1. Basic criteria
- Research ethics.
- Is the principle of “do no harm” considered to the best possible extent?
- Are human rights principles implemented in the research process?
- Are research ethics and evaluation standards adhered to?
- Appropriateness of funds requested and, if necessary, reduction of funds by the selection committee.
- Proposal convincingly addresses any logistical or political obstacles and risks that could jeopardise completion of the RIE research project (e.g. implementation capacity or government approval).
2. Evaluation criteria
The selection committee will evaluate and select funded RIE based on three categories. Applications with the overall highest scores will be funded.
1. Development policy relevance
To what extent does the RIE research project address a developmentally relevant issue?
- Considering the German development cooperation portfolio
- The German development policy strategy
- For the partner country
2. Quality of the project
Scientific quality and relevance:
- Does the RIE address a scientifically relevant issue?
- Are the proposed methods implementable and rigorous?
- Is the proposed RIE research project likely to make a significant contribution to addressing technical or methodological knowledge gaps?
Feasibility and efficiency:
- Is the design of the RIE research project realistic?
- How is the economic efficiency of the RIE research project to be assessed?
The team’s qualifications:
- Does the team have the appropriate technical, methodological and regional expertise?
3. Usefulness and partner orientation
- Do thoughtful and realistic plans exist for how the findings will be useful to the evaluated development cooperation project, the implementing organisation, the project partners and to development cooperation as a whole?
- Are scientific partners from the Global South involved in the project and in what way?
- Can positive effects be expected regarding evaluation capacity development (ECD)?
- How are the ECD project partners involved in the evaluation?
- The grading scale ranges from 0 (criterion not met at all) to 10 points (criterion fully met).
- Proposals that receive an average score of 3.0 or less in any category or receive an average of less than 5.0 points as an overall score will be eliminated from the process.
- In the case of equivalent proposals, the selection committee may give preference to proposals that contribute to a more diverse distribution of supporting organisations, scientific institutions or topics across the funding programme.