Alliance for Social Dialogue

:: Grant Making Project Evaluation Process
Project Evaluation Process


  • ASD secretariat will read the concept notes as they come and contact organizations for full length proposals (if found interesting)
  • ASD secretariat will check basic format of the received proposals.
  • Applicants who submit the proposals without basic criteria will be rejected.
  • The secretariat will submit a brief description of the proposals to the ASD executive committee.
  • The ASD executive committee will decide on the process, time and names of reviewers for proposal evaluation.
  • Proposals will be sent to the reviewers for review along with the evaluation criteria.
  • One proposal will be reviewed by three reviewers
  • Reviewers will evaluate proposals and send comments and recommendations to the ASD secretariat.
  • Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the ASD executive committee will finalise the list of qualified proposals which will be sent to the Open Society Foundations (OSF), New York twice a year.

Terms of Reference for Reviewers:

  • Reviewer(s) must maintain impartiality and shall not have any personal and/or institutional interest in the /proposal.
  • Reviewers will have to declare the relationship, if any (e.g. personal or institutional), with the applicant which may lead to a conflict of interest.
  • The reviewer(s) shall review and appraise the applications/proposals as against the envisaged criteria developed to review the applications/proposal. No other considerations or criteria (ethnicity, gender, caste, etc.) shall be used to evaluate the proposals.

Proposal Evaluation Criteria

The reviewers are expected to read the full proposal but the evaluation will be based on the following criteria:

  • Does the proposal fall within the three thematic areas (media, human
    rights and education) identified by ASD and mentioned in the public call for proposals?
  • Has the proposal been submitted in the requested format? If not, are the contents substantive enough to warrant a request for a re-writing of the proposal in the stated format or should it be rejected?
  • Is the proposed project idea coherent? If not, should a revision of the proposal be requested?
  • Is the organisation/individual proposing the project competent to execute it? Has the organisation/individual demonstrated such ability with respect to similar-sized projects in the past?
  • Is the proposed timeframe for the execution of the project realistic? If not, should a revision be requested?
  • Is the proposed project relevant to the context of the changes taking place in Nepal?
  • Has a similar idea been tried out by someone else and what were the results (if possible to find out)? The idea is to recommend projects that are innovative and not tried out time and again.
  • Is the proposal designed to work in collaboration with other like-minded organisations since collaboration is desirable.

The reviewers provide an overall assessment and indicate the most important strengths and weaknesses of the project proposal. Based on these assessment the ASD will decide whether the proposal should be forwarded to OSF New York for funding.