Understanding Your Score
Each year, the CHEST Foundation receives many more proposals than we are able to support with research awards. Within the Grants Management System, applicants are able to view their total average score and public comments left by the reviewers. We encourage applicants to review their scores and comments, and to utilize this feedback, when developing future proposals that they may submit to the CHEST Foundation.
Definitions
- Minor: Easily addressed weaknesses; overall concept is easily communicated and does not reduce projects overall impact
- Moderate: Weaknesses are more prevalent; overall concept is not clearly communicated and may affect the projects overall impact
- Major: Weaknesses are severe and inhibit the overall concept being conveyed; weaknesses would greatly affect the projects overall impact
Research Grants
Review Focal Points
- Scientific Merit
- Innovation
- Feasibility of the Research Plan
- Relevancy to the RFP Focus
- Investigator and Environment
|
Average Total Score
Lowest scores are best
|
Additional Guidance on Submission
|
|
High: 26 – 81
|
- Strong proposal with well-written information, idea aligns with RFP focus
- Topic reinforces the foundation’s mission/vision
- Has minor-to-no weaknesses
|
|
Moderate: 82 – 136
|
- Good proposal with mostly well-written information, idea aligns with RFP focus
- Topic can relate to the foundation’s mission/vision
- Has moderate-to-minor weaknesses
|
|
Low: 137 – 191
|
- Fair proposal with unclear written information
- Idea mostly aligns with RFP focus
- Topic may not fully relate to the foundation’s mission/vision
- Has few-to-numerous major weaknesses
|
Community Service Grants
Review Focal Points
- Project Need
- Project Impact
- Project Innovation
- Applicant Involvement
- Project Sustainability
- Project Plans
- Budget Stability
- General Rating
|
Average Total Score
High scores are best
|
Additional Guidance on Submission
|
|
High: 116 – 82
|
- Strong proposal with well-written information
- Topic reinforces the foundation’s mission/vision
- Has minor-to-no weaknesses
- Community being served will be greatly impacted
|
| Moderate: 81 – 47 |
- Good proposal with mostly well- written information
- Topic can relate to the foundation’s mission/vision
- Has moderate-to-minor weaknesses
- Community being served will be moderately impacted
|
| Low: 46 – 13 |
- Fair proposal with unclear written information
- Topic may not fully relate to the foundation’s mission/vision
- Has few-to-numerous major weaknesses
- Community being served will not truly be impacted
|
Distinguished Scholar Grants
Review Focal Points
- Qualifications and Experience of the PI
- Project Goal
- Project Method
- Project Environment
- Project Budget
|
Average Total Score
High scores are best
|
Additional Guidance on Submission
|
|
High: 100 – 68
|
- Strong proposal with well- written information
- Idea aligns with RFP focus
- Topic reinforces the foundation’s mission/vision
- Has minor-to-no weaknesses
|
| Moderate: 67 – 36 |
- Good proposal with mostly well- written information
- Idea aligns with RFP focus
- Topic can relate to the foundation’s mission/vision
- Has moderate-to-minor weaknesses
|
| Low: 35 – 5 |
- Fair proposal with unclear written information
- Idea mostly aligns with RFP focus
- Topic may not fully relate to the foundation’s mission/vision
- Has few-to-numerous major weaknesses
|