Scientific Review Process
Login for all users Login to site
    Forgot password?  
Scientific Review
Each proposal is sent to both German and Israeli scientists for review; when necessary, scientists from other countries are approached as well. These reviewers are chosen by a scientific advisors’ committee headed by a very experienced scientist. 
On average, each proposal is evaluated by at least 3 reviewers.
Applicants are requested to submit a list of recommended referees, as well. Such a list should not include people with a possible conflict of interest, having close professional associations, joint publication, etc. Referees may not be affiliated to the applicants' institutions. The Foundation also honors requests of P.I.s not to send their proposal to certain colleagues. In both cases, we can only relate to a list printed in English with full details (address, telephones, e-mail(.
After the peer review stage has been concluded, the advisors’ committees (whose members are appointed by the GIF Board of Governors) analyze the referees' evaluations, rank the proposals assigned to their committee according to value, and submit their recommendations to the scientific members of the GIF Board of Governors, who devote at least one day to discussions before the final funding decisions are made.

The following criteria are used in evaluating G.I.F research proposals
  • Scientific and technological merit,
  • Originality and importance
  • The manner of cooperation and the complementary elements between the investigators: do all groups involved make a real contribution to the project?
  • Anticipated benefits (scientific, social and/or economic),
  • Suitability of the investigators,
  • Suitability of equipment and facilities,
  • Support requested in relation to project objectives and time-table,
  • Participation of other funding agencies.
Additional specific criteria will be employed in evaluating applied or interdisciplinary projects.
After the peer review, excellently reviewed projects are sent to the relevant advisor’s committee for ranking. Each proposal is ranked by the one advisor responsible for the sub-area, who grades all excellent proposals in descending order according to scientific merit, cooperation, originality, benefits, etc.

In case of renewal of an ongoing G.I.F. grant, the advisors also receive the last available scientific report.
The number of grants allocated each year is determined by the availability of funds.
In order to enable applicants whose proposals were not funded to improve their project for a second submission, G.I.F. will provide, upon request, the reviewers’ comments it received (in edited form, to preserve the anonymity of the Foundation's referees). Since this is pointless in cases where no specific, constructive criticism has been expressed, the G.I.F. will decide on each demand individually. The requests must be made in writing (emails are sufficient) and reach the G.I.F. main office by August 31 2011 (
Login in proccess...