我该如何评价你?让我数一数方法:美国联邦资助机构研究经费提案审查标准的比较。

IF 0.5 Q4 MANAGEMENT
Journal of Research Administration Pub Date : 2015-01-01
Holly J Falk-Krzesinski, Stacey C Tobin
{"title":"我该如何评价你?让我数一数方法:美国联邦资助机构研究经费提案审查标准的比较。","authors":"Holly J Falk-Krzesinski,&nbsp;Stacey C Tobin","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While Elizabeth Barrett Browning counted 25 ways in which she loves her husband in her poem, \"How Do I Love Thee? Let me Count the Ways,\" we identified only eight ways to evaluate the potential for success of a federal research grant proposal. This may be surprising, as it seems upon initial glance of the review criteria used by various federal funding agencies that each has its own distinct set of \"rules\" regarding the review of grant proposals for research and scholarship. Much of the grantsmanship process is dependent upon the review criteria, which represent the funders' desired impact of the research. But since most funders that offer research grants share the overarching goals of supporting research that (1) fits within its mission and (2) will bring a strong return on its financial investment, the review criteria used to evaluate research grant proposals are based on a similar set of fundamental questions. In this article, we compare the review criteria of 10 US federal agencies that support research through grant programs, and demonstrate that there are actually only a small and finite number of ways that a grant proposal can be evaluated. Though each funding agency may use slightly different wording, we found that the majority of the agencies' criteria address eight key questions. Within the highly competitive landscape of research grant funding, new researchers must find support for their research agendas and established investigators and research development offices must consider ways to diversify their funding portfolios, yet all may be discouraged by the apparent myriad of differences in review criteria used by various funding agencies. Guided by research administrators and research development professionals, recognizing that grant proposal review criteria are similar across funding agencies may help lower the barrier to applying for federal funding for new and early career researchers, or facilitate funding portfolio diversification for experienced researchers. Grantmakers are furthermore provided valuable guidance to develop and refine their own proposal review criteria.</p>","PeriodicalId":43094,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research Administration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4892374/pdf/nihms-770392.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Do I Review Thee? Let Me Count the Ways: A Comparison of Research Grant Proposal Review Criteria Across US Federal Funding Agencies.\",\"authors\":\"Holly J Falk-Krzesinski,&nbsp;Stacey C Tobin\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>While Elizabeth Barrett Browning counted 25 ways in which she loves her husband in her poem, \\\"How Do I Love Thee? Let me Count the Ways,\\\" we identified only eight ways to evaluate the potential for success of a federal research grant proposal. This may be surprising, as it seems upon initial glance of the review criteria used by various federal funding agencies that each has its own distinct set of \\\"rules\\\" regarding the review of grant proposals for research and scholarship. Much of the grantsmanship process is dependent upon the review criteria, which represent the funders' desired impact of the research. But since most funders that offer research grants share the overarching goals of supporting research that (1) fits within its mission and (2) will bring a strong return on its financial investment, the review criteria used to evaluate research grant proposals are based on a similar set of fundamental questions. In this article, we compare the review criteria of 10 US federal agencies that support research through grant programs, and demonstrate that there are actually only a small and finite number of ways that a grant proposal can be evaluated. Though each funding agency may use slightly different wording, we found that the majority of the agencies' criteria address eight key questions. Within the highly competitive landscape of research grant funding, new researchers must find support for their research agendas and established investigators and research development offices must consider ways to diversify their funding portfolios, yet all may be discouraged by the apparent myriad of differences in review criteria used by various funding agencies. Guided by research administrators and research development professionals, recognizing that grant proposal review criteria are similar across funding agencies may help lower the barrier to applying for federal funding for new and early career researchers, or facilitate funding portfolio diversification for experienced researchers. Grantmakers are furthermore provided valuable guidance to develop and refine their own proposal review criteria.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43094,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Research Administration\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4892374/pdf/nihms-770392.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Research Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

伊丽莎白·巴雷特·勃朗宁在她的诗《我如何爱你?》中列举了25种爱丈夫的方式。让我数一数方法”,我们只确定了8种方法来评估联邦研究拨款提案的成功潜力。这可能令人惊讶,因为乍一看各种联邦资助机构使用的审查标准,似乎每个机构都有自己独特的一套关于研究和奖学金资助提案审查的“规则”。资助过程的大部分取决于审查标准,这代表了资助者对研究的期望影响。但是,由于大多数提供研究资助的资助者都有一个共同的总体目标,即支持:(1)符合其使命,(2)将为其财政投资带来丰厚回报的研究,因此用于评估研究资助提案的审查标准是基于类似的一组基本问题。在本文中,我们比较了10个通过资助项目支持研究的美国联邦机构的审查标准,并证明实际上只有少数几种方法可以评估资助提案。尽管每个资助机构的措辞可能略有不同,但我们发现,大多数机构的标准都解决了八个关键问题。在研究资助的高度竞争环境中,新的研究人员必须为他们的研究议程找到支持,而已成立的研究人员和研究发展办公室必须考虑使他们的资助组合多样化的方法,然而,所有这些都可能因不同资助机构使用的审查标准的明显差异而气馁。在研究管理人员和研究开发专业人员的指导下,认识到资助机构之间的资助提案审查标准相似,可能有助于降低新职业和早期研究人员申请联邦资助的障碍,或促进有经验的研究人员的资助组合多样化。此外,还为资助者提供宝贵的指导,以制定和完善他们自己的提案审查标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

How Do I Review Thee? Let Me Count the Ways: A Comparison of Research Grant Proposal Review Criteria Across US Federal Funding Agencies.

How Do I Review Thee? Let Me Count the Ways: A Comparison of Research Grant Proposal Review Criteria Across US Federal Funding Agencies.

While Elizabeth Barrett Browning counted 25 ways in which she loves her husband in her poem, "How Do I Love Thee? Let me Count the Ways," we identified only eight ways to evaluate the potential for success of a federal research grant proposal. This may be surprising, as it seems upon initial glance of the review criteria used by various federal funding agencies that each has its own distinct set of "rules" regarding the review of grant proposals for research and scholarship. Much of the grantsmanship process is dependent upon the review criteria, which represent the funders' desired impact of the research. But since most funders that offer research grants share the overarching goals of supporting research that (1) fits within its mission and (2) will bring a strong return on its financial investment, the review criteria used to evaluate research grant proposals are based on a similar set of fundamental questions. In this article, we compare the review criteria of 10 US federal agencies that support research through grant programs, and demonstrate that there are actually only a small and finite number of ways that a grant proposal can be evaluated. Though each funding agency may use slightly different wording, we found that the majority of the agencies' criteria address eight key questions. Within the highly competitive landscape of research grant funding, new researchers must find support for their research agendas and established investigators and research development offices must consider ways to diversify their funding portfolios, yet all may be discouraged by the apparent myriad of differences in review criteria used by various funding agencies. Guided by research administrators and research development professionals, recognizing that grant proposal review criteria are similar across funding agencies may help lower the barrier to applying for federal funding for new and early career researchers, or facilitate funding portfolio diversification for experienced researchers. Grantmakers are furthermore provided valuable guidance to develop and refine their own proposal review criteria.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
50.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信