NSF Seeks Input on Proposed Merit Review Criteria

At a well-attended briefing yesterday for representatives of the science community, National Science Foundation Director Neal Lane announced the recommendations of a Merit Review Task Force. The next step in this process is for researchers to comment on these proposed changes to the criteria that are used to evaluate proposals submitted to NSF.

Lane opened his presentation saying that the National Science Board’s Task Force is “not proposing any kind of sea change,” adding that there is nothing in the current criteria that is broken and needs fixing. Elaborating on this theme, he said that in contemplating these changes, NSF is determined to “first do no harm.”

The selection criteria was last revised in 1981, Lane saying much has changed since then. For instance, NSF had dropped its education program at that time. This action was later reversed, and the Education and Human Resources (EHR) Directorate has since become a significant part of NSF’s activities. Lane feels the proposed criteria would be a better fit for EHR, and other non-research activities, than those now employed.

Also changing is the number of proposals NSF receives. Approximately 30,000 new proposals are received every year (not counting requests for continuations.) The NSF handles 170,000 reviews, making 10,000 awards. The foundation is highly appreciative of the support it receives from proposal reviewers, and is aware of the burden this process can entail. Foundation staff is also under greater pressure. Mindful of these conditions, Lane declared, “something has to give here.”

In addition to these factors, Lane discussed other problems that the Task Force identified. Primary among them was a “lack of clarity” leading some reviewers to misunderstand or ignore the existing criteria, or use an “unwritten” criteria.

FYI #163 (forthcoming) provides information on the proposed changes. NSF has established a comprehensive web site at the following address: http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/meritrev.htm A feedback form is provided.

The foundation will carefully monitor response on this website to determine if public meetings are needed. NSF officials will include, as appropriate, this topic in speaking engagements.

“We don’t know what will come out of this,” Lane said. He assured the audience that the foundation does not anticipate changing its portfolio, the flexibility it gives its program officers, or its approach to risk-taking. “It’s been 15 years,” since the selection process was revisited, Lane said, concluding that this reexamination of the criteria is “prudent.”