The periodic academic assessment of its members and funded projects, and the different evaluation stages are the procedures in which CONICET conducts exhaustive monitoring of its community.

The assessment of the projects and the scientific and technological personnel is based on peer review. This means that national or foreign professionals with recognized scientific and/or technological careers evaluate quality and merit, irrespective of other parts.

According to a decree of the National Executive Power 1661/96, the evaluation criteria must consider the particularities and differences of each scientific and technological activity as well as the specific characteristics of each area of knowledge keeping quality as the main objective.

The evaluation for submission and the Promotions of the Scientific and Technological Researcher Career (CIC) is based on the review of the following academic jury: Disciplinary Advisory Committee and Qualification and Promotion Board. These errands demand the intervention of at least one Peer Advisor, as special consultant.

The research projects presented by the researchers require the intervention of Peer Advisors, but they are evaluated by the Disciplinary Advisory Committees while the Obligatory Reports of the CIC are only assessed by the Disciplinary Advisory Committees.

Fellowship applications are evaluated by the Fellowship Advisory Committee.

If the Governing Board considers it necessary, Special Committees with specific functions will be created. Apart from these evaluation bodies, the Board of the Council has the assessment of the Advisory Committees by Great Area. The errands of evaluation are done through the Integral System of Administration and Evaluation – SIGEVA.

Peer consultants

They are Argentine or foreign professionals with recognized scientific or technological career who are called to provide advise on the quality and merit of the subjects under their consideration.

Peer Consultants make technical and academic reports that then are sent to the Disciplinary Advisory Committee to write the opinion piece. These reports must describe accurately the academic quality and merits of the scientific proposal that is evaluated.

In order to contribute to the study of the Advisory Committee, the Board approved in 1997 the creation of the Peer Consultants Bank, which was modified by Resolution 1046/05.