Section 3401.17 - Review criteria(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: PEER PANEL SCORING FORM
Proposal Identification No. _______________________________
Institution and Project Title _______________________________
I. BASIC REQUIREMENT: Proposal falls within guidelines? __________ Yes __________ No. If no, explain why proposal does not meet guidelines under comment section of this form.
II. SELECTION CRITERIA: | 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.