Blog Layout

Feature Spotlight: Reviewing

Cass Montemagni & Jill Murphy • Apr 12, 2019

When we designed our centralized reviewing interface, our goal was to help both reviewers and administrators make the best awarding decisions possible, as quickly as possible. So administrators can take advantage of the customization options they need, while reviewers benefit from a simple, streamlined, and easy-to-use interface.

A paper-based review process just can’t compete with the time savings, accuracy, flexibility, and insights offered by AwardSpring’s online review process. Here are just a few of the ways that AwardSpring’s reviewing features improve upon a paper-based process:

Bias Elimination & Time Savings

Before the review cycle begins, administrators can hide certain pieces of student information from reviewers, like name, email address, and financial details, to eliminate any potential bias. Administrators can also hide select application responses from reviewers. We recommend hiding any responses that don’t directly pertain to your scorecards; that way, your reviewers won’t waste any time reading responses that won’t impact their evaluation.

Personalized Review Methods 

The AwardSpring platform offers you two different ways to conduct reviews: a global review or a scholarship-specific review. With global review, each applicant is considered individually using the same scorecards and review committee members across all scholarships. A scholarship-specific review requires reviewers to assess every candidate for a given scholarship individually. This review style allows for more fine-tuning of your process, including create different scorecards and assigning unique review committees for each scholarship, but it can take longer to complete.

If you have lots of scholarships, you’ll save quite a bit of time using global review. That’s because each student application will go through just one review cycle, no matter how many scholarships the student is eligible for. On the other hand, a scholarship-specific review is essential for those scholarships with that need a specific review committee or have unique qualifications. Luckily, you can get the best of both worlds: use global review for those scholarships that can share the same scorecard and review committee, and then conduct a scholarships-specific review of the rest of your scholarships.

Simple, Adaptable Scorecards

Our online score cards are designed to be flexible, easy-to-use translations of your old paper rubric. Using simple labels eliminates scrolling for reviewers, which can save a surprising amount of time. If you need to include more context or explanation of your scorecard methodology, we recommend that you provide it in a separate document to keep the reviewing experience as simple as possible.

Flexible Reviewer Assignments

Choose your assignment methodology - random, all, or manual - with a single click in AwardSpring. If you have more than 50 applicants, or lots of reviewers, we recommend assigning reviewers randomly. Small review team? Choose “all” so that all reviewers will see all of the applications. And if you have a scholarship that requires a specific review team, you can always select “manual” to make your assignments on a per-reviewer basis.

Quick & Seamless Reviewing Experience

Every detail of the AwardSpring reviewing experience was designed to help reviewers work quickly, accurately, and without unnecessary distractions. As your reviewers make their way through each application, their work is saved automatically, so there’s no chance of losing a single score. Navigation buttons at the top and bottom of the page make it easy to move on to the next application. And if a reviewer wants to take notes to explain a score, remind herself about something, or share an idea with the administrator, she can do so right in the scorecard - and the note will be kept private from everyone except the author and the administrator.

Insightful Awarding & Denying

Designed to help administrators make faster decisions, AwardSpring’s Award & Deny screen gives you deep insights into your applicant pool without a lot of complication. Pre-filter your applicant list for secondary preferences, which can help you please donors or make tie-breaker decisions. Once reviewer scores are in, your applicant list will automatically re-sort to bring the highest scored students to the top. Hover over a student’s overall score to see just how many individual scores are in from reviewers, or click on a student’s name to see all of the individual scores. The wealth of information available at the Award & Deny stage will help you - and your donors - feel confident about your awarding decisions.

If you or your review team ever have questions about how to optimize your customized AwardSpring platform for the best reviewing experience, or if you’d like a refresher training course, just send us a note at support@awardspring.com.

AwardSpring Blog

By Jill Murphy 08 Feb, 2024
The FAFSA Simplification Act has brought about significant changes to the financial aid landscape, ushering in a new era in the FAFSA application process. While you’re likely familiar with the details, let's take a moment to recap the key highlights of this transformative legislation. Key Changes: Transition to SAI: The cornerstone of the FAFSA Simplification Act is the replacement of the Expected Family Contribution (EFC) with the Student Aid Index (SAI). This shift aims to provide a more nuanced assessment of financial need, offering flexibility with SAI values, including the possibility of negative figures down to -1500. SAR to FSS: Another notable change is the rebranding of the Student Aid Report (SAR) as the FAFSA Submission Summary (FSS), reflecting the evolving nature of the application process. Negative SAI and PELL Grant Eligibility: One of the significant departures from the previous system is the allowance for negative SAIs. This change necessitates adjustments in how institutions package students for need-based aid. Additionally, PELL grant eligibility will now be determined using criteria separate from the FAFSA and resultant SAI, with the incorporation of IRS tax return data where feasible. As you embark to adapt these new protocols, it's essential to remain informed and proactive in navigating the evolving landscape of higher education finance. As an AwardSpring partner, we’ve made suggestions on how to leverage these changes to better support students on their educational journeys and ensure access to the opportunities they deserve. AwardSpring offers the following recommendations to guide institutions through this process: Recommendation #1: Expected Family Contribution (EFC) to Student Aid Index (SAI) The most consequential change to teams that are putting together Financial Aid packages or making scholarship awarding decisions are the EFC to SAI transition. We recommend you consider one of two options: Option 1: Re-label existing EFC fields as SAI to maintain continuity in data collection If you choose to re-label existing EFC fields, be mindful that doing so may impact historical data analysis, requiring a clear understanding by the consumers of any reports of the transition from EFC to SAI effective the date you make this conversion Option 2: Keep your existing EFC fields for historical purposes and create a new SAI field In this instance, you’ll need a thorough review of all of your qualifications and/or awarding decision-making processes to ensure SAI is being used and EFC is properly retired Notables: In the case where you’re using our SIS Integration feature, we’ll want to coordinate which path you’ve chosen so we can update the import process accordingly AwardSpring currently doesn’t allow our numeric fields to go negative creating a gap between the new SAI protocol and our existing numeric fields. We’ll be addressing this in a March, 2024 release so you can capture negative SAI values, if desired In either case, you’ll want to review scholarship qualifications tied to EFC and/or SAI, and ensure compatibility with the possibility of negative SAI values Recommendation #2: Student Aid Report (SAR) to FAFSA Submission Summary (FSS) Much like repurposing EFC for SAI in our first recommendation, you have another consideration with SAR vs. FSS: Option 1: Evaluate the option of re-labeling existing SAR upload fields as FSS to streamline data collection recognize that this adjustment repurposes the field, necessitating careful consideration of historical data interpretation Option 2: Alternatively, create separate fields to accommodate the transition, albeit with potential rework depending on your unique configuration and whether you utilize SIS Integration Recommendation #3: Other FAFSA Fields There’s more variability here since you may have a wide degree of fields to consider. You should tailor any changes based on the specific field type, whether it’s being used as a qualification, and whether you’d need to make corresponding changes in your SIS. Summary Proactive assessment and strategic adaptation of FAFSA-related questions are crucial to seamlessly transition to the new framework outlined by the FAFSA Simplification Act. By carefully considering these recommendations, you can ensure alignment with regulatory changes while maintaining efficiency and accuracy in financial aid processes. As always, if you’d like to talk with our expert staff, don’t hesitate to reach out to us at support@awardspring.com.
AwardSpring: The #1 Scholarship Management Software
By The AwardSpring Team 22 Sep, 2023
We're absolutely thrilled to announce that AwardSpring has clinched the prestigious #1 spot in the G2 report for Scholarship Management Software, but we didn't stop there!
Show More
Share by: