to the consortium and research objectives?
         

Principal Investigators and Team’s High-Level Skill Set and Capabilities:

• Do the qualifications and experience of the Principal Investigator (PI), Deputy PI, and Co-Principal Investigator (Co-PI) align with the proposed activities, and do PI and Deputy PI have an established record of leading and managing large-scale research projects and partnerships?
   
• Is there a clear rationale for team composition and distribution of responsibilities among investigators, and is there evidence that Co-PIs will make a significant contribution to the proposed activities, such as leading a strand of research or engaging meaningfully in training, development, or research ecosystem strengthening activities?
   
• Do(es) the institutional support letter(s) provide evidence of strong institutional support for the delivery of the proposed activities and adequate detail of the institutional support that will be provided?