National Research Initiative A Vital Competitive Grants Program in Food, Fiber, and Natural-Resources Research (2000) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 The National Research Initiative Competitive Grants Program
3 The National Research Initiative Competitive Grants Program
Pages 29-40
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 29... ...
High-quality research also impacts science and technology themselves—that is, on the direction and development of the scientific enterprise and its technical implementation an attribute closely related to relevance. Fairness refers to the likelihood that a proposal will be evaluated with strict adherence to a set of evaluation criteria related to the quality and relevance of the proposed research.
|
From page 30... ...
The remaining two attributes of a successful competitive grants program are relevance and flexibility. A relevant grants program provides funding for research that will most effectively further the goals of the program and meet national needs.
|
From page 31... ...
Coble, representing the Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, who testified before the committee that panel reviewers consistently rated proposal quality as excellent. Similarly, past chief scientists unanimously concluded that NRI proposals were of high quality.
|
From page 32... ...
Zimbelman, chairman of the Coalition of Funding Agricultural Research Missions, testified that "the record shows the NRI has supported very high quality research and the results have been meaningful." Kenneth E Olsen, dairy and animal health specialist with the American Farm Bureau Federation, testified that "within the scientific community the NRI is well respected for top quality basic research." Tony Cavalieri, of Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.
|
From page 35... ...
A definitive record of patents and publications resulting from NRI research is not available, nor is a continuing evaluation of current applications and
|
From page 36... ...
This delicate balance is maintained principally by staff, although panel managers can be instrumental. The committee believes that high-quality merit-based peer review is an essential component of a fair competitive grants program because it subjects all proposals to systematic scrutiny by knowledgeable specialists and requires ratings of quality and feasibility that constitute valuable advice to agency staff.
|
From page 37... ...
Ranking involves placing a proposal in one of six funding priority groups (outstanding, high, medium, and low priorities for funding; some merit; and not to be funded) and then ranking its merit relative to that of other proposals in the priority group.
|
From page 38... ...
. Respondents with review-panel experience in other competitive grants programs were especially complimentary of the NRI peer-review process.
|
From page 39... ...
The narrative history that NRI staff provided to the committee suggests, however, that the evolution of the six mandated divisions into the 26 current programs was overwhelmingly the result of upper-level management decisions (especially spinoffs of existing programs into the Agriculture Systems program) rather than the result of proposal submissions.
|
From page 40... ...
That finding is based on the results of the committee's survey of applicants, awardees, administrators of land grant institutions, and industry; the views of former chief scientists and individuals from federal agencies; and the personal perspectives of committee members and their colleagues. Documentation of successfully completed projects and their use and application was factored into the committee's assessment, as were the proportion of applications funded and successful renewal rates.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.