Submission guidelines

CID Voices publishes ideas, insights, and evidence shaping the future of global development evidence-based analysis, not opinion or political commentary. These guidelines explain what we publish, how long it should be, and what to send with your draft.

CID Voices amplifies the work and perspectives of the CID community, and gives a platform to the individuals and communities in countries around the world. Posts come from faculty affiliates, researchers, fellows, staff, students, and alumni.

CID Voices is not an op-ed page. Every post is grounded in research, data, or documented firsthand experience. We do not publish opinion pieces, personal commentary on current affairs, or political statements.

Research summaries

Fellows · PhD students · Researchers

A translation of a paper, working paper, or policy report into something a policymaker will read on a phone. The job is not to compress the paper, it's to surface the one finding that changes how someone acts, then show enough method that the finding is credible. 

Always link to the full paper or report so readers can go deeper.

Example:

Classroom, conference, & seminar takeaways

Students · Course Assistants · Fellows

What a course, seminar series, workshop, or conference taught you, written so that someone who wasn't in the room gets the lesson, not the itinerary. These are first-person and reflective, but they are not diary entries: the reader should leave with two or three transferable insights.

Name the course, the term, and the speakers or faculty involved. Where a guest's remarks were made in a closed session, confirm with them before quoting.

Reflections on fieldwork, study trips, and conference attendance follow the same shape.

Example: 

Thought leadership on the field

Senior Fellows · Faculty · Practitioners · Alumni

An argument about where development itself is heading or review of something that is working and could be applied in other contexts. Example topics may be aid architecture, development finance, research methods, or the institutions. These pieces are often longer and earn their length through structure: a diagnosis the reader recognizes, a framework that reorganizes it, and implications concrete enough to argue with.

 

Target approximately 1,000 words. Anything between 800 and 1,200 is comfortable. Pieces above 1,500 words need sign-off by the CID communications team.

Write for an intelligent reader who does not work in your subfield: a policymaker, a journalist, a student who may be enrolled in a different program. 

  • Write in plain English, avoiding academic jargon.
  • Spell out acronyms on first use, including familiar ones (ODA, LMIC, RCT).
  • Numbers carry units and comparisons. "0.26 percent of gross national income — the sharpest single-year fall on record" beats "a significant decline."
  • Name people and places precisely. Include titles and institutional affiliations on first mention.
  • Write about communities, not for them. Avoid framing that reduces people to deficits; describe what people do, not only what they lack.
  • Keep the register analytical. Describe what the evidence shows and what follows from it. Skip the rhetorical questions, the exhortations, and the moral framing — "this is unacceptable," "we must act now," "shamefully." A finding stated plainly carries more weight than a finding stated indignantly.
  • Attribute policy judgments to evidence, not to actors. "The 2025 budget cut reduced coverage by 12 percent" rather than "the administration gutted the program."
  • Style basics: serial comma, numerals for 10 and above, percent spelled out in text, dates as September 21, 2026. Follow HKS house style where it differs.

CID Voices uses hyperlinks, not footnotes or reference lists. Every factual claim that isn't yours should link to its source.

  • Link on descriptive anchor text — the name of the dataset, report, or paper — never on "here" or "this study."
  • Prefer primary sources: the dataset, the working paper, the agency release. Link to a news article only when the reporting itself is the source.
  • Link your own underlying paper or report at least once, ideally in the first third of the piece.

Every post needs a hero image and an author headshot. Most posts are better with one or two photos or charts. Send images as separate files, not embedded in the document. Images should be high resolution wherever possible. Author headshots are ideally square, 600 x 600 pt. 

We can only publish images you own, images licensed for editorial reuse, or images in the public domain. For every image, please send:

  • Credit line: photographer or source, and the platform where relevant (for example, "Photo: Shivam Singh via Unsplash").
  • Caption: one sentence of 15–25 words saying where, when, and what.
  • Alt text: one descriptive sentence for screen readers. Required on every image, including charts.
  • Permission: written consent for recognizable individuals, and for any photo taken in a classroom, clinic, or private setting.

Unsplash, Pexels, and Wikimedia Commons are reliable sources for free editorial imagery. Never pull an image from a search engine, a news site, or social media. If you have no usable hero image, say so in your submission and we'll source one.

Bylines read "By Full Name" or "By Name and Name" for co-authors, listed in the order you agree among yourselves. Bios sit at the foot of the post with a headshot.

Write the bio in the third person, 40–70 words for each author. Include, in this order: current role and institution, your connection to CID, one relevant credential, publication, or forthcoming book. 

Include a link to your personal site, LinkedIn, Google Scholar, or your program page. One link per author.

How to Submit

Email Valerie Krempus, Senior Director of Communications, with a two or three sentence pitch outlining your idea and estimated date to submit full article. You can expect a response with a few business days. If CID would like to move forward, you will be asked to submit a full draft.

Every submission is read by the CID communications team and some are also reviewed by a faculty affiliate or senior researcher for accuracy. Expect a decision within 1-2 weeks and publication within 2 months of the final approved draft.

A few final notes:

  • We edit for clarity, length, accuracy, and house style, and we may rewrite the headline and standfirst for the web. You'll see the edited version and approve it before it goes live. 
  • Analysis and conclusions are the author's own and do not represent a position of CID, HKS, or Harvard University. CID publishes work reaching a range of evidence-based conclusions and does not require posts to reflect an institutional line.
  • The most common reason a draft is returned is a conclusion the evidence in the post doesn't carry, or a passage that has slipped into advocacy. We'll usually ask you to cut or re-ground it rather than decline the piece.
  • We publish original work. If a version has appeared elsewhere, or you plan to republish, tell us upfront. Cross-posting is usually no issue, but there are some additional steps we need to take.
  • Published posts are shared through CID's newsletter and social channels. Send your handles if you'd like to be tagged.
  • Email the CID team for any needed revisions or updates. Substantive corrections are noted at the foot of the post.