Researchers gain a better understanding of how their proposals are assessed

Every grant proposal undergoes a multi-stage evaluation process at the SNSF. At least two external reviewers assess the proposal scientifically. Two referees from the relevant SNSF evaluation body then analyse the expert reviews and draw up recommendations for discussion by the body. These recommendations are a key factor in deciding whether or not the SNSF will fund the project.

Previously, after a funding decision, applicants were given access to the anonymised expert reviews. Since the beginning of October 2026, the SNSF has also been making the referees’ anonymised recommendations available to them.

Recommendations complement reviews

The recommendations go beyond a mere summary of the expert reviews. They highlight which strengths and weaknesses of a proposal carry particular weight and how the reviewers’ various appraisals should be interpreted.

“Regardless of whether the proposal was successful or not, we want to explain to researchers as clearly as possible how their proposals were assessed and what considerations went into the decision,” says Katharina Valta, who is responsible for implementing the new procedure at the SNSF. “This will help them to better understand the funding decision.”

Researchers’ concerns taken on board

Greater transparency in research funding is a key objective of the SNSF. In feedback sessions, too, researchers have repeatedly asked for more information about the evaluation. Through this new approach, the SNSF is addressing this issue.

Katharina Valta also emphasises the future benefits: “The recommendations provide researchers with specific pointers for future proposals and help them to develop their ideas further.”