(a) Federally funded research supported under these provisions shall be designed to, among other things, accomplish one or more of the following purposes:
(1) Improve management of rangelands as an integrated system and/or watershed;
(2) Remedy unstable or unsatisfactory rangeland conditions;
(3) Increase revegetation and/or rehabilitation of rangelands;
(4) Examine the health of rangelands; and
(5) Define economic parameters associated with rangelands.
(b) In carrying out its review under § 3401.16, the peer review panel will use the following form upon which the evaluation criteria to be used are enumerated, unless, pursuant to § 3401.7(a), different evaluation criteria are specified in the annual solicitation of proposals for a particular program:
Proposal Identification No.
Institution and Project Title
Proposal falls within guidelines? _____ Yes _____ No. If no, explain why proposal does not meet guidelines under comment section of this form.
| Score 1-10 | Weight factor | Score X weight factor | Comments | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Overall scientific and technical quality of proposal | 10 | |||
| 2. Scientific and technical quality of the approach | 10 | |||
| 3. Relevance and importance of proposed research to solution of specific areas of inquiry | 6 | |||
| 4. Feasibility of attaining objectives; adequacy of professional training and experience, facilities and equipment | 5 |
Score
Summary Comments
(c) Proposals satisfactorily meeting the guidelines will be evaluated and scored by the peer review panel for each criterion utilizing a scale of 1 through 10. A score of one (1) will be considered low and a score of ten (10) will be considered high for each selection criterion. A weighted factor is used for each criterion.