Thread by @lisascottbcd

Review grants? Ever wonder about best practices for doing it well? This is the thread for you! Below I outline review strategies that I use and I hope that the reviewers of my grants also use. /begin thread

First, if you have the option, don’t say yes to reviewing a grant outside your area of expertise or if you don’t have the time. Suggest other reviewers. Of course this is not always possible when serving on a panel. Grant reviews take time- make sure you have some to give.

Second, read and print out the review instructions and know what format the review will take. Are there questions that need to be answered? Keep these in mind and have the instructions handy during your review.

Third, plan on reading each grant in its entirety twice. The first time I usually sit down with a highlighter and pen and take notes in the margins or highlight parts I’m stuck by or require additional attention later.

During this first round, don’t write anything. Just get the whole thing read in one sitting without interruption. This typically takes me 1-1.5 hours and I schedule it so I won’t be interrupted.

Here’s what interruption does: it makes you think the grant is disjointed when in fact it could be that you being interrupted is what gave you that impression.

Also proposals are often organized differently. You may think the predictions should come before the experiments but some put them after the experiments. This doesn’t mean that the predictions are crap just that people do things differently- not something to knock someone for.

Now that you have read the grant in its entirety, take a break. Eat lunch, go for a walk, check email, sleep on it. Come back to it within two days.

Now read it again and write a summary paragraph while you do this. What is the main question, how will they answer this question, what do they think will happen, why does it matter. If you can’t do this go back and re-read to figure out why. Is it you or them? Sometimes it’s you.

With your computer open and format for review ready, answer the questions the funding agency or foundation is asking you to answer. Look for the answers in the grant. If proposers are savvy they will highlight the answers in bold.

After you answered the questions, go back and check your notes and highlights and make sure everything has been resolved or is included in your review. Add details if you think it would be helpful to the proposer.

If you have a critique that will significantly reduce the score you are going to give, double check that it is valid.

Base your review on the proposed work, the justification of this work, the methods, predictions, and potential impact. There are likely lots of connections to things that are not being proposed but that doesn’t always mean that what is being proposed is flawed.

Finally, put the time into reviews that you would want others to put into the review of your grant. Even if you read it and know it won’t make the cut- help them figure out what would make the cut. Hopefully others will do this for you too. /end