During Peer-to-Peer review, each applicant will score and comment on five other applications using the four criteria included in the scoring rubric: community-informed, feasible, collaborative, and impactful. This is the same scoring rubric that the Evaluation Panel will use in their review.
Scores will be calculated using an algorithm that ensures a level playing field for all applicants. In addition to scoring each application on the four criteria in the scoring rubric, Peer-to-Peer reviewers will also provide a final numerical score, ranging between 0-100, representing an overall impression of the entire application. We ask that each Peer-to-Peer reviewer carefully read the applications assigned to them and provide meaningful feedback.
The Peer-to-Peer review will result in a rank order of all valid submissions. Post Peer-to-Peer Review, valid applications will move forward to the Evaluation Panel.
The Evaluation Panel members have been carefully chosen for their knowledge and experience, and will score and provide feedback on a subset of top-scoring applications assigned to them using the scoring rubric. Each application that advances to this stage will receive five sets of reviews with scores that have been statistically normalized to ensure a level playing field. Informed by the resulting rank order of applications after Evaluation Panel review, six Finalists will be named and invited to participate in a pitch event with the Selection Committee in June 2023.
The Selection Committee will review and discuss the proposals from six prize Finalists and name three Winners of the Common Good Challenge. The selection of the Winners may be based on considerations that include, but are not limited to, resulting rank order from Peer-to-Peer and Evaluation Panel Reviews, organizational capacity, geographic diversity, and feasibility. Each Winner of the Common Good Challenge will receive $100,000.