IMPORTANT Instructions for preparing IRTF observing proposals under Dual-Anonymous Peer Review (DAPR) Guidelines.

(This page updated for Semester 2026B and subsequent semesters)

The IRTF has been instructed by NASA Headquarters to implement Dual-Anonymous Peer Review (DAPR) procedures in the review and ranking of observing proposals. Applications are required to submit proposals that meet NASA DAPR requirements criteria for anonymity. The goal of DAPR is to remove cognitive bias during the review process, not make identification of the applicants impossible. Violations of the DAPR requirements may mean a proposal is penalized or even rejected.

The application process for observing time includes both a webpage entry form, and the generation a pdf file attachment.

The IRTF Online Application Form gathers the following information and other components not mentioned here:

1. A short title for the proposal. This is in addition to the regular program title. It is limited in length to a maximum of 5 words, and is used during the Telescope Allocation Committee (TAC) review as a means of making anonymous reference to the proposal.

2. The broad science category for the proposed program.

3. A text field for the PI to report on the status of IRTF observations obtained by the PI over the previous 2 years. Please keep this section succinct – it should only contain reports on data status for programs where the PI of the new proposal was PI on past IRTF proposals over the previous four semesters.

Provide all information requested in the Online Application form. Only the anonymous portions (those that cannoti be linked to the proposing team) will be seen by the TAC during the proposal review.

The pdf attachment, which includes the Scientific and Technical Cases, figures, references and target list, must be prepared in a way that hides the identity of proposing team, institutions or direct references to previous works. For guidelines and examples of how to anonymize the content of this file, please refer to the NASA DAPR webpage.

In preparing the attachment file, you must use the latest version of the MS Word template file, this is available on the IRTF Observing Time Applications page.

In the PDF attachment, do not include the names of the personnel associated with the proposal or their organizational affiliations. This includes but is not limited to, page headers, footers, diagrams, figures, or watermarks. Numbered references to past work should be included whenever relevant. All references must be written in the form of a number in a square bracket, e.g. [1], which will then correspond to the full citation in the reference list.

Any reference to previously obtained unpublished observations with IRTF or any other facility must be made as numbered references stating private communication.

When citing references, use third person neutral wording. This especially applies to self-referencing. For example, replace phrases like "as we have shown in our previous work [17], …" with "as previously shown [17], …"

However, as there is no formal process at this time for long-term programs at IRTF, and a large fraction of the proposals received for IRTF are part of long-running, multi-semester research projects, there is an exception to self-referencing. So, to assist with the review of multi-semester observing programs, indicating the proposal’s connection to previously obtained IRTF data without listing a private communication is allowed only as long as the data are unpublished, the team cannot be identified and the data in question are part of a longer program of 2 or more consecutive semesters for which the present proposal is part.

Proposed observations to followup from a previous project, whether the previous project’s observations are published or unpublished, do not qualify as a long-term program.

The above-mentioned rules for anonymity apply to the abstract that is entered on the IRTF Online Application Form as well.

The TAC will provide comments for each proposal that will be included (anonymously) in the acceptance / rejection letters sent to the PIs. The purpose for this feedback is to provide suggestions for improving future submissions of a proposal. It is not appropriate for a PI to respond in the proposal directly to TAC comments from prior proposals. Instead, consider the prior TAC comments and implement those suggestions in the proposal as appropriate without reference to the TAC.

Use of AI tools: A statement in the scientific justification portion must identify all proposal sections for which Artificial Intelligence tools (AI) are used, including the name of the program, version number, the date and time the AI tool was used. AI must be used in private mode to ensure a proposal is not kept out in the cloud and accessible by others

IMPORTANT NOTE: PLEASE follow the above guidelines in preparing your proposal for observing time CAREFULLY. Any proposal that does not make a good-faith effort to follow the guidelines for anonymity WILL BE REJECTED.