In some cases, the review process requires greater flexibility to accommodate varying program structures, multiple evaluation criteria, or a multi-stage decision-making process.
To address this, AwardSpring introduced the Multi-Panel Review (MPR) feature. Unlike the traditional single-panel approach, MPR lets scholarship administrators design review processes that reflect more complex, real-world decision-making structures.
For instance, applicants might first be evaluated in an initial screening round, followed by a second round of review with a different panel of reviewers. This layered approach ensures that evaluations can be tailored to the unique needs of each scholarship program.
Available Scoring Models
AwardSpring is gradually introducing MPR functionality, beginning with the following scenarios:
1. Finalist Advance (Live Feature in 2025)
In this sequential model, Panel 1 first reviews applicants. Based on their scores or other criteria, a subset of applicants is advanced to Panel 2 for an additional round of evaluation.
This model is ideal for programs that want an initial vetting or pre-screening phase before a final review.
2. Parallel Scoring (Coming Soon)
In this concurrent model, Panel 1 and Panel 2 evaluate the same group of applicants simultaneously, each using its own rubric. The system then combines their scores into a Total Score.
This approach is best suited when you need multiple perspectives or scoring dimensions from different panels.
Enabling the Feature
Once you enable the feature for your organization, each review group will display a Multi-Panel Review tab.
On this page, click Enable to activate multi-panel review for the group.
After enabling the feature, you will see setup instructions such as:
“Panel 2 Setup Instructions Multi-Panel Review is enabled for {{Review group name}}. Panel 1 currently retains all the original configurations of the review group.
To configure Panel 2, please visit the following tabs: Rubric Setup, Question Visibility, and Reviewer Assignment, and set up the configurations for Panel 2 as well.
On the Applicants tab, you can choose how applicants will be advanced from Panel 1 to Panel 2.
In the "Review Deadlines" section, you can also configure the Panel 1 timeline, which defines how long Panel 1 remains open for reviewers before applicants advance to Panel 2.
Timelines and Logic
In the Finalist Advance model, reviews take place in sequential stages:
While applications are still being accepted, Panel 1 remains closed (reviewers cannot access it yet).
Panel 1 opens according to the group’s Review Deadline settings.
After the Panel 1 deadline, applicants advanced to Panel 2 are assigned to reviewers.
Panel 2 remains open until the award cycle closes.
Panel Settings
When Multi-Panel Review is enabled, each panel requires its own configuration:
Rubric Setup
Question Visibility
Reviewer Assignment
By default, Panel 1 inherits the existing settings of the review group. Panel 2, however, must be configured separately.
Applicant Advancement to Panel 2
Manage applicant advancement in the Applicants tab. Two options are available:
Manual Advancement
Administrators select which applicants move to Panel 2.
Automatic Advancement
Applicants are advanced based on a predefined rule (e.g., advance all applicants with a score of 80% or higher).
Automatic advancement occurs only after the review deadline, ensuring promotion to Panel 2 is based on final scores (not interim results).
Even when automatic advancement is enabled, administrators can still manually select or unselect applicants. Manual decisions always take priority, and once applied, they remain in effect even if thresholds are later adjusted.
FAQs
Why can’t reviewers see their Panel 2 assignments?
If Panel 2 assignments are not visible, it is typically due to one of the following:
Panel 1 is still open
Panel 2 will not appear until the Panel 1 review deadline has passed—even if reviewers have already completed their work.Applicants have not been advanced to Panel 2
Reviewers will only see assignments after applicants are moved forward (manually or automatically).Panel 2 is not fully configured
Panel 2 must have its own rubric, question visibility, and reviewer assignments set up.Reviewer is not assigned to Panel 2
Being assigned to Panel 1 does not automatically assign a reviewer to Panel 2.
Do Panel 1 and Panel 2 have separate settings?
Yes. When MPR is enabled, each panel must have its own configuration for:
Rubric Setup
Question Visibility
Reviewer Assignment
Panel 1 keeps (inherits) the original review group setup you already had. Panel 2 must be configured separately.
How do applicants advance to Panel 2?
You manage applicant advancement from the Applicants tab. You can choose:
Manual advancement: You select which applicants move to Panel 2.
Automatic advancement: Applicants advance based on a rule you set (example: advance all applicants with a Panel 1 score of 80% or higher).
Automatic advancement happens after the review deadline, so advancement is based on final scores, not in-progress scoring.
If I use automatic advancement, can I still manually override who advances?
Yes. Even when automatic advancement is enabled, you can still manually select or unselect applicants for Panel 2.
Manual selections always take priority.
Once you manually select/unselect an applicant, that decision stays in effect even if you later change the automatic threshold.
Do I need different reviewers for each panel?
Not necessarily. You can set up Panel 2 with the same reviewers as Panel 1 or a completely different group—depending on your process.
Many programs use different reviewers in Panel 2, so finalists get a second perspective from a smaller committee.
If MPR is enabled for our organization, do all review groups have to use it?
No. MPR is enabled and configured at the review-group level.
If a scholarship/review group is not set up with MPR, it will continue to use the normal single-panel review experience.