Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation, Information Collection for Prospective Conference Peer Reviewer Opportunities

RECS 2026 Reviewer Application Site – Draft Text

INSTRUCTIONS: PEER REVIEWER APPLICATION

The RECS 2026 planning team invites you to apply to be a reviewer. Reviewers play a key role in ensuring the high quality and relevance of the presentations at the conference. In October of 2025, reviewers will read and rate proposals submitted in response to the Call for Proposals.

Reviewers for RECS 2026 must possess:

• Experience with and understanding of economic self-sufficiency and family well-being research;

• Experience with and understanding of evaluation design and methods; and

• Knowledge of practices, programs, and policies related to economic self-sufficiency and family well-being.

You will need to enter:

• Name (First and Last)

• Highest Academic Degree

• Organization/Institution

• Email address

• Information about your [ 250 word maximum]:

  • Experience with and understanding of economic self-sufficiency and family well-being research;

  • Experience with and understanding of evaluation design and methods; and

  • Knowledge of practices, programs, and policies related to economic self-sufficiency and family well-being.

• Area(s) of Expertise

You also will be asked to:

• Read and agree to the Peer Reviewer Terms

All communications regarding reviews will be sent via email, so please provide a permanent, long-term email address to which you have regular access.

Peer reviewer applications must be submitted by the deadline of 9/17/25.Decision notifications will be sent to all reviewer applicants by 9/24/25.

 

Questions:
Please direct all questions to RECS@air.org.

Click "Next" to continue.

PEER REVIEWER APPLICATION

Please provide the following information:

First Name *

Last Name *

Highest Academic Degree *

Organization/Institution *

Email Address (a permanent, long-term email address to which you have regular access) *

Please provide information on your:

• Experience with and understanding of economic self-sufficiency and family well-being research;

• Experience with and understanding of evaluation design and methods; and

• Knowledge of practices, programs, and policies related to economic self-sufficiency and family well-being.

(Maximum 250 words)

Please select your areas of expertise.*

The information you provide here will aid the RECS planning team in making appropriate review assignments. Please select at least one and a maximum of five options from the list below. [dropdown]

• Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention

• Behavioral Science

• Benefits Cliffs

• Child Abuse and Neglect

• Child Care

• Child Support

• Coaching

• Community-Based or Participatory Research Methods

• Data and Interoperability

• Early Care and Education/Head Start

• Employment and Training

• Employment Programs for People with Disabilities

• Family Violence

• Foster Care

• Healthy Marriage

• Home Visiting/MIECHV

• Housing and Homelessness

• Inferential Statistics or Causal Experimental Design

• Responsible Fatherhood

• Runaway and Homeless Youth

• Substance Use and Mental Health Disorders

• Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)

• Tribal Communities

• Youth Development

• Work Experience

Please provide your years of work experience in the economic self-sufficiency and/or family well-being fields.* [select one option from dropdown menu]

• No Previous Work Experience

• 1-2 Years

• 3-5 Years

• 6-10 Years

• 11-20 Years

• More than 20 Years

Have you served as a reviewer for other conferences? If yes, please specify which conferences.* [Yes/No]

If Yes [text box] (Maximum 50 words)

PEER REVIEWER TERMS

Agreement Form Regarding Conflict of Interest, Confidentiality, and Non-Disclosure for Reviewers of Proposal Submissions for the Research and Evaluation Conference on Self-Sufficiency (RECS) 2026:

In accordance with the RECS 2026 Call for Proposals, submissions for peer review should not identify the author, institution or provide other identifying information. However, it is possible that a reviewer may be able to identify the author or institution based on the submitters' work. Therefore, peer reviewers are individually responsible for evaluating their own affiliations and financial interest, and those of their close relatives and professional associates that relate to their duties as reviewers before they review any submissions.

Conflict of Interest is defined as: Any action by a reviewer in the submission review or selection process which would affect, or could appear to affect, the reviewer's financial interest, or would cause the reviewer's impartiality in the review process to be questioned. Examples of ”financial interest” or close affiliation include, but are not limited to, if the submission is from:

1. The reviewer or anyone in the reviewer’s immediate family (e.g., spouse, parent, child, sibling, or romantic partner);

2. Any organization (including a parent or subsidiary) in which the reviewer or member of the reviewer's immediate family (see above) serves as officer, director, trustee, partner or is otherwise similarly associated;

3. Any organization (including a parent or subsidiary) in which the reviewer or a member of the reviewer's immediate family (see above) is negotiating for or has an arrangement concerning prospective employment or other similar association;

4. Any organization (including a parent or subsidiary) in which the reviewer or a member of the reviewer's immediate family (see above) has an interest with respect to any pending submission to be reviewed by the same peer reviewers; or

5. Any affiliation that could lead to the perception that the reviewer was biased.

I have read and understand the above definition of conflict of interest and hereby certify that, based on the information provided to me, if during the review there is an appearance or actual conflict of interest, I will recuse myself from the review of the submission and notify RECS@air.org.

In addition, I fully understand the confidential nature of the review and agree: (1) to destroy all materials related to my reviews; (2) not to disclose or discuss the materials associated with my reviews except as authorized by the RECS planning team.

I also agree to complete all assigned reviews prior to the review deadline.

If you have questions about the definition of conflict of interest or any terms of the Peer Reviewer Agreement, please email the RECS planning team at  RECS@air.org.

By entering your full name below, you confirm that you have read and agree to the Peer Reviewer Agreement Terms.

Signature * [text box]

Please click "Submit" in the bottom right of this screen to complete this application.

Applications still being edited by the deadline will not be considered complete.

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT OF 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) STATEMENT OF PUBLIC BURDEN: The purpose of this information collection is to identify potential peer reviewers for an academic conference. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average .17 hours per grantee, including the time for reviewing instructions, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and reviewing the collection of information. This collection of information is voluntary. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB # is 0970-0477 and the expiration date is 05/31/2026. If you have any comments on this collection of information, please contact Sarita Barton (Sarita.barton@acf.hhs.gov).

7 | AIR.ORG RECS 2026 Call for Reviewers Process Overview & Draft Text v2