Applicants may request that up to three persons or research groups be excluded from the review process. In close collaboration with the FWF Office, the Reporters and Alternates suggest appropriate expert reviewers – based outside Austria – to the Executive Board. In the selection of reviewers, due attention is paid to ensuring that there are neither real nor assumed negative or positive conflicts of interest.
The criteria for the selection of international peer reviewers as well as the rules regarding bias, conflicts of interest, and the composition of expert juries and boards are discussed in the Appendix.
The FWF Executive Board decides whether a review procedure is to be initiated and appoints reviewers on the basis of the recommendations submitted by the FWF's Reporters and/or Alternates. This is an ongoing process, and it is not linked to specific Board meeting dates.
Funding applications which are outside the scope of the FWF's funding activities or which involve applicants who obviously do not possess the professional qualifications or research experience necessary to carry out the project are rejected without the initiation of a review procedure. The same applies to funding applications which cannot be reviewed in their current form because they contain major errors which are not remedied (or not remedied within a reasonable period of time, generally no more than three weeks). This rule applies to programmes where applications are reviewed on a rolling basis. For programmes with specific submission deadlines, applicants are required to rectify the errors in their applications within 10 days after being notified of the errors. Decisions to reject applications without review are taken by the Executive Board and require the consent of the FWF Board in order to take effect.