Scientific organisation and quality of review
Please comment on the composition of your panel, the set of proposals which were assigned to you, and the quality of scientific exchanges. Was your expertise well utilized? Was the right mix of perspectives around the table? Were there any proposals which did not receive appropriate consideration? What would you suggest to improve review quality, review organization, or the review process?
Administrative organisation and process
From an operational standpoint, what worked or didn't work for you? What can we do to improve our communication, administrative processes, infrastructure, logistics, etc.? Did you have any interactions with ANR that stood out as being particularly helpful or unhelpful?
Your experience as a panelist
Are there any additional comments or suggestions that you would like to provide? If you wish you can provide your name so that the discussion can be continued!