Hewlett International Grant Program Evaluation Criteria

Hewlett International Grant proposals are reviewed by a faculty
committee composed of former grant recipients representing a range of
disciplines.  The committee evaluates and awards points to each
proposal based on the set of criteria listed below.

The cumulative point scores are used for an initial ranking of
the proposals, but all proposals are discussed by the whole committee
before final award decisions are made.

Review Criteria for Level I: Small Grants and Level II: Larger Grants (fall and spring)

Please see outline of Funding Priorities

  • Is this an original and significant project?   (For
    conference travel proposals, the inquiry will focus on the status of the
    conference or workshop in the applicant’s field and the importance of
    the paper in his/her academic career.)
  • Does the proposal include sufficient information about the
    project; is the information clearly presented and understandable to
  • Are the activities proposed appropriate to the overall project?
  • Does the project have an impact at Pitt beyond the research record of the applicant?
  • Will the project lead to or conclude a larger overall agenda?
  • Does the project involve collaboration with faculty at Pitt or with faculty at institutions abroad?
  • How successful has the applicant been in securing matching funds?


  • Is the proposed budget reasonable for the activities proposed? (Yes/No)

Reviewers may expect more substantial projects and effort for
Level Two  than for Level One grants to justify the larger award.

Review Criteria for Level III: Major Impact Grant (spring only)

Because the Major Impact Grant offers a higher level of funding
and is awarded to only one faculty member each year, all the review
criteria for Level One and Level Two Grants will be applied, and in
addition the review committee will consider:

  • Does the proposal demonstrate an impact on the international
    profile of the University of Pittsburgh, either through research,
    teaching, curriculum development or the development of publications?