Peer review is a well-known, pervasive and most reliable method for assessment of research proposals. But with the strength of peer review, it also has some various limitations and shortcomings. This study suggests the use of bibliometric indicators as a counterbalance of shortcomings and mistakes in peer review. Bibliometric indicators suggested in this study are somewhat different from the conventional ones. Bibliometric indicators with limited number of papers, use of impact factor and discrimination first and corresponding authors from co-authors may produce a more resonable indicators. In this way bibliometric indicators can be considered as complementary to a peer review.