Share your views on the use of peer review in selecting grant applications

As a small funder, the Carnegie Trust is very much reliant on peer reviewers to manage the selection of proposals for funding. At the same time we are keenly aware of the pressures faced by academics and that requests to undertake reviews of grant proposals often add to the many demands already placed upon them.

To help us take stock of the advantages and disadvantages of using peer review to select grant applications we are launching an online survey. The survey is aimed at academics with experience of peer reviewing for the Carnegie Trust or other funders. We also welcome input from research fund managers, research managers or administrators who manage peer review processes and policies in a research organisation or funding body, support researchers in writing grant applications or are responsible for peer review training. We seek views and suggestions from the wider research community on how to make the system better and fairer for applicants and peer reviewers, and indeed consider alternatives to peer review, or to the way in which peer review is managed and recognised.

The full survey should take 20 minutes to complete and you can skip to the most relevant parts of the questionnaire as you go along. Your answers are anonymous and will be included in a report on peer review which will be published on the Carnegie Trust website in due course. The survey will be open until May 25th.

To take part, follow this link