Preparing Assessors for Each Grant Round: A Briefing Note Template

The quality of your grant assessment depends heavily on what assessors know before they start reviewing applications. Assessors who are unclear about programme priorities, scoring criteria, or process requirements make inconsistent decisions — not because they're careless, but because they're filling in gaps with their own assumptions.

A briefing note is the most efficient intervention for preventing this. Done well, it takes two hours to write and saves you far more than that in clarification queries, inconsistent scoring, and post-assessment corrections.

Here's what a good briefing note covers and how to structure it.

Section 1: Programme overview

Assessors who understand the "why" of a programme make better assessments than those who only understand the "what". Start with a brief, clear statement of:

• What the programme is trying to achieve
• Who it's intended to benefit
• What types of projects or activities are in scope
• Any strategic priorities for this particular round (e.g., geographic areas you're trying to reach, underrepresented community types, specific activity areas)

Keep this to half a page. Assessors don't need a history of the programme — they need to understand its current purpose well enough to apply the criteria with good judgement.

Section 2: Eligibility reminder

Eligibility should have been checked before applications reach assessors. But assessors will encounter borderline cases and need to understand the boundaries.

Include a brief summary of key eligibility criteria with any nuances that have come up in the past:

• Entity types that are eligible and any that are commonly confused with eligible types
• Geographic eligibility, including any edge cases
• Project type eligibility and common out-of-scope examples
• Any conditions that were clarified since the programme guidelines were published

If there are edge cases in the current application pool — applicants who are arguably within or outside eligibility — flag these specifically and provide guidance on how assessors should handle them.

Section 3: Scoring rubric and criteria

Include the full scoring rubric, with criteria, scale, and descriptors. Even if assessors have seen this before, having it in the briefing note means they don't need to find it separately.

Supplement the rubric with any guidance specific to this round:

• Which criterion is most important for this particular round and why
• Any criteria that have been adjusted since the last round
• Examples of what strong and weak responses to each criterion look like (anonymised from previous rounds if available)
• Common mistakes in scoring this rubric — criteria that assessors tend to over- or under-weight

This section is the most important in the briefing note. Invest the most time here.

Section 4: Conflict of interest process

Even if assessors have completed conflict of interest declarations already, remind them of the process in the briefing note:

• What counts as a conflict of interest in the context of this programme
• What to do if they discover a conflict after they've started reviewing an application (stop reviewing, contact the programme manager immediately)
• Who to contact and how
• The consequence of not declaring — make it clear that undisclosed conflicts of interest are a serious process failure

Include the conflict of interest declaration form if assessors haven't already completed one.

Section 5: Practical process guidance

The logistics that, if unclear, generate the most follow-up queries:

• How assessors access the applications (link to the grants system, login instructions, any access issues to report)
• How to submit scores (within the grants system, or separately)
• The requirement to provide written rationale for each score — what format, what level of detail
• The scoring deadline, with the consequence if scores aren't submitted on time
• What to do if an application appears incomplete or if a document is missing
• How to handle applications where the applicant has made contact directly (refer to programme manager; don't respond independently)

Section 6: Deliberation process

Explain what happens after individual scoring is complete:

• When and how the deliberation session will happen (date, format, who chairs)
• What material assessors should prepare for the deliberation (e.g., a list of applications they want to discuss)
• How decisions will be documented and by whom
• What the final output of the deliberation is (a funding recommendation to the programme manager / board / committee)

Assessors who understand the full process — not just their individual scoring task — are more engaged and make better contributions to deliberation.

Section 7: Confidentiality reminder

A brief, clear statement that:

• Applications and applicant information are confidential
• Assessment scores and deliberation discussion are confidential
• Assessors should not discuss applications with external parties, including people at organisations that have applied
• The funding decisions are not to be shared before they are formally communicated by the programme team

This isn't legalistic — it's a reminder that assessors carry a responsibility to the programme's integrity and to the applicants who shared their information in confidence.

How to distribute and follow up

Send the briefing note at least one week before assessors start reviewing applications. Follow up with a brief email asking assessors to confirm they've read it and to raise any questions before scoring begins.

For new assessors, offer a brief phone call to walk through the briefing note. Fifteen minutes at this stage prevents a significant amount of confusion during the assessment period.

Keep the briefing note updated between rounds. The best use of a post-round retrospective is identifying what was unclear in the previous briefing note and improving it for next time.

---

Part of the Tahua grants management series

This article is part of the complete guide: How to Run a Multi-Round Grants Programme Without Losing Track.