Red Team Reviews

If you are interested in setting up a Red Team Review, contact Amy Raubenolt ( at least 60 days before your submission due date. 

The red team review happens no later than one month before the submission date. Conversation about getting ready for the red team review need to happen no later than six weeks before the submission deadline. ASC Research Service will recruit at least three reviewers (with input from the proposer), with the understanding that reviewers will have at least a week to read and provide feedback and that during this time the proposer is not making any changes to the narrative or research plan. The reviewers can be from the College, from other departments/colleges, or from outside the university. The review should have the same magnitude as formal panel reviews. The proposer will know who the reviewers are, and the reviews will be shared with the proposer during a Zoom meeting.

Expectations for proposer:

  1. The narrative should be nearly complete (95%). Resubmissions are ideal for the red team review, but if first-time submissions can meet this criterion in the 60-day timeframe, they are eligible as well.
  2. The document should have final or near final graphics and tables.
  3. All sections should have complete narratives and the documents should be formatted the same as it will be submitted. Depending on the review process, the document may or may not retain the full RFP references, but should retain RFP paragraph references after the heading titles.

Questions for reviewers: The questions that guide the review will be derived from the RFP and sent to reviewers in template form. The following questions provide a broad base of questions that could be chosen to guide the review:

  1. Does the proposal articulate a plan of work that describes research and development strategies appropriate for attaining its goals consistent with the type of study proposed?
  2. Does the proposal address how the major design iterations and resulting evidence will be developed to support or question key assumptions underlying the research and development plan?
  3. Does the proposal identify all measures to be developed or employed in generating evidence of the project’s success and provide evidence of or plans to establish the technical quality (e.g., validity and reliability) of each measure?
  4. Does the proposal include detailed descriptions of the study goals, design and implementation processes, data collection and quality, and analysis and methods for producing findings?
  5. Does the proposal describe appropriate mechanisms to assess success through project-specific external review and feedback processes?
  6. Does the proposal specify how the PI will report and use results of the project’s external, critical review process?
  7. Does the proposal include a creative communication strategy for reaching a broad audience for the findings of the project, including, where appropriate, scholars, practitioners, policymakers and public audiences?
  8. Does the proposal identify the key elements of a communication plan, e.g., target audiences and identification of the channels / media / technologies appropriate for reaching specific audiences?
  9. Does the proposal demonstrate the expertise of an interdisciplinary team?
  10. Does the proposal include a brief narrative describing the expertise of personnel and their contributions to the proposed work, including those responsible for the external review?
  11. Does the proposal include a section that discusses the broader impacts of the proposed activities?

Paid External Review

ASC Research Services has a program to pay an honorarium of $250 for external expert review of grant resubmissions that have received high scores from federal funding agencies, specific invitations from sponsors to submit a proposal, or proposals that represent a strategic value to the research mission of the college. The proposer is responsible for recommending a few names of potential reviewers in order to locate a single, available reviewer for the submission.

First submissions on NIH R01 renewal applications may also be eligible for consideration. Contact Amy Raubenolt to see if you qualify for a Paid External Review.