Skip to main content

LS26 Targeted Prevention / Evaluation criteria

Main evaluation criteria

Projects that do not meet all key requirements regarding scope will be rejected by the jury, regardless of scientific quality. 

The key evaluation criteria for the proposals are scientific excellence and innovation, relevance and impact, and the pathway to implementation of the proposed work.

  • Scientific excellence and innovation: To what extent does the project demonstrate scientific novelty in its proposed approach? What is the additional value of this innovation for addressing the specified research gap? Is the project’s overall approach scientifically excellent and appropriate for achieving its aims?
  • Relevance and impact: To what extent does the project contribute to advances in targeted prevention research? How has the team ensured the relevance of the project’s aims, methodology and anticipated outcomes for the specified risk group? What potential does the project have to improve the health and well-being of this group? How great an impact is this project likely to have on the health of this group?
  • Pathway to implementation: Does the project present a pathway to implementation that will facilitate its intended impact? To what extent have factors relevant for implementation been addressed?
  • Team composition and excellence: Do the applicants demonstrate the scientific expertise and potential to conduct the proposed research? Does the team include an appropriate combination of expertise, bringing together researchers from complementary scientific fields as required? Have additional relevant stakeholders with the necessary expertise been included as appropriate?
    • Please note that scientific excellence and track record will be assessed according to academic age. Career breaks such as for parental leave, care duties and longer illnesses will be taken into account in the evaluation of the proposals. Please indicate the time periods in the applicants' CV to allow them to be considered.
Further evaluation criteria
  • Feasibility: Given the competences of the research team, the suggested methods, the timeframe, resources and budget, can the project achieve its goals? 
  • Consideration of gender aspects: The relevance of potential sex-specific and gender-related aspects of the proposed project should be considered and explained throughout the proposal. Please consider WWTF's guidelines regarding sex and gender in research.
  • Open Science. Does the proposed work adhere to WWTF's Open Science Policy? 

Please note that the short proposal will be evaluated by a high-level jury panel only, whereas the full proposal will be evaluated by experts in the project's specific fields. An appropriate level of scientific detail should therefore be provided at each stage to allow the respective audience to evaluate the proposal.

Back to top