Yes! I had a discrete cheer in your direction. Can't wait to see the impacts of this - really exciting

Check you've covered everything that was raised.
Check your tone is professional (especially if you've had rough reviews).
Check you are still compliant with the scheme (don't try to accommodate a reviewer by suggesting something you can't do.)
Check your interpretation of all comments
Celebrate!

There's a lot of nuance in these suggestions so it is REALLY important to get someone to look over your response. Ideally someone who has experience of panels and reviewing, but there's a lot of common sense. A few final thoughts on prompts for you and your ally before your send the response.

Don't assume that the reviewer fully understands the scheme or call. If a comment seems to want you to do something that you can't, acknowledge the comment, but say it falls outside the scope of the scheme. Don't tie yourself in knots - get a sense check from someone.

Some thoughts on scores and comments - they are often slightly out of kilter. Numbers are so subjective (my 5 might be your 3) so panels generally look for consistency with comments. So don't panic if the numbers aren't great - look at the comments. Good panels look at both.

You may also see a review misinterpret or misunderstand something. Gently clarify - remember that they may have been confused by your choice of words, so don't dismiss their point. But also don't throw yourself on your sword.

Many fields have different "factions" so if you get a review from someone who disagrees with your position, acknowledge the different perspectives but explain the value of your approach, particularly if your work might bridge gaps

You will have had to make difficult choices about what to include in your proposal so reviewer comments often request for more detail. Set out what you could add and look for common themes. Unless indicated otherwise, you can decide which structure works (i.e. by theme rather than reviewer)

But hopefully most of your reviews will be constructive! For the really positive reviews, double check for any queries you might miss, keep their praise in mind if you're going to face an interview, think about how these comments might be woven into the narrative of your response.

If a review really upsets or undermines you, let the research office/equivalent in your institution/organisation know. They can complain on your behalf. Keep your focus on your application for now.

Downright rude reviews don't land well with the panels I've been involved with. Funders usually catch real howlers and won't pass them on, but it's a tricky line to draw. A good panel will flag a bad reviewer, so leave that to them. You focus on extracting what you can address. In a calm tone.

Then I make a checklist of what the response has to include, prioritising the things that will damage the application if not addressed. But I include everything. I've seen proposals fail when the response misses a point of clarification from a positive review because they focused on a negative one

I thought about the categories that I've seen - this helps me navigate the response - hopefully these make sense
Positive
Points of Clarification
Didn't have the room
Fair point
Misinterpretation
Challenge
Dismissal
Rude
Organising comments like this helps me decide how to structure the response

I always start by writing out everything that could be responded to, even if the response is "thank you, I agree". It's easy to miss points of clarification made in a positive tone so make sure you've caught everything. Also, those positive comments are helpful if another reviewer disagrees.

Then I asked for the questions people had. Common themes - reviewers contradicting each other, how much new information to bring in to response, questions that are at odds with the scheme, irrelevant comments, and (for want of a better word) ego.

We started with the panel that would look at the responses. Every panel is different, but for this scheme they are a moderating panel, unlikely to be experts in the same field as the applicant. So response to reviews is vital - can't assume panel will know what's fair, nonsense or obvious