Here is what to expect of the application review process, starting March 27 to April 1.
The reviewers
GOSH community members may volunteer to be reviewers if they were eligible to vote in the most recent council election (whether or not they actually voted), and if they are not also an applicant under this microgrant funding programme. Just send an email to goshcouncil@openhardware.science with the subject line “Volunteer reviewer” before the start of the review period (March 27).
All microgrant applicants are reviewers in the review process. Applicants’ full participation here is a requirement of the application process.
The review process
March 27 is the start of the review period. After any ineligible applications have been removed and the review forms prepared, reviewers will be emailed a link to their personal review form sent from DIGIT-EUSURVEY@nomail.ec.europa.eu. Please make sure the application contact email address is correct. If you have not received the link after checking your spam folder, please contact goshcouncil@openhardware.science. Do not share the link or review form.
Reviewers will evaluate all applications on the form by applying the accompanying GOSH selection criteria, a copy of which is attached below. Your own application will also appear in the list to be evaluated, if you are an applicant.
April 1 (really) is the last day of the review period, at which time all review forms must be completed and submitted. The results of the review will be announced on April 4.
If an applicant has submitted multiple independent applications, they will have received as many forms to be completed as applications they have submitted.
If an applicant has not submitted a requisite review, that corresponding application will not be awarded a grant.
The selection criteria
These are the criteria by which applications are to be evaluated during the review process.
- Meets programme criteria (see below): the proposal is for the described target audience and purpose, it involves open hardware and its use for science.
- Value and impact of the event: you think the activities have a high chance of success in promoting open hardware for science with their target audience.
- Ongoing impact: The proposal described activities that are intended and likely to lead to ongoing projects, courses or communities developing or using open science hardware (prioritised compared to one-off events).
- Feasibility: The proposal seems accomplishable given the described timeline, goals, and budget. Budget seems reasonable and includes estimated costs, requested costs, and costs covered by other sources. All expenses are justified.
Programme criteria were previously described as follows: The goal of the workshops or short courses should be to teach, deploy, or experiment with open science hardware tools and their related software applications, at any level of difficulty to any audience, in a hands-on manner, to participants that will put that knowledge to practical and immediate use. If this event kicks off or is part of a series of similar events, that would be preferred.