This packet lets a second reviewer independently check the official sources and all six first-pass assessments. It evaluates public discoverability, not institutional prestige, research quality, or the private quality of services.
Reviewer declaration
Reviewer name and affiliation: __________________________________
Relevant expertise: ____________________________________________
Conflict with this institution: □ None □ Described below
Conflict note: _________________________________________________
Independence confirmed: □ Yes □ No
Public attribution consent: □ Yes □ No
First-pass summary
Georgia Tech provides an especially actionable research and data-support pathway, with room to strengthen manuscript-stage visibility.
Clear consultation and instruction routes connect researchers quickly to data and subject expertise.
Elevate journal choice, author rights, and manuscript-readiness support within the central hub.
Dimension review
Confirm only when the note is supported by the cited institution-owned pages. A missing public signal means it was not discoverable in the reviewed evidence, not that the service does not exist.
A researcher can find a coherent support hub, subject expertise, and a clear route to help.
A clear research-help hub links consultations, subject librarians, data, and instruction.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
The institution offers practical help with searching, evidence synthesis, citations, and research discovery.
Expert consultations and research guides are visible; systematic-review support is not a central general service.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Researchers can find guidance for writing, reporting, publication strategy, and preparing work for submission.
Instruction and research support help with scholarly workflows, with modest public journal-submission guidance.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Public support covers publishing options, open access, rights, repositories, and author-cost questions.
Publishing, copyright, and repository support are available but less prominent than research and data services.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Researchers can access data-management, reproducibility, research-integrity, and responsible-AI guidance.
Research-data management guidance is detailed and tied to planning, storage, sharing, and compliance.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Help is actionable through consultations, workshops, templates, accessible pages, and current maintenance.
Consultation and instruction requests are direct and easy to use.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Official evidence review
The hub connects consultations, subject librarians, research guides, data, citation, and instruction services.
Supports: Findability, Evidence, Manuscript, Publishing, Access
Source resolves and is institution-owned: □ Yes □ No
The university provides lifecycle guidance for planning, storing, securing, sharing, and preserving research data.
Supports: Integrity and data, Access
Source resolves and is institution-owned: □ Yes □ No
Independent outcome
Outcome: □ Confirmed □ Corrected
Required note: ________________________________________________________________
Official evidence supporting any correction: _______________________________________
Reviewed on (YYYY-MM-DD): __________________