Questions for Past Reviewers

This KnowledgeBase archive includes content and external links that were accurate and relevant as of September 30, 2019.

Contact some past reviewers and indicate that you understand they were reviewers for the grant program you intend to approach. Your goal is to learn about the actual process to be followed as your proposal is reviewed. For example, if a reviewer has only three minutes to review your proposal, you will write differently than if the reviewer has three hours to review your proposal. Ask

    1.    How did you get to be a reviewer? Usually you submit a resume and express an interest, showing how your background and expertise meshes with agency concerns.

    2.    Did you review the proposal at the funding source or at another location? The difference here is between a mail and a panel review. Mail reviews are done under more relaxed conditions but often require greater documentation while a panel review is apt to be done more quickly, placing a higher premium on proposal readability.

    3.    Did you follow a particular point or scoring system? Invariably, some portions of a proposal carry greater weight than other portions. This information will enable you to concentrate your greatest efforts on the highest-scoring portions.

    4.    What were you told to look for? Often reviewers must assign specific points to various evaluation categories. Any special "flags" raised by the program officers should be attended to as you develop your proposal.

    5.    How would you write a proposal differently now that you have been a reviewer? Again, people invariably learn from the positive experience of seeing the inside process of awarding grants and have a number of suggestions about things they would do next time to strengthen a proposal.

    6.    What were the most common mistakes you saw in the proposals you read? The answers are errors that you want to be sure to avoid, such as failing to number the pages, omitting the resumes of project directors or consultants, or miscalculating budgets.

    7.    How many proposals were you given to read? This answer will give you an idea of what your immediate competition will be like.

    8.    How much time did you have to read them? If the reviews have essentially unlimited time to read a proposal (as in a mail review), then you will write one way, but if they are under severe time constraints, then you will write another way. One reviewer recently noted that in a panel review situation, he could spend approximately 20 seconds per page in order to finish the review process on time. While that is not the norm for proposal review, it does suggest that you would use a certain proposal-writing strategy under such conditions, e.g., simple and short sentences, creative use of headers and subheaders, lots of white space, bolding for emphasis, and bulleted lists.

    9.    Was there a staff review following your peer review? This will give you a clue about what happens after the review process is over. You especially want to find out how much discretionary authority the program officers have over the peer review results.

Source:
Miner, Jeremy A. and Lynn E. A Guide to Proposal Planning and Writing. Miner and Associates. August 23, 2004.

The contents of this website were developed under a grant from the U.S. Department of Education and are intended for general reference purposes only. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the U.S. Department of Education or the Center, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. Some resources on this site require Adobe Acrobat Reader. This website archive includes content and external links that were accurate and relevant as of September 30, 2019.