ACTIVA: Journal of Applied Community Development applies a double-anonymous peer-review process to ensure the quality, integrity, and fairness of manuscript evaluation. In this process, the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process.

Initial Editorial Screening

After submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial assessment by the Editorial Office to evaluate:

• Alignment with the journal’s focus and scope;
• Completeness of submission materials;
• Academic language quality;
• Compliance with ethical requirements;
• Authorship information; and
• Similarity and originality.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s basic requirements may be returned to authors for correction or rejected at the editorial screening stage (desk rejection).

External Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to a Handling Editor and normally reviewed by at least two independent expert reviewers.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

• Relevance to community development and applied scholarship;
• Methodological rigor and research design;
• Level of community participation and engagement;
• Originality and contribution to knowledge;
• Ethical safeguards and responsible research practices;
• Evidence of outcomes and community impact;
• Sustainability and potential for replication; and
• Clarity of presentation and contribution to practice.

Editorial Decisions

Based on reviewer recommendations and editorial evaluation, possible decisions include:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Resubmit for Review
• Reject

When revisions are requested, authors must submit a revised manuscript along with a detailed point-by-point response addressing all reviewer comments. Revised manuscripts may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation.

The final decision is made by the Editor based on reviewer reports, author responses, manuscript quality, and the journal’s editorial standards.

Review Timeline

ACTIVA aims to maintain an efficient and transparent review process with the following target timelines:

• Initial editorial screening: 7–14 days
• First review decision: 4–8 weeks
• Author revision period: 2–4 weeks
• Final editorial decision: 1–3 weeks

Actual processing times may vary depending on manuscript complexity, reviewer availability, and revision requirements.

Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest

All manuscripts, reviewer reports, and editorial communications are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and withdraw from the review process when their objectivity may be compromised.