ZipRecruiter

Log In

1

Application Reviewer Jobs (NOW HIRING)

Mercor

Reviewer

New York, NY · Remote

$70 - $150/hr

Application Process (Takes 20-30 mins to complete) * Upload resume * AI interview based on your ... Our team reviews applications daily. Please complete your AI interview and application steps to be ...

Collabera

Medical Reviewer/Safety Reviewer

Springfield, IL · On-site

$40K - $65K/mo

Join to apply for the Medical Reviewer/Safety Reviewer role at Collabera Join to apply for the ... Excellent critical thinking and application skills required Ability to speak up and support medical ...

City of Branson

Plan Reviewer

Branson, MO · On-site

$26.43/hr

At least two (2) years of experience related to enforcement and/or application of property ... Review and approve building and construction plans to ensure compliance with applicable codes and ...

Harris County

ROW Plan Reviewer

Houston, TX · On-site

The Plan Reviewer position resides within the Public Review Team of the Harris County Permits ... You may attach a resume to the application as supporting documentation but ONLY information stated ...

Harris County, TX

ROW Plan Reviewer

Houston, TX · On-site

The Plan Reviewer position resides within the Public Review Team of the Harris County Permits ... You may attach a resume to the application as supporting documentation but ONLY information stated ...

Mercor

Content Reviewer - Fully Remote

New York, NY · Remote

$70 - $150/hr

Application Process (Takes 20-30 mins to complete) * Upload resume * AI interview based on your ... Our team reviews applications daily. Please complete your AI interview and application steps to be ...

Harris County

ROW Plan Reviewer

Houston, TX · On-site

The Plan Reviewer position resides within the Public Review Team of the Harris County Permits ... You may attach a resume to the application as supporting documentation but ONLY information stated ...

next page

Showing results 1-20

People also search for

All JobsApplication Reviewer Jobs

Application Reviewer information

See salary details

$39.5K

$121.5K

$202K

How much do application reviewer jobs pay per year?

As of May 29, 2026, the average yearly pay for application reviewer in the United States is $121,466.00, according to ZipRecruiter salary data. Most workers in this role earn between $96,500.00 and $142,000.00 per year, depending on experience, location, and employer.

What are the key skills and qualifications needed to thrive as an Application Reviewer, and why are they important?

To thrive as an Application Reviewer, you need strong analytical skills, attention to detail, and a solid understanding of relevant evaluation criteria, often supported by a degree in a related field. Familiarity with applicant tracking systems (ATS), databases, and digital documentation tools is typically required. Excellent written communication, objectivity, and time management are crucial soft skills for consistently fair and efficient reviews. These competencies ensure accurate, unbiased assessments and contribute to effective selection processes.

What are some common challenges faced by Application Reviewers, and how can they be addressed?

Application Reviewers often face the challenge of managing large volumes of applications while maintaining consistency and fairness in evaluations. Balancing efficiency with thoroughness can be demanding, especially during peak application periods. Staying organized through standardized rubrics and regular calibration meetings with the review team can help ensure objective assessments. Additionally, clear communication with colleagues and ongoing training on evaluation criteria are key to overcoming these challenges and delivering high-quality recommendations.

What are application reviewers?

Application reviewers are professionals responsible for evaluating and assessing applications submitted for jobs, schools, grants, or other programs. They review submitted materials to determine if applicants meet the required criteria and standards. Application reviewers play a key role in the selection process by ensuring fairness and consistency in evaluating each candidate. Their work helps organizations identify the best-suited applicants for available opportunities.

What is the difference between Application Reviewer vs Application Analyst?

AspectApplication ReviewerApplication Analyst
Required CredentialsHigh school diploma or equivalent; some roles may require a bachelor's degreeBachelor's degree in related field; certifications may be preferred
Work EnvironmentOffice setting, often in government or corporate sectorsOffice or remote, analyzing data and processing applications
Employer & Industry UsageUsed in government agencies, healthcare, and finance sectorsCommon in IT, finance, and administrative sectors
Search & Comparison IntentUnderstanding job duties and qualifications for application review rolesComparing roles involving data analysis and application processing

Application Reviewers primarily evaluate applications for completeness and eligibility, focusing on initial screening. Application Analysts perform more in-depth data analysis, interpret application data, and may recommend decisions. While both roles involve reviewing applications, Analysts typically require more technical skills and higher education, and their work involves detailed data analysis beyond initial screening.

More about Application Reviewer jobs
What cities are hiring for Application Reviewer jobs? Cities with the most Application Reviewer job openings:
What are the most commonly searched types of Application Reviewer jobs? The most popular types of Application Reviewer jobs are:
What states have the most Application Reviewer jobs? States with the most job openings for Application Reviewer jobs include:
What job categories do people searching Application Reviewer jobs look for? The top searched job categories for Application Reviewer jobs are:
Application Reviewer jobs near you
Infographic showing various Application Reviewer job openings in the United States as of May 2026, with employment types broken down into 4% Full Time, 73% Part Time, 4% Temporary, and 19% Contract. Highlights an 92% Physical, 2% Hybrid, and 6% Remote job distribution, with an average salary of $121,466 per year, or $58.4 per hour.
Request for Proposals: Designing Equitable Review Practices

Request for Proposals: Designing Equitable Review Practices

American Association of University Women

Washington, DC

Full-time

Posted 28 days ago

Job description

Background
The American Association of University Women (AAUW) is committed to advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) through all aspects of its Fellowships and Grants programs. As part of this commitment, AAUW seeks to strengthen both the consistency and equity of its application review process.
To support this effort, AAUW is seeking a consultant to design and deliver tailored implicit bias and equitable review training for both application reviewers and panelists, while also reviewing and
strengthening the evaluation rubrics that guide funding decisions. This work will address how bias can
influence decision-making at multiple stages of review and ensure that evaluation criteria and scoring practices promote fairness, transparency, and consistency.
In addition to training delivery, this engagement is intended to build AAUW staff capacity to develop, assess, and refine evaluation rubrics using equity-centered frameworks over time. The consultant will ground all work in AAUW’s specific processes, materials, and observed challenges to ensure relevance, practical application and long-term impact.
Note on terms:
  • “Application reviewers” refer to reviewers who conduct a first round of eligibility checks for applications
  • “Panelists” or “Panel reviewers” refer to reviewers who conduct a technical scoring of an application based on merit and make recommendations to AAUW on which applications to fund.
Objectives
  • Increase application reviewers’ and panelists’ awareness of implicit bias and how it manifests in grant review processes.
  • Provide practical, AAUW-specific tools to recognize and mitigate bias during AAUW application review, panel review, and panel deliberations.
  • Develop differentiated training approaches for application reviewers and panelists, including a tailored “light” training for reviewers that reflects their role in the process.
  • Review and strengthen AAUW’s evaluation rubrics to ensure they promote equitable, consistent, and transparent assessment practices.
  • Build AAUW staff capacity by providing guidance and frameworks for developing and updating equitable evaluation rubrics in the future.
  • Support AAUW’s long-term commitment to DEI by creating recorded training resources for future application reviewer and panelist cohorts.
Outcomes/Success Indicators
By the end of this engagement:
  • Application reviewers and review panelists will be able to identify common forms of implicit bias that can influence grant review processes, including bias related to institutional prestige, field of study, writing style, and identity-based assumptions.
  • Review panelists will be equipped to recognize moments during application review and panel deliberations where bias may arise and apply strategies to mitigate its influence.
  • Application reviewers and review panelists will apply AAUW’s evaluation criteria more consistently and equitably when assessing applications.
  • Stakeholder confidence will be strengthened in AAUW’s scoring rubrics and evaluation guidelines to make fair and transparent funding recommendations.
  • Review panelists, and application reviewers, as applicable, will be prepared to engage in review and panel discussions using shared strategies and language that support equitable and inclusive decision-making.
  • AAUW staff will have improved capacity to design, assess, and refine evaluation rubrics using equity-centered frameworks and best practices.
  • AAUW will be equipped with 2 recorded trainings and supporting materials for application reviewers and review panelists, for continued use.
Scope of Work
Consultant Responsibilities
  1. Orientation amp; Context-Setting (July – August 2026)
    • Meet with AAUW staff to gain an understanding of both application reviewer and panelist processes, current practices, and common challenges.
    • Review relevant AAUW materials (application reviewer and panelist guidelines, scoring rubrics, DEI commitments).
    • Engage with Program Managers to gather real examples, case studies, and scenarios from past review cycles to inform training design.
    • Identify key points in the review process where bias is most likely to emerge.
  1. Rubric Review amp; Equity Calibration (July – August 2026)
    • Conduct a detailed review of AAUW’s evaluation rubrics across programs.
    • Identify potential sources of bias, ambiguity, or inconsistency in criteria and scoring guidance.
    • Provide recommendations to strengthen alignment with equitable assessment practices.
    • Collaborate with AAUW staff to refine and calibrate rubrics to support fairness and consistency
    • Develop and deliver a framework or set of guidelines that AAUW staff can use to create and update rubrics through an equity-centered lens going forward.
  2. Curriculum Development (July through October 2026)
    • Develop two tailored training experiences, sequenced to align with AAUW’s review process and timeline:Application reviewer training (Early September – Recorded session)
      1. Share draft training outline and materials with AAUW staff by mid-August 2026 for review and feedback. Application review onboarding will take place in early September.
      2. Use of AAUW-specific examples to ensure relevance and engagement.
      3. Emphasis on consistency, checklist use, and minimizing bias in independent reviews.
      4. Focus on bias in initial application assessment and scoring.
      5. Short, highly targeted training tailored to the reviewer role.
      6. Panelist training (1.5-hour live virtual training - Recorded)
        • Concise theoretical overview of implicit bias (definition, mechanisms, impacts).
        • Specific focus on bias within fellowship and grant review processes (e.g., institutional prestige, field of study, writing style, identity-based assumptions) and panel deliberations.
        • Integration of AAUW-specific scenarios, case studies, scoring, and decision-making.
  • Practical strategies and tools for equitable scoring, discussion, and decision-making.
  • Clear guidance on applying updated AAUW rubrics equitably.
  • Share draft training outline and materials with AAUW staff by late October 2026 for review and feedback. Panelist reviewer onboarding will commence in late November or early December 2026.
  • Design both trainings for active engagement and practical application, prioritizing AAUW-specific context over general theory.
  • Incorporate interactive elements (polls, reflection prompts, short exercises or scenario-based discussions as appropriate).
  1. Delivery (early September 2026 - January 2027)
    • Deliver the application reviewer training in early September 2026.
    • Deliver the live 1.5-hour training session to the 2027–28 panelists during the first week of December 2026.
    • Facilitate discussion and provide actionable takeaways for participants.
    • Ensure all sessions and materials are accessible and inclusive (captioning, plain language, etc.).
  2. Recording amp; Materials (early September 2026 – January 2027)
    • AAUW will record the live training for AAUW’s internal use and future panelist cohorts. AAUW will retain ownership of the recording and all materials provided by the consultant and may retain, store, and reuse them for organizational purposes.
    • The consultant will provide AAUW with:
      1. Final presentation slides and materials for both trainings.
      2. Reflection questions, tools, and resources in a shareable format.
      3. Rubric framework/guidance documentation for internal staff use
  3. Project Management amp; Communication (Ongoing throughout engagement)
The consultant will participate in regular check-ins with AAUW staff to support alignment, progress tracking and timely feedback. This will include:
  • Biweekly (or otherwise mutually agreed upon) check-in meetings during active phases of the project
  • Ongoing communication via email or other agreed-upon channels
  • Advance sharing of draft materials to allow sufficient time for AAUW review and feedback
The consultant will proactively communicate progress, flag any challenges or risks and incorporate feedback to ensure deliverables align with AAUW’s goals and timelines.
AAUW Responsibilities
  • Provide consultant with an overview of the reviewer and panelist review process, including materials and examples.
  • Facilitate access to Program Managers for development of real-world scenarios and case studies.
  • Coordinate scheduling and communication with reviewers and panelists.
  • Manage technical aspects of training delivery (platform, registration, and recording).
  • Provide timely feedback on draft materials and rubric recommendations.
  • Gather participant feedback on trainings.
Deliverables
  • Draft Application Reviewer training content by mid-August 2026.
  • Finalized Application Reviewer training materials by late August 2026.
  • Application Reviewer training delivered (recorded) by early September 2026.
  • Draft panelist training materials by mid-October 2026.
  • Finalized panelist training materials by late November 2026.
  • One live virtual 1.5-hour panelist training session delivered in late November or early December 2026.
  • Recordings and final resources provided by January 2027.
Timeline
  • July - August 2026: Orientation, context-setting, and scenario gathering.
  • July - August 2026: Rubric review and equity calibration.
  • July through late August 2026: Reviewer training finalized.
  • Early September 2026: Application reviewers begin; training available.
  • September through November 2026: Panelist training refined and finalized.
  • Late November or First week of December 2026: Panelist training delivered.
  • December 2026 through January 2027: Final deliverables submitted.

Consultant Qualifications

• At least 7-10 years of demonstrated expertise in DEI, implicit bias, and adult learning/educational design.

• Experience designing and delivering virtual training sessions for professional audiences.

• Familiarity with grant review or academic funding processes preferred.

• Strong facilitation skills and ability to engage diverse participants in interactive learning.

• Ability to create accessible materials suitable for a wide range of participants.

• Preference will be given to AAUW alumnae.

Application Instructions
Interested consultants should submit the following:
  1. Cover letter outlining experience with DEI, implicit bias training, and relevant grant review or academic expertise.
  2. Resume or CV highlighting training design, facilitation experience, and qualifications.
  3. If applying as a team or firm, include descriptions of each team member’s roles and an explanation of how they complement one another.
  4. Two to three sample previous work products. Include links to products.
  5. Proposed approach for this project, including timeline, key milestones, and methods for engaging participants.
  6. Proposed budget including consultant fees, materials development, and any other anticipated costs. Budget should be provided in USD.
  7. Three references from previous clients or organizations for whom similar work was delivered.
Submission Guidelines:
  • Submissions should be no more than 6 pages (excluding resume/CV).
  • Submissions should be in English.
  • Questions about this solicitation must be submitted to awards@aauw.org by May 7, 2026, at
11:59pm ET. Responses to all questions received will be posted on the AAUW website by May 14, 2026.
  • Applications should be emailed to awards@aauw.org with the subject line “Implicit Bias Consultant Application” DEADLINE EXTENDED : May 28, 2026 at 11:59pm Eastern Time.
Shortlisted applicants may be requested for an interview with AAUW staff as part of the selection process.
Request for Proposals: Designing Equitable Review Practices
Questions and Responses
May 14, 2026
  1. Question: The RFP mentions that the panel training session will be held virtually. I wanted to clarify whether other project activities such as the check-ins with AAUW staff or other deliverables require in-person attendance or may also be completed remotely. This will help me develop a budget that accurately reflects both the resources and engagement approach that best meets AAUW's needs.
Response: All activities may be held virtually or remotely, as the consultant may be based anywhere. There is no expectation of any in-person engagement.

Apply