National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC)

In 2020, NSFC introduced a "points-based reviewer performance assessment" system for grant review, involving dual-feedback mechanisms:

1. Applicant Feedback: After funding decisions, applicants rate reviewers (on a scale of 1-4) on the insightfulness and constructiveness of their comments.
2. Program Director Monitoring: NSFC program directors monitor reviewers against positive criteria (e.g., willingness, efficiency, feedback quality) and negative criteria (e.g., error rate, potential bias).

The performance-based points system is supported by the NSFC's Research Integrity Office, which maintains records of and investigates allegations of reviewer misconduct, such as conflict of interest or breaches of confidentiality. The system also reinforces reviewer accountability and engagement by incentivizing self-reflection and high-quality work.

The positive-incentive scheme rewards conscientious effort, fostering a stronger program identity and motivating the broader community. When normative breaches or ethical risks occur, proportionate corrective measures are applied. Together, this combination of positive motivation and normative oversight creates a framework for continuously improving grant review quality.

From the perspectives of funders and applicants, grant peer review reports should be constructive, unbiased and contain specific suggestions for improvements based on sound scientific reasoning. To enable this, an  assessment system was designed and introduced to encourage responsible assessment and to identify a group of highly responsible reviewers to provide specific feedback to help applicants improve their research proposals.

The NSFC  built a points-based reviewer system through a phased and adaptive strategy, involving:

• Development: The system was first trialed as an experiment in 2020, allowing for refinement before being scaled across most grant programs.
• Implementation: A multi-source feedback process was established, combining quantitative applicant ratings (1-4) with qualitative monitoring by program directors and integrity staff.
• Managing Change: NSFC actively addressed dynamics like reviewer anxiety and low feedback participation through communication and trust-building.

Going forward, NSFC plan to further develop feedback loops for reviewers, shifting the focus of the system from pure evaluation to one of learning and collaborative improvement.

NSFC experimented with the “points-based reviewer performance assessment” in 2020 and has since rolled out the approach to most of NSFC’s grant assessments, including the NSFC general program (standard grant), funds for young scientists (early career researchers), funds for less developed regions and key programs.