Principal Investigator Response Mechanism Process

National Science Foundation Surveys to Measure Customer Satisfaction

PIResponseSurveyv4-1

Principal Investigator Response Mechanism Process

OMB: 3145-0157

Document [docx]
Download: docx | pdf

As you know, your recent Algorithms in the Field proposal was evaluated using a modified merit review process that includes a PI response mechanism. Principal investigators were provided with panel review comments, and given the opportunity to clarify potential misunderstandings and/or provide additional information. To measure the effectiveness of the modified process, we have a few questions for you. We would be grateful if you could complete our short survey, which should take no more than 10 minutes of your time. Please be assured that your answers will remain anonymous and reported in aggregate form only.


1. Have you submitted a proposal to CISE before this one?

Yes

No – SKIP to question 6


2. Compared to your last CISE submission, how much detail did the panel provide in its review package (including the panel summary as well as the reviews)? Mark only one.

  • A lot more detail

  • A little more detail

  • About the same amount of detail

  • A little less detail

  • A lot less detail


3. Compared to your last CISE submission, how would you rate the quality of the feedback you received? Mark only one.

  • A lot higher quality

  • A little higher quality

  • About the same quality

  • A little lower quality

  • A lot lower quality


4. In your opinion, which merit review process resulted in the panel having a greater understanding of your proposal? Mark only one.


  • The modified review process

  • Both processes were about the same

  • The usual merit review process

  • No opinion


5. Overall, how did the modified merit review process compare to the usual review process? Mark only one.

  • Modified process was better than the usual review process

  • Modified process and usual review process were about the same

  • Modified process was worse than the usual review process

  • No opinion


6. In your opinion, how much better or worse did the panel understand your proposal after your response compared to the understanding conveyed in the initial reviews? Mark only one.

  • A lot better

  • A little better

  • About the same

  • A little worse

  • A lot worse

  • No opinion


7. How much value did the PI response mechanism add to the merit review process? Mark only one.

  • A lot of value

  • Some value

  • No value



8. If you submitted a proposal to NSF in the future, would you like to see this mechanism used during the review process? Mark only one.

  • Yes

  • No

  • No opinion


9. Do you have any other feedback for NSF regarding this mechanism?




File Typeapplication/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
AuthorTracy Kimbrel
File Modified0000-00-00
File Created2021-01-27

© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy