The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative’s core values center around people, technology, collaboration, and open science. We adhere to those values in both proposal selection and evaluation of progress.
Applications will be evaluated for their expected impact, the quality of the plugin project(s) involved and the feasibility of the proposal—each of which will be assessed through quantitative and qualitative factors. Relevant materials will be provided by the applicants and obtained by CZI from publicly available sources where possible (e.g., GitHub or other public code repositories). Independent expert review will be solicited, and final decisions will be made by CZI staff in consultation with our expert advisors.
Impact will assess the importance of the plugin project(s) involved in the proposal to science and the bioimage analysis ecosystem, in alignment with our mission to support the science and technology that will make it possible to cure, prevent, or manage all diseases by the end of the century.
For translation and maintenance grants, reviewers will evaluate:
- Demonstrated scientific impact of the existing plugin or project,
- The value to the plugin project provided by the proposed scope of work,
- The role of the plugin project in the image analysis ecosystem, and
- Alignment of the plugin project to areas currently prioritized by CZI Science.
For infrastructure grants, reviewers will evaluate:
- The value provided to the napari plugin developer community by unlocking foundational infrastructure that other plugins can use to deliver value to their end users (e.g. through cloud computing, imaging file type support, etc.).
In addition to the award-specific criteria, all applicants will be evaluated according to the following criteria:
- Distribution of source code under an OSI-approved open source software license;
- Code quality as evidenced by good conformance to best practices of open source software development, such as automated testing, documentation for users, and guidelines for contributors; and
- Interoperability/compatibility with other tools in the scientific Python ecosystem.
Alongside qualitative materials, expert evaluation may utilize metrics when available and applicable such as:
- Number of users and recent growth,
- Adoption within relevant communities,
- Number of bug reports, feature requests, and pull requests by the user community,
- Number of support requests in public forums,
- Number of citations or mentions of the software project in scientific literature, and
- Number of potential contributors and diversity of the organizations they represent.
Quality will assess the health of the plugin project and its compliance with best practices in open source development. It will again be assessed qualitatively and quantitatively. Where available and applicable, reviewers will evaluate:
- Composition and leadership of team,
- Plugin project communications and community engagement,
- Availability of tutorials and examples,
- Quality and comprehensiveness of documentation, and
- Existence and coverage of automated testing.
Feasibility will assess the plan of work described in the proposal and whether it can be accomplished given the requested budget and key personnel involved. Reviewers will evaluate the following based on qualitative materials:
- Specificity and clarity of plan of work to be accomplished,
- Proposed use of funds (relative to plan of work),
- Likelihood of the work being accomplished, and
- Plan for tracking and validating progress against goals.
There is no expectation of any specific number of awards for this RFA program. The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative reserves the sole right to not recommend the funding of any applications. CZI does not provide individual feedback on decisions for unfunded proposals.