Jump to navigation Jump to search
- Phase 1
- Each reviewer should get access to a reviewer dashboard like the one presented below.
- Submissions are members of a wiki category, potentially "IEG Tool Grants Applications 2014 R1" or something. There is a few such topical categories for each round.
- The 'approved' column should contain links to the scoring form for the relevant submission.
- The scoring form contains several single choice questions (score from 1 to 5 for example) and a comment box.
- Only one person should see the scoring form of him/herself.
- Phase 2
- Aggregated anonymous output
- After the reviewing period ends, the tool should produce output for each submission: average score for each form question and a list of anonymous comments.
- Such output should not be public. It should be accessible by a administrative person who leads the reviewing committee.
- Phase 3
- Semi-automated posting
- Optionally, the tool should have a button to post the averaged data to the tools' talk pages once the previous phrase completes (by manual click of a button).
Example of a reviewer dashboard
|Grants:IEG/Map atlas||a short description from the idea page (first template)||not scored||$1,000|
|Grants:IEG/Gadget to do Foos and Bars||a short description from the idea page (first template)||yes||$10,000||should talk to candidate about X|
|Total (Tools)||Total amount you funded.||$10,000||1 scored, 1 not yet|
|Grants:IEG/More ponies in user preferences||.||no||$55,000||exorbitant amount, no clear goal|
|Grants:IEG/Reach Bazz @ Belarus||a short description from the idea page (first template)||yes||$35,000||should talk to candidate about X|
|Total (Outreach)||Total amount you funded.||$35,000||1 scored, 1 not yet|
- $45,000 of $82,000 this round.