Evaluation

Learn about others’ work and get helpful feedback on your idea.

Judge group title A

Judge group title A

Peer-to-Peer Review

During Peer-to-Peer review, each applicant will score and comment on five other applications using the four criteria included in the scoring rubric: transformative, feasible, equitable, and scalable. 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 given to them and provide meaningful feedback. Applicants who do not complete the Peer Review requirement will not move forward in the Challenge.

The Peer-to-Peer review will result in a rank order of all valid submissions. Based on the rank order of scores, a subset of top-scoring applications will move forward to the Evaluation Panel.

Evaluation Panel

Evaluation Panel judges will score and provide feedback on the applications assigned to them using the scoring rubric, and each valid application 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, the Henry L. Hillman Foundation may request additional information and select four final awardees to each receive a $500,000 grant.