All manuscripts submitted to JENDELA (Jurnal Pengetahuan dan Kolaborasi Ilmiah) undergo a rigorous peer review process to ensure the publication of high-quality scholarly works in the field of community service (Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat).

The journal implements a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process. This approach ensures an objective, impartial, and fair evaluation of every submitted manuscript.

The peer review process consists of the following stages:

1. Initial Editorial Assessment
   The Editorial Office conducts a preliminary evaluation to determine whether the manuscript complies with the journal's aims and scope, author guidelines, ethical standards, and formatting requirements. Manuscripts may also be screened using plagiarism detection software. Submissions that do not meet these requirements may be rejected or returned to the authors for revision before peer review.
2. Assignment to an Editor
   Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to a Handling Editor with expertise relevant to the manuscript's subject area.
3. Double-Blind Peer Review
   The Handling Editor assigns the manuscript to at least two independent reviewers who possess expertise in the relevant discipline. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:
   • Relevance to the journal's scope
   • Originality and significance of the community service program
   • Scientific and methodological rigor
   • Innovation and practical contribution
   • Quality of implementation and community engagement
   • Clarity of presentation and organization
   • Validity of conclusions and recommendations
   • Adequacy of references and supporting literature

4. Editorial Decision
   Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the Editor makes one of the following decisions:

   • Accept without revision
   • Accept with minor revisions
   • Major revisions required
   • Reject

   If reviewers provide conflicting recommendations, the Editor may invite an additional reviewer or make a final decision based on the overall evaluation.

5. Author Revision
   Authors are required to revise their manuscripts by addressing all reviewer comments and submitting a detailed response explaining how each comment has been addressed.
6. Final Evaluation
   Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary. The Editor assesses whether all comments have been satisfactorily addressed before making the final publication decision.
7. Copyediting and Publication
   Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, proofreading, layout editing, and final author approval before publication in the journal.

Review Principles

JENDELA is committed to maintaining a transparent, ethical, and high-quality peer review process. All editors and reviewers are expected to uphold the following principles:

• Confidentiality of submitted manuscripts.
• Objectivity and impartiality in the review process.
• Constructive and evidence-based feedback.
• Declaration of any conflicts of interest.
• Compliance with publication ethics and academic integrity standards.

The editorial team strives to complete the peer review process as efficiently as possible. Under normal circumstances, the first editorial decision is expected within 2–6 weeks after submission, depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript.