My suggestion would be to get peers with actual topic-relevant knowledge to review funding proposals.
I am not sure whether this is currently done, but it is standard practice in governmental science funding.
I understand that it is the funders decision to collect peer reports, but I guess it is an easy way to spot projects that are targeted towards funders, not impact.
My suggestion would be to get peers with actual topic-relevant knowledge to review funding proposals.
I am not sure whether this is currently done, but it is standard practice in governmental science funding.
I understand that it is the funders decision to collect peer reports, but I guess it is an easy way to spot projects that are targeted towards funders, not impact.