NSF PR 97-28 - April 8, 1997
This material is available primarily for archival purposes. Telephone
numbers or other contact information may be out of date; please see current
contact information at media
contacts.
NSF to Adopt New Merit Review Criteria
The National Science Board (NSB) has approved new
criteria for evaluating funding proposals submitted
to the National Science Foundation (NSF). The Board,
which is the governing body of NSF, took the action
at its March 28 meeting.
The approval culminates several months of discussion
with the research and education community and analysis
by a special task force, chaired by NSB member Warren
Washington of the National Center for Atmospheric
Research.
The Board action clears the way for the first change
in NSF's merit review criteria since 1981. NSF expects
to implement the new criteria beginning October 1,
1997.
"Clearly the review process is critical to our effort
to foster the highest standards of excellence and
accountability in the use of limited funds," said
NSF Director Neal Lane. "Our current system has a
track record of success; but now we have an improved
system to ensure that success continues and that excellence
remains our first priority."
NSF receives nearly 30,000 new proposals for funding
per year, and funds about one-third of them. Funding
decisions are made largely through the process of
merit review, including expert evaluation by selected
peers. NSF receives more than 170,000 such reviews
each year to help evaluate funding proposals.
"We know from surveys of our reviewers and staff that
the current criteria are not always well understood
or uniformly applied," said NSF Acting Deputy Director
Joe Bordogna. "The new criteria are clearer and easier
to apply."
The need to reexamine the current criteria was prompted
by an evolution in NSF programs since 1981 to include
a stronger focus on broad educational initiatives,
the integration of research and education, and partnered
research activities. It was also prompted by the adoption
in 1994 of a new NSF strategic plan.
"The new criteria can be applied more flexibly to
this broad range of activities; and they better reflect
the philosophy and spirit of our strategic plan,"
said Bordogna.
They also reflect the concerns of the science and
engineering community, solicited during an eight-week
comment period during which draft criteria were published
and their merits debated. Hundreds of scientists,
engineers and educators offered both support and critique,
as well as specific suggestions. Many of those suggestions
are incorporated into the guidance that will accompany
the new criteria.
Currently the agency asks reviewers to comment on
four aspects of a proposal: (1) researcher performance
competence, (2) intrinsic merit of the research, (3)
utility or relevance of the research, and (4) effect
on the infrastructure of science and engineering.
Under the new criteria, reviewers are asked to answer
two questions regarding proposals for funding: (1)
What is the intellectual merit and quality of the
proposed activity? and (2) What are the broader impacts
of the proposed activity?
"Most importantly, they continue to make 'excellence'
the hallmark of our merit review process," Bordogna
emphasized.
Editors: See related documents at http://www.nsf.gov/home/special/notices.htm:
Merit Review Task Force Final Report (March 1997)
and FY 1996 Report on the NSF Merit Review System
(February 1997).
|