STScI Logo

Hubble Space Telescope

Cycle 25 Peer Review Guidelines

Review Assignments

Your reviewer assignments are pre-loaded into the Web-Reviewer tool. The tool will provide you with all of the proposals being reviewed by your Panel as well as the subset of those that you have been assigned to review. For the Preliminary Grading/Triage process, each proposal has been assigned to 2 reviewers and 4 additional graders. After the triage list has been produced the Primary reviewers will be selected and notified, this is being done to try to even out the workload during the meetings. Each reviewer should be prepared to lead the initial proposal discussion. The primary reviewer will start the discussion, and is also responsible for capturing relevant comments that come up during the discussion to formulate the proposer feedback.

In making the reviewer assignments, STScI makes an effort to avoid conflicts of interest. If nevertheless you discover any remaining conflicts, please inform your Panel Support Staff member (PSS) immediately, as well as update the conflict in the Web-Reviewer tool, so that the proposal(s) in question may be reassigned. You will not be able to submit preliminary grades for any proposal on which you have a conflict. We ask reviewers to take a broad view of each proposal, with particular emphasis on the importance of the proposed science to astronomy as a whole. This does not necessarily require the reviewer to be an expert in the particular sub-field of the proposal. Indeed, the CP requests that proposals address a broad audience, commensurate with the scope of the Cycle 25 selection Panels. Nonetheless, in making the reviewer assignments, STScI tries to take into account the expertise of the reviewers.

Direct any questions about the scientific or technical feasibility of a proposal as well as scheduling or policy questions, to us at: We will forward your question to an appropriate expert and provide a response within two business days.