The Oil Spill Recovery Institute: Past, Present, and Future Directions (2003)
Chapter: Appendix D: PWSSC/OSRI Proposal Review Form
D
PWSSC/OSRI Proposal Review Form
Prince William Sound Oil Spill Recovery Institute
P.O. Box 705 - Cordova, AK 99574 - (907) 424-5800; fax 424-5820 e-mail:frontdes@pwssc.gen.ak.us
************************************************************
PROPOSAL REVIEW FORM
************************************************************
Guide for Reviewers
Thank you for your expertise and time in reviewing this proposal. We need an impartial and professional evaluation. If you find you have a conflict of interest, please notify us and return this proposal.
You may range as widely in your comments as you wish; however, please strive to make your comments both constructive and civil, even for unfavorable assessments. You are encouraged to point out the proposals strong points as well as the weak ones. You need not be concerned about the proposal format.
Please either type your comments on separate sheets of paper and attach this form, or e-mail the written comments to bird@pwssc.gen.ak.us. We request that all proposals be treated as the intellectual property of the
principal investigators or their employers. Their confidentiality must be respected during the review process.
Please complete the rating summary below: If you do not wish to remain anonymous, sign the review. Return your review and the proposal directly to me. Also, retain a copy for your own files to guard against loss in the mail. Your assistance is greatly appreciated. Thank you!
Evaluation criteria:
-
Is the proposal clearly written and understandable?
-
Are there clear objectives for the project?
-
Is there a clear outline of organization for its implementation?
-
Does the project propose multi-disciplinary or multi-organizational coordination? Or, does it include partnerships with industry, agencies and others to accomplish its goals? Are there entities missing which should be involved in this project?
-
Does the proposed work have a low, moderate or high chance of contributing new information, developing a new method or providing an unique service to its field?
-
If successful, would the proposal make an unique, major, moderate, minor or insignificant contribution?
-
Do the investigator(s) identify who the major users of the results will be?
-
Do the investigator(s) have the expertise to implement this project?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Rating summary (check one):
Fund ____
Fund after minor revisions ____
Reconsider after major revision ____
Reject ____
Better suited for other funding ____
Reviewer’s signature (optional, but encouraged):
