SAES Banner
  
 

Evans-Allen Proposal Reviewers’ Instructions/
Proposal Peer Review Form

Note to Reviewers

The purpose of your review is to provide the Associate Dean for Research of School of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences (SAES) assistance with making a judgment about the appropriateness and quality of the attached proposal for receiving Evans-Allen funding. This funding is intended to provide research scholars initial and/or continuing funds to support a research study or program that addresses one of the School’s research initiatives, is consistent with the goals of NIFA, and represents a potential contribution to agricultural science or related disciplines.

As a reviewer you are being asked to provide your honest professional assessment of the proposal on a range of evaluation attributes including its scholarship, potential for measurable impact, advancement of knowledge related to agricultural science, and practicality of being successfully completed by the identified research team, identified resources (equipment and expertise beyond the research team), and time frame.

The value of your assessment will be based on a complete and honest review of the attributes identified in the review. Please keep in mind that high ratings of a proposal that does not meet the aims or quality requirements of Evans-Allen funding will likely contribute little to the achievement of the research initiatives of SAES or advance the development of the PI (s)’ research agenda and scholarship. Conversely, low ratings may not necessarily mean that a proposal lacks merit for consideration for funding. Such ratings may help the PI(s) address weaknesses in the proposal that result in a much stronger and more impactful project.

Please complete the attached form by reading each evaluation statement and assigning a rating representing your estimation of completeness (Large to No(ne) Extent) that the material in the proposal addresses each of the identified proposal component categories. Also, in order to assist both the Associate Dean and the PI(s) we ask that you provide comments indicating some basis for your rating. These comments will not be identified as coming from you but may be excerpted to be shared with the PI(s) as feedback and suggestions for revision or other changes.  

Ratings of the proposal and comments on its quality and merit are very important. You represent a significant peer to the PI(s) and your knowledge of the field and research experience can provide exceptional guidance regarding the merits of the proposal. Please know that the content of your evaluation will be taken very seriously and will play a large part in determining if the proposal should be considered for funding. Your time and participation in this review process is greatly appreciated.

 

Reviewer Name

Reviewer Email Address

Reviewer Telephone Number

Project Title:

Principal Investigators: (please separate names with commas)



CONNECTION TO SAES RESEARCH INITIATIVES


Does the proposal describe a research question or issue that has current relevance or importance to an identified area of agricultural research?

 

1.     Does the proposal describe how the proposed research supports the aims of the Agricultural Research Program?

(Assess if the proposal identifies a research study worth doing. If so, the purpose of the study should be spelled out, its relevance or importance to the field and its potential contribution to agricultural sciences and the university.)

Comments:

 

2. The proposal describes how the project will improve or build upon previous work conducted by the PI, co PIs, and/or other SAES researchers.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:


SCIENTIFIC APPROACH


3. The need for the project is established through review and discussion of relevant research, the practice literature, and other sources of research support evidence (i.e., pilot studies, unpublished work).

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:


4. The project’s aim(s) represent goals that are sufficiently distinct from any recent reported work by other researchers investigating the same or similar project topic.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:

5. The proposal includes research question(s)/hypotheses that will be addressed through experimental or non-experimental comparison, or by assay or other analysis.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:

METHODOLOGY


6. The review of literature includes recent and relevant work that supports the aim or objectives of the proposed project.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

Comments:

METHODOLOGY


7. The proposal provides a clear description and explanation of the intention to conduct pilot and/or preliminary data collection and/or to develop data collection procedures prior to full stage testing of research questions or hypotheses.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:

8. The proposal provides a clear description of the sampling plan for how subjects/ participants/samples will be selected for comparison and/or analysis.

 

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

Comments:

9. The proposal provides a clear description of the data collection measures and procedures that will be followed.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:

 

10. The proposal provides a clear description of how the data will be analyzed for purposes of addressing the research question(s)/hypotheses.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:


11. The proposal includes a time line that provides sufficient detail of planned objectives and a reasonable time frame for achieving each objective and the major tasks of each objective.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

Comments:


EXPECTED OUTCOMES

12. The proposal provides a clear description of the outcomes the PI(s) expect(s) the project to achieve.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:

IMPLEMENTATION CAPACITY


13. The proposal identifies the source and/or the connection to all essential instrumentation, equipment, personnel, and other support that is needed for the successful conduct of the project.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

Comments:

14. The proposal identifies the roles and responsibilities of all essential personnel and partners on the project.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

Comments:

15. The proposal provides sufficient explanation of budget items and amounts.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

Comments:


INVOLVEMENT OF SCIENTISTS/STAKEHOLDERS OUTSIDE OF SAES


16. The proposal identifies and describes specific contributions on the project expected from scientists and/or others not identified as co-PIs or from within the School of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:

CONNECTION TO COOPERATIVE EXTENSION

17. The proposal identifies and describes specific contributions of NCA&T or other Cooperative Extension personnel identified either as co-PIs, collaborators, or consultants on the project.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:

INVOLVEMENT OF STUDENTS

18. The proposal identifies and describes specific student research activities.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:

19. The proposal identifies specific learning objectives for students employed as student research assistants.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:


IMPACT

20. The proposal includes a clear description of the likely beneficiaries of the findings of the project.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:

21. The proposal provides a clear description of how the expected outcomes will be translated for use by stakeholders.

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:

LOGIC MODEL


22. The proposal includes a Logic Model that conforms to the model outline provided by NIFA: http://www.csrees.usda.gov/about/strat_plan_logic_models.html

Large Extent
Moderate Extent
Limited Extent
None

 

Comments:

 

RECOMMENDATIONS

 

Accept
Return for minor revisions and re-review
Return for major revisions and re-review
Proposal is not sufficiently developed for funding

 

SUMMARY OF NEEDED REVISIONS

 

OTHER COMMENTS

 


jump over products navigation bar Home     About SAES     Academics    Agricultural Research    Cooperative Extension     Communications     Links     Contact    Site Map