LEADER 05817nam 2200733 a 450 001 9910971020203321 005 20251116140701.0 010 $a9786610246908 010 $a9781280246906 010 $a1280246901 010 $a9780309586320 010 $a0309586321 010 $a9780585143125 010 $a0585143129 035 $a(CKB)110986584751400 035 $a(EBL)3376093 035 $a(SSID)ssj0000195613 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)11179003 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000195613 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)10131480 035 $a(PQKB)11505675 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC3376093 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL3376093 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10055087 035 $a(CaONFJC)MIL24690 035 $a(OCoLC)923261099 035 $a(Perlego)4738628 035 $a(BIP)975342 035 $a(EXLCZ)99110986584751400 100 $a19940318d1994 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurcn||||||||| 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 00$aMajor award decisionmaking at the National Science Foundation /$fPanel on NSF Decisionmaking for Major Awards, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy 205 $a1st ed. 210 $aWashington, D.C. $cNational Academy Press$d1994 215 $a1 online resource (xii, 160 pages) 300 $a"National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine." 300 $a"B-274"--T.p. verso. 311 08$a9780309050296 311 08$a0309050294 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references (p. 156-160). 327 $a""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"" 327 $a""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"" 327 $a""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"" 327 $a""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"" 327 $a""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"" 327 $a""Recommendation 7: Reorienting the NSB Workload"" 330 $aAs part of its mission to foster high-quality scientific and engineering research, the National Science Foundation (NSF) plans, grants, and administers major awards to universities and other research institutions for national research facilities, multidisciplinary research centers, and other large-scale research projects. Although few in number, less than 100, such projects account for about 30 percent of NSF's annual research budget. This book provides a useful overview of how such projects are planned, reviews proposals for merit, and evaluates ongoing projects for renewal awards. The panel makes a series of recommendations for strengthening major award decisionmaking. 606 $aScience$xAwards$zUnited States 606 $aResearch grants$zUnited States 615 0$aScience$xAwards 615 0$aResearch grants 676 $a507.9 712 02$aCommittee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (U.S.).$bPanel on NSF Decisionmaking for Major Awards. 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910971020203321 996 $aMajor award decisionmaking at the National Science Foundation$94363571 997 $aUNINA