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
Berkeley stands out for the breadth of its scholarly-communication and information-policy expertise, backed by lifecycle data support.
The library explicitly covers author rights, contracts, privacy, text and data mining, and responsible AI alongside open access.
Create a central author journey that adds visible manuscript readiness and journal-submission support.
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.
Data and scholarly-communication services are prominent, though the full support journey is distributed.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
The institution offers practical help with searching, evidence synthesis, citations, and research discovery.
Subject expertise, research consultations, and data discovery support evidence work across disciplines.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Researchers can find guidance for writing, reporting, publication strategy, and preparing work for submission.
Publishing consultations and scholarly-policy expertise assist authors, with less emphasis on manuscript editing or submission templates.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Public support covers publishing options, open access, rights, repositories, and author-cost questions.
Scholarly Communication and Information Policy provides unusually broad expertise in open access, rights, contracts, privacy, and AI.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Researchers can access data-management, reproducibility, research-integrity, and responsible-AI guidance.
Data-management consultation covers planning, security, metadata, publishing, sharing, and reproducibility.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Help is actionable through consultations, workshops, templates, accessible pages, and current maintenance.
Direct specialist email and consultation routes are clearly available.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Official evidence review
The office advises on open access, copyright, author rights, contracts, licensing, privacy, text and data mining, and AI-related information policy.
Supports: Findability, Manuscript, Publishing, Integrity and data, Access
Source resolves and is institution-owned: □ Yes □ No
The program offers consultation and training before, during, and after research on plans, security, metadata, workflows, publishing, and sharing.
Supports: Evidence, 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): __________________