Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport CBET Division Panel

1
Chemical, Bioengineering,Environmental, and
Transport (CBET) Division Panel
Program Director _______________________ Progra
m Assistant ______________________ Number of
Proposals Number of Panels Dates of Panels
2
Outline

• Overview
• Administrative Points
• COI
• Confidentiality
• NSF Evaluation Criteria
• Panelist Responsibilities
• What Happens After the Panel?
• Introductions
• Thanks!

3
Safety Overview

• 4 Emergency exits (stairs)
• 2 exits Close to North and South elevators (close
  to restrooms)
• 2 other exits
• Restrooms located next to the elevators
• Visitor (ID) entrance (North Elevator, 1st floor)
• Exit towards North (9th Street and Stuart St)
• Towards Metro Starbucks
• North elevator (2nd floor)
• Skywalk to Ballston Commons Mall
• Skywalk to Metro Hilton

4
Administrative Points

• Sign-In
• Ensures reimbursement for each day served
• Check name and address for accuracy
• Please update contact information in FastLane
• Internet access
• Wireless take your computer to Room 357 in
  Stafford I for connection and laptop verification
  between 7 am and 9 pm EST, Monday - Friday
• For non-wireless LAN access ensure your laptop
  meets the NSF External IT Screening measures
  outlined in the 07/24/06 Memo on the FastLane
  homepage once verified, you can plug the LAN
  connection into directly your laptop.

5
Travel Questions

• Travel
• Travel should be arranged through the FedTravel
• Center (SATO) (1-800-741-9943 or
  1-866-876-8020)
• Have you registered for this panel through
  FastLane? (Even if you have participated in
  previous NSF panels, you still have to register
  for this panel)
• EFT (electronic funds transfer) information must
  be provided
• Reimbursement will appear w/o notice to your
  specified financial institution and account (
  U.S. Treasury - doesnt reference NSF)
• Reimbursement is considered taxable NSF
  automatically sends a Form 1099 if 600 or
  greater is paid to a reviewer per calendar year
• Any problems to solve or to tell us?

6
Travel Questions(Continued)

• Reimbursement
• 480 for each meeting day and
• 280 for each travel day
• Local Participants
• 280 for each meeting day
• Did You Drive? Please complete the
• auto travel form.

7
Conflicts of Interest

• Sign and turn in Conflict-of-Interest form
• Typical relationships that could lead to a
  conflict
• You must not participate in the discussion of any
  proposal for which you have a conflict. Please
  discuss any actual or perceived conflicts with
  your panel moderator.

• INSTITUTIONAL
• current or previous employment (12 months) or
  seeking employment
• award, honorarium, or travel payment (12 months)
• officer or governing board
• any financial interest

• PERSONAL
• co-author of paper or project collaborator (48
  months)
• co-edited journal or proceedings (24 months)
• thesis advisor or student (life-long)
• family member or close friend

8
Confidentiality

• NSF receives proposals in confidence and is
  responsible for protecting the confidentiality of
  their contents and their review.
• Do not copy, quote, or otherwise use material
  from the proposals.
• Proposals contain sensitive information and are
  not in the public domain.
• Destroy all copies, including computer records,
  when you have completed your reviews. (You may
  leave your paper copies in the conference room.)
• Do not discuss proposal content, results,
  recommendations, or membership of this panel
  outside the meeting room, even at NSF.
• Except for copies to the Principal Investigator
  (excluding identifying information), reviews will
  not be disclosed to non-Governmental personnel.
• NSF considers reviews to be exempt from
  disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act,
  but it cannot guarantee that it will not be
  forced to release reviews under the FOIA or other
  laws.

9
NSF Evaluation Criteria

• Intellectual Merit
• Advancement and contribution of knowledge in its
  own field or across different disciplines?
• Creative and original concepts?
• Well-conceived and organized proposal?
• Qualification of the PIs?
• Sufficient access to resources?

10
NSF Evaluation Criteria

• Broader Impacts
• Advancement of discovery and understanding while
  promoting teaching, training, and learning?
• Benefits, as applicable, to society and
  industry?
• Educational Impact?
• Participation of underrepresented groups (e.g.,
  gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)?
  
• Enhancement of the infrastructure for research
  and education, such as facilities,
  instrumentation, networks, and partnerships?
• Dissemination of results?

11
NSF Evaluation Criteria

• Additional NSF considerations
• Integration of Research and Education
• One of the principal strategies supporting NSF's
  goals is to foster integration of research and
  education through the programs, projects, and
  activities it supports at academic and research
  institutions. These institutions provide abundant
  opportunities in which individuals may
  concurrently assume responsibilities as
  researchers, educators, and students and in which
  all can engage in joint efforts that infuse
  education with the excitement of discovery and
  enrich research through the diversity of learning
  perspectives.
• Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs,
  Projects, and Activities
• Broadening opportunities and enabling the
  participation of all citizens women and men,
  underrepresented minorities, and persons with
  disabilities is essential to the health and
  vitality of science and engineering. NSF is
  committed to this principle of diversity and
  deems it central to the programs, projects, and
  activities it considers and supports

12
Avoid Unintended Bias

• Implicit bias toward a group
• Lack of critical mass a greater reliance on
  perceptions and generalizations
• Few women and minorities in sciences
• Accumulation of disadvantage
• Mitigate evaluation bias

13
Ways toMitigate Evaluation Bias

• Increase awareness of how implicit bias might
  affect evaluation
• Decrease time pressure and distractions in
  evaluation process
• Rate on explicit criteria rather than global
  judgments
• Point to specific evidence supporting judgments

Bauer Baltes, 2002, Sex Roles, 47 (9/10),
465-476
Please incorporate (3) (4) in your discussions.
14
PanelistResponsibilities

• Ensure your reviews are entered in the Panel
  System correctly and are entered prior to the
  panel meeting
• Minimum of 3 reviews via FastLane for each
  proposal (OK to modify reviews, including change
  of overall rating)
• You may change your reviews during the meeting
• However, modifications MUST be done BEFORE
  leaving the panel

15
PanelistResponsibilities

• For each proposal
• Primary reviewer (lead) summarizes and then
  initiates comments on the proposal. The lead
  also reviews the proposal.
• One reviewer will be the scribe for a panel
  summary, to which all assigned reviewers provide
  input. The scribe can also be the lead.
• The panel summary generally reflects the panels
  discussion and the individual reviews and basis
  for recommendation.
• The summary should be written in 3rd-person.
• Other reviewers concur and/or add their comments.
• The floor is open for panel discussion.
• Once the final overall panel ranking is
  formalized, please sign on the ranking sheet.

16
PanelistResponsibilities

• Final Recommendation to the Program Director
• Place each proposal into rating categories
  outlined by the Program Officer, normally
• For example,
• HR - Highly Recommend for funding (optional)
• R - Recommend, if funds are available
• DNR - Do Not Recommend for funding
• Rank the proposals within the categories as
  outlined by the Program Officer, if applicable

17
A Good Panel SummaryLeads to Better Research!

• Objectives of the proposal
• Intellectual merit
• Strengths
• Weaknesses
• Broader impact
• Strengths
• Weaknesses
• Panel Summary Statement (optional)
• Panel recommendation and rationale
• Ensure that this statement agrees with the
  overall panel discussion and ranking sheet

18
A Good Panel SummaryLeads to Better Research!

• The scribe should follow the Panel Summary
  Template while he/she writes the panel summary.
• Primary and secondary reviewers edit for
  substance and tone to develop a summary
  reflecting the consensus of the panel.
• Comments should be constructive, informative,
  non-inflammatory, and non-discriminatory.
• Finalize reviews and panel summaries before you
  leave.

19
Post-Panel Actions

• Reviews and panel summaries are important
  feedback to PIs.
• PI will receive
• All reviews
• Panel summaries
• Program Directors analysis and recommendation
  (award/decline)
• Expected awards to be recommended to the Division
  Director for funding

20
Introductions
21
Lets Get Started!

• Thanks for participating in this panel!

22
Appendix ISample PanelSummary Template
23
Appendix IISample PanelFlow Chart