Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

1, Reviewer lists their main comments in green columns (these should be a brief summary only). If the comments are minor enough for the Reviewer to feel that they do not need to see a response from the Author, skip to Step 3 ;
2, Author responds with how comments have been addressed in yellow columns;
3, Once the reviewer is happy for the proposal to be submitted, they should then type their name in the blue box.

Tips and Advice

  • When you share your application with the peer reviewer, be sure that you also share the specific scheme's link and Assessment Criteria so that the reviewer knows the context of the application and can provide tailored feedback. Funders sometimes even provide forms for reviewers (e.g. NERC Reviewer forms and guidance notes) that you can share.
  • We typically encourage peer reviewers to be selected to cover both the technical side of the proposal and a broader overview. This means that one reviewer may be in your research area, but that the other reviewer may be further from your specific research area. This second review is important as the broader perspective can be beneficial for commenting on things like the structure of your proposal, how well 'auxiliary' sections (like Impact Summaries) read, and how well they feel you're aligned to the call priorities.
  • It may be useful for you to discuss what you would like your peer reviewer to focus on when you share your application. This can allow you to get more targeted feedback.