All valid applications to the Justice Innovation Prize will receive written feedback on their proposals. Evaluation takes place in several stages. The first is Peer-to-Peer Review. During this stage, each applicant will score and comment on five other applications using the four criteria included in the scoring rubric: innovative, impactful, scalable, and feasible. This is the same scoring rubric that the Evaluation Panel will use in their review.
Scores will be calculated using an algorithm that ensures a level playing field for all applicants. In addition to scoring each application on the four criteria in the scoring rubric, peer reviewers will also provide a final numerical score, ranging between 0-100, representing an overall impression of the entire application. We ask that each peer reviewer carefully read the applications given to them and provide meaningful feedback.
Peer-to-Peer Review will result in a rank order of all valid submissions. Based on the rank order of scores, a subset of top-scoring applications will move forward to the Evaluation Panel.
Evaluation Panel judges will score and provide feedback on applications assigned to them using the scoring rubric, and each valid application will receive five sets of reviews with scores that have been statistically normalized for fairness. Informed by the resulting rank order of applications after Evaluation Panel review, Dream.Org will select up to five Finalists based on factors that include, but are not limited to Evaluation Panel and Peer Review rank order and feedback, organizational capacity, and geographic diversity.