04954nam 2200637 a 450 991077876990332120230124180918.01-280-24690-197866102469080-309-58632-10-585-14312-9(CKB)110986584751400(EBL)3376093(SSID)ssj0000195613(PQKBManifestationID)11179003(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000195613(PQKBWorkID)10131480(PQKB)11505675(MiAaPQ)EBC3376093(Au-PeEL)EBL3376093(CaPaEBR)ebr10055087(CaONFJC)MIL24690(OCoLC)923261099(EXLCZ)9911098658475140019940318d1994 uy 0engurcn|||||||||txtrdacontentcrdamediacrrdacarrierMajor award decisionmaking at the National Science Foundation[electronic resource] /Panel on NSF Decisionmaking for Major Awards, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public PolicyWashington, D.C. National Academy Press19941 online resource (xii, 160 pages)"National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine.""B-274"--T.p. verso.0-309-05029-4 Includes bibliographical references (p. 156-160).""MAJOR AWARD DECISION MAKING AT THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION""; ""Copyright""; ""Preface""; ""Contents""; ""Executive Summary""; ""BACKGROUND""; ""FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS""; ""Clear Rules of the Game""; ""Primacy of Technical Merit""; ""Appropriate Roles of Peer Reviewers and Staff""; ""Public Documentation of Decision making""; ""More Stringent Setting of Priorities""; ""RECOMMENDATIONS""; ""Recommendation 1: Justification for Major Project Awards""; ""Recommendation 2: Involvement and Support of the Research Community in Planning""""Recommendation 3: Primacy of Technical Merit Criteria""""Recommendation 4: Human Resource Development and Equal Opportunity as a Criterion""; ""Recommendation 5: Cost Sharing as a Criterion""; ""Recommendation 6: A Two-Phase Merit Review Process""; ""Recommendation 7: Reorienting the NSB Workload""; ""Recommendation 8: Planning the Review Process and Criteria""; ""Recommendation 9: More and Better Public Documentation of Award Decisions""; ""Recommendation 10: More Recompetitions""; ""1 Major Awards at NSF ""; ""OVERVIEW OF MAJOR AWARDS""; ""MAJOR AWARDS AND MERIT REVIEW""""MAJOR AWARDS AND THE NSB""""NSF ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING FOR MERIT REVIEW""; ""OVERALL CONCLUSIONS""; ""Clear Rules of the Game""; ""Primacy of Technical Merit""; ""Appropriate Roles of Peer Reviewers and Staff""; ""Public Documentation of Decision making""; ""More Stringent Setting of Priorities""; ""2 Planning Major Projects ""; ""BACKGROUND: PROJECT PLANNING AND BUDGETING AT NSF""; ""Long-Range Planning at NSF""; ""Annual Budget Process""; ""MAJOR PROJECT PLANNING AND BUDGETING""; ""Capital Facilities Planning""; ""FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON PLANNING AND BUDGETING""; ""Findings""""Recommendations""""Recommendation 1: Justification for Major Project Awards""; ""Recommendation 2: Involvement and Support of the Research Community in Planning""; ""3 Awarding Major Projects: Criteria and Review Procedures ""; ""BACKGROUND: THE MERIT REVIEW PROCESS AT NSF""; ""Current Review Criteria""; ""Review and Selection Criteria for Major Project Awards""; ""Findings and Recommendations on Criteria""; ""Recommendation 3: Primacy of Technical Merit Criteria""; ""Recommendation 4: Human Resource Development and Equal Opportunity as a Criterion""""Recommendation 5: Cost Sharing as a Criterion""""NSF PROCEDURES FOR REVIEWING PROPOSALS""; ""Proposal Review Process""; ""Peer Review Modes""; ""Selection of Reviewers""; ""Policies and Procedures for Dealing with Bias and Conflict of Interest""; ""Award Decision making""; ""Findings and Recommendations on Review Procedures""; ""Recommendation 6: A Two-Phase Merit Review Process""; ""4 Awarding Major Projects: NSB Role, Review Process Design, and Decision Documentation ""; ""NSB ROLE AND PROCEDURES""; ""Findings and Recommendations on the NSB Role""""Recommendation 7: Reorienting the NSB Workload""ScienceAwardsUnited StatesResearch grantsUnited StatesScienceAwardsResearch grants507.9Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (U.S.).Panel on NSF Decisionmaking for Major Awards.MiAaPQMiAaPQMiAaPQBOOK9910778769903321Major award decisionmaking at the National Science Foundation3772430UNINA