Motivation and Rationale

  • Academic structures, peer-review processes are biased, exclusionary
  • Scholars belonging to historically underrepresented groups and/or those who work in non-STEM disciplines are comparatively and competitively disadvantaged
  • Holistic, systems approaches can help enable transparent, equitable, and inclusive selection of internal funding recipients
  • Noticing, naming, and nurturing such approaches can disrupt entrenched processes and systems, helping funding programs be more inclusive and effective

Broad Approaches

  • Begin with the end in mind: articulate a goal and motivating values
    •  How can we create transparent, equitable, and inclusive selection processes?
  • Break the selection system into component parts
  • Consider disruptions, innovations within and/or across the parts
    • Recruiting reviewers
    • Onboarding and calibrating reviewers 
    • Designing and implementing review processes
  • Design a plan, solicit feedback
  • Refine the plan – then implement it
  • Commit to continuous improvement


Recruiting reviewers

  • Leverage intentional, inclusive messaging
  • Indicate – explicitly – whom you are calling on and welcoming in
    • “The perspectives of scholars who belong to historically underrepresented groups, including gender and racial/ethnic minorities and individuals having other minoritized identities, are highly valued and sought as part of the proposal review process. Faculty from all academic ranks — including those earlier in their career — are encouraged to volunteer.”
  • Articulate benefits of service
  • Issue a call to action


Onboarding and calibrating reviewers

  • Require structured, intentional pre-review training
    • Funding opportunity purpose
    • Reviewer roles
    • Anti-bias training
    • Conflict of interest
    • Review flow
    • Use of a well-defined reviewer rubric
  • Host mock review panel(s)

Additional Resources

Selection Slides