FY2010-2012 Division of Human Resources Development Combined COV COV PRESENTATION TO ADVISORY COMMITTEE January 7, 2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MRSEC Directors Meeting Focus on MRSEC Working Groups NSF, Thursday June 24, 2010 Sean Jones, Tom Rieker, and Charles Ying MRSEC Program Directors.
Advertisements

CDCs 21 Goals. CDC Strategic Imperatives 1. Health impact focus: Align CDCs people, strategies, goals, investments & performance to maximize our impact.
The Readiness Centers Initiative Early Education and Care Board Meeting Tuesday, May 11, 2010.
The subcommittee recognizes the profound changes in US demographics and skill levels that currently exist, and the changes that are predicted for the.
Breast Cancer Research Program
Report of the Committee of Visitors Energy Frontier Research Centers and Joint Center for Artificial Photosynthesis Energy Innovation Hub Office of Basic.
Engaging Patients and Other Stakeholders in Clinical Research
NSF Regional Grants Conference St. Louis, MO
1 Response to the Employee Survey Recommendations.
Dr. Kathleen M. Smith Director, Office of School Improvement (804) (804) (Cell) Dr. Dorothea Shannon.
NSF Merit Review Process NSF Regional Grants Conference October 4 - 5, 2004 St. Louis, MO Hosted by: Washington University.
Math and Science Partnership National Science Foundation Building Capacity in the Field Building Capacity in the Field A Cycle of Continuous Improvement.
NSF Proposal and Merit Review Process. Outline Proposal review process –Submission –Administrative Review –Merit Review –Decisions.
NSF Research Proposal Review Guidelines. Criterion 1: What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity? How important is the proposed activity.
NSF Merit Review Criteria Revision Background. Established Spring 2010 Rationale: – More than 13 years since the last in-depth review and revision of.
Proposal Writing Workshop Features of Effective Proposals: Fellowship Track Washington, DC January 9, 2014.
National Science Foundation Strategies for Broadening Participation DMR Facilities Directors’ Meeting Tallahassee, FL September 20, 2007 Roosevelt Y. Johnson,
The IGERT Program Preliminary Proposals June 2008 Carol Van Hartesveldt IGERT Program Director IGERT Program Director.
Addressing the Challenges of Graduate and Post-graduate Training in the Geosciences Margaret Leinen Assistant Director for Geosciences National Science.
BSSD Response to the Committee of Visitors June 2008 review report The COV was charged to assess the processes used to: –solicit, review, and recommend.
Overview of the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) Program Office of Integrative Activities National Science.
Milwaukee Math Partnership Year 1 External Evaluation Lizanne DeStefano, Director Dean Grosshandler, Project Coordinator University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
How many balls can you juggle at one time?. Identify 7 balls extension middle managers juggle every day in leading the extension program Identify strategies.
Partnerships for the Future 1 Our Relationship and Our Future: The Role of State Associations Florida Regional Councils Association Sheri Coven Director.
Reorganization at NCAR Presentation to the UCAR Board of Trustees February 25, 2004.
Innovation through Institutional Integration (I 3 ) National Science Foundation Directorate for Education and Human Resources.
Partnerships and Broadening Participation Dr. Nathaniel G. Pitts Director, Office of Integrative Activities May 18, 2004 Center.
National Science Foundation 1 Evaluating the EHR Portfolio Judith A. Ramaley Assistant Director Education and Human Resources.
Promoting Diversity at the Graduate Level in Mathematics: A National Forum MSRI October 16, 2008 Deborah Lockhart Executive Officer, Division of Mathematical.
EPSCoR 2030 Workshop Dialogue. EPSCoR 2030 Workshop Thanks to P. Hill, A. Echols, all participants NSF is currently reviewing the report Constructive.
Development of the Strategic Vision and Where We Go From Here? Dan Dooley Vice President.
BFA Update National Science Foundation Advisory Committee for Business and Operations March 31, 2004 Tom Cooley NSF Chief Financial Officer Director, Office.
NSF IGERT proposals Yang Zhao Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Wayne State University.
Professor Mick Fuller Chair of UK Council for Doctoral Education Member of Steering Committee, EUA-CDE Head of Graduate School, Plymouth University.
Session 6: Summary of Discussion A. Institutional Barriers and Potential Solutions 1. Natural environment does not have national or institutional boundaries,
1 Direction scientifique Networks of Excellence objectives  Reinforce or strengthen scientific and technological excellence on a given research topic.
Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) Joseph F. Burt, Staff Associate Office of Integrative Activities National Science Foundation
Office of Special Education Programs U.S. Department of Education GRANT PERFORMANCE REPORT FOR CONTINUATION FUNDING.
Proposal Writing Workshop Features of Effective Proposals.
Innovation through Institutional Integration (I 3 ) National Science Foundation Directorate for Education and Human Resources National Science Foundation.
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BOARD TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD TRB’s Vision for Transportation Research.
1Mobile Computing Systems © 2001 Carnegie Mellon University Writing a Successful NSF Proposal November 4, 2003 Website: nsf.gov.
ARL Workshop on New Collaborative Relationships: The Role of Academic Libraries in the Digital Data Universe September 26-27, 2006 ARL Prue.
STRATEGIC PLANNING & WASC UPDATE Tom Bennett Presentation to Academic Senate February 1, 2006.
ITR COV AC Briefing Dr. Lesia Crumption Young ITR COV Member ENG AdCom Member May 11-12, 2005.
Arlington, VA March 31, 2004 Presentation for the Advisory Committee for Business & Operations Effective Practices Research Overview For Merit Review This.
Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI) Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics PROGRAM.
Broadening Participation in the Geosciences: NSF Funding Opportunities
2016 DOE EPSCoR State Implementation Grants Program January 7, 2016 Contact : Richard Cristina.
NSF Office of Integrative Activities Major Research Instrumentation Program September 2007 Major Research Instrumentation QEM Workshop 2007 September 28,
BIO AC November 18, 2004 Broadening the Participation of Underrepresented Groups in Science.
NSF CTS COV FY June 12 and 13, 2003 Committee Members Timothy W. Tong (Chair), GWULinda J. Broadbelt, Northwestern University Juan J. de Pablo,
NEW DIRECTIONS FOR EVALUATION DIRECTORATE FOR EDUCATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES Dr. Bernice Anderson Senior Advisor for Evaluation AGEP Evaluation Capacity.
Report of the Committee of Visitors of the Division of Materials Science and Engineering (DMSE) to the Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee Review.
Multistate Research Program Roles & Responsibilities Eric Young SAAESD Meeting Corpus Christi, TX April 3-6, 2005.
Minority Research and Education Programs National Science Foundation.
1 25 STRONG WORKFORCE RECOMMENDATIONS IMPLEMENTATION OVERVIEW #strongworkforce DoingWhatMATTERS.cccco.edu.
1 An Overview of Process and Procedures for Health IT Collaboration GSA Office of Citizen Services and Communications Intergovernmental Solutions Division.
Major Research Instrumentation- COV Discussion of the Issues and Recommendations with SMART October 18, 2005.
NSF INCLUDES Inclusion Across the Nation of Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science AISL PI Meeting, March 1, 2016 Sylvia M.
Data Infrastructure Building Blocks (DIBBS) NSF Solicitation Webinar -- March 3, 2016 Amy Walton, Program Director Advanced Cyberinfrastructure.
European Social Fund Promoting improvement 15 th March 2016 Nigel Finch.
External Review Exit Report Campbell County Schools November 15-18, 2015.
NSF/NIH Review Processes University of Southern Mississippi
NSF/NIH Review Processes University of Southern Mississippi
Teaching Excellence Development Fund
Office of Secretary of Defense
  PREM Annual Reporting “These guidelines were developed to provide a uniform reporting structure for the Partnerships in Research and Education in Materials.
Finance & Planning Committee of the San Francisco Health Commission
University of the Incarnate Word
Presentation transcript:

FY Division of Human Resources Development Combined COV COV PRESENTATION TO ADVISORY COMMITTEE January 7, 2014

SELECTED FINDINGS ACROSS PROGRAMS

Merit Review Process:  Overall, the merit review process uses appropriate methods to review proposals and make award and declination recommendations  Panel summaries provided excellent overviews of proposal reviews  There was variable quality of reviews across reviewers  COV Recommendation: Programs need to communicate better with reviewers about what the kinds of feedback they should include for both Merit Review Criteria that is most useful to proposers  Programs also need to explain more fully funding recommendations to proposers, especially in the case of declines

SELECTED FINDINGS ACROSS PROGRAMS Selection of Reviewers:  Overall, there was variability across programs in the diversity of the reviewer pools  Conflicts of Interest were dealt with appropriately and the process was transparent  COV Recommendation: Programs should make an effort to retain reviewers who provide detailed and informative feedback  Programs need to widen the candidate pool for panel reviewers, especially beyond the current awardee pool  Some effort to include other types of reviewers from industry and national labs, for example, might be beneficial

SELECTED FINDINGS ACROSS PROGRAMS Management of the Program:  Overall, the COV members found the program management to be very professional and of high quality, although continuity of management was variable across programs  Programs have paid attention to community needs, evaluation results, and previous COV recommendations when making programmatic changes and adding new solicitation tracks  COV Recommendation: All five COVs mentioned the need for more program staff and, better continuity in program staffing  Programs need to ensure awards align with new priorities as the programs evolve and pay attention to intended impacts  Programs should seek out more co-funding opportunities within NSF, across federal agencies, and potentially with the private sector

SELECTED FINDINGS ACROSS PROGRAMS Portfolio of Awards:  For these programs, the portfolios of awards generally represent an appropriate balance of disciplines  Awards build on proven practices  Award sizes seem appropriate and a broad range of institutions are being funded  COV Recommendation: There is some need to broaden the awardee pools beyond those who have already received funding  There is a need for the 5 programs to coordinate award portfolios so new institutions are given a chance to participation in Broadening Participation activities  Programs need to communicate successes better  Need to provide more data on program outcomes to EHR and other NSF Directorates

SELECTED FINDINGS FOR EACH PROGRAM

TCUP COV FINDINGS  TCUP has had significant success in establishing partnerships across NSF Directorates and should expand this across the agency and with other federal agencies and minority-serving scientific societies  TCUP would benefit from the creation of additional metrics to measure the success of TCUP-funded projects, including outcome goals  The program might consider new program tracks that offer smaller and shorter-term awards to expand the number of institutions getting awards

HBCU-UP COV FINDINGS  The program needs to make more effort to disseminate the results of its portfolio  The program needs to partner with other federal agencies  The size of the program management team has decreased substantially over time while the proposal load has increased more than 300%; the COV strongly recommends increased program staffing

AGEP COV FINDINGS  The program needs to widen the pool of institutions receiving awards  AGEP proposals need more data to show both need and impact  The program had too many large unsolicited proposals as it was realigning, which took up too many resources  The COV praised the program realignment, which used a deliberate process of incorporating multiple stakeholder feedback  Appropriate funding needs to be addressed to sustain the program

CREST COV FINDINGS  The program needs better coordination and co-funding with NSF’s Research Directorates  The program needs more consistent staffing  The program staff needs to communicate successes better  The COV included specific recommendations about program management and structure including:  A multi-tiered application process that involves Letters of Intent, Preliminary Proposals, and Invited Full Proposals  More award types and sizes  Awards that have a more coherent research focus as well as sustained institutional commitment beyond the funding

LSAMP COV FINDINGS  The program is encouraged to continue to gather data about awardees and participants and encourage use of the data to show program progress  The program should continue communicating its successes and the outcomes of student research  Program should increase communications of its successes and the outcomes of student research within EHR and NSF  There is a need for additional personnel

DISCUSSION OF COV FINDINGS

MOVE TO ACCEPT COV FINDINGS