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
UCLA combines a clear central research-help experience with unusually broad workshops and practical services spanning evidence synthesis, writing, journal selection, open science, and data.
A recurring workshop program turns publishing and open-science guidance into concrete researcher actions.
Make one-on-one manuscript critique and reporting-guideline support as visible as workshops and research consultations.
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.
The research-help surface connects consultations, subject specialists, writing tutorials, scholarly communication, data, open science, and systematic reviews.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
The institution offers practical help with searching, evidence synthesis, citations, and research discovery.
Research-strategy consultations, guides, evidence-synthesis help, citation workshops, and data expertise are easy to identify.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Researchers can find guidance for writing, reporting, publication strategy, and preparing work for submission.
Writing tutorials and workshops cover literature reviews, preprints, journal selection, citations, and sharing research, though individualized manuscript review is less explicit.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Public support covers publishing options, open access, rights, repositories, and author-cost questions.
Open access, fee support, repositories, preprints, copyright, author rights, and journal-finding workshops provide a broad publishing layer.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Researchers can access data-management, reproducibility, research-integrity, and responsible-AI guidance.
Open-science services cover reproducibility, protocols, data, code, funder mandates, repositories, AI, and open-source practice.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Help is actionable through consultations, workshops, templates, accessible pages, and current maintenance.
Online and in-person consultations, help desks, quarterly workshops, guides, and practical tools make the support highly actionable.
□ Confirmed □ Corrected □ Insufficient evidence
Reviewer note: __________________________________________
Official evidence review
The official hub connects consultations, subject specialists, writing tutorials, data services, scholarly communication, publishing, copyright, and open science.
Supports: Findability, Evidence, Manuscript, Publishing, Integrity and data, Access
Source resolves and is institution-owned: □ Yes □ No
Researchers can request consultation and use a dedicated guide for rigorous systematic-review methods.
Supports: Evidence, Access
Source resolves and is institution-owned: □ Yes □ No
The service covers open publishing, reproducibility, repositories, protocols, data and code, funder mandates, workshops, and practical research tools.
Supports: Publishing, Integrity and data, Access
Source resolves and is institution-owned: □ Yes □ No
Recent workshops include literature reviews, systematic reviews, citations, preprints, journal selection, open access, and ethical use of AI in research.
Supports: Evidence, Manuscript, Publishing, 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): __________________