Build weighted rubrics with defined criteria shared across every reviewer on your panel. Everyone evaluates against the same framework — no interpretation variance, no scoring drift, no ambiguity about what each dimension means.
Reviewr strips identifying information — names, institutions, employers, affiliations — from submissions before reviewers see them. Evaluations are based on the work, not on who submitted it.
Reviewers self-identify conflicts before scoring begins. Administrators see disclosed conflicts and manage assignments accordingly — before a compromised evaluation happens, not after.
Assign submissions manually, randomly, or by rules — with workload caps that ensure no reviewer is assigned more than their fair share. Every submission gets the attention it deserves.
Reviewr randomizes the order in which submissions appear in each reviewer's queue — eliminating order bias and ensuring no applicant is systematically disadvantaged by where they fall in the sequence.
Match reviewers to submissions based on category, track, subject matter, or any custom criteria. Every submission is evaluated by someone qualified to assess it.
Reviewr detects strict and lenient scoring patterns across your panel and normalizes scores automatically — so an applicant's result reflects their merit, not which reviewer they happened to be assigned to.
Reviewers see the submission and the scorecard in one split-screen view — no downloading, no switching between tools, no losing their place. The interface is designed to keep reviewers focused and consistent.
Administrators see scoring progress in real time — who has started, who is behind, how scores are distributing across the panel. Anomalies surface while there's still time to address them.
The all-in-one platform for managing scholarships, grants and awards programs.
