Site Search

Account Information

Help, advice, and support for students and their mentors.

Science Careers ForumGet your careers questions answered.
Get FundingOur GrantsNet engine helps you fund your science research and education.
Alternative CareersResearch not for you? Check out these options.
Junior Faculty and PostdocsSee the Academic Career Development Center
Career Development WorkshopsScience Careers workshops coming up in the next few months.
RSS Feeds
Science Podcasts

Vid Mohan-Ram
United States
8 October 1999

Criterion 1: What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?

How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields?
How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of prior work.)
To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative and original concepts?
How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity?
Is there sufficient access to resources?

Criterion 2: What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?

How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning?
How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)?
To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships?
Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding?
What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society?

For more information, read:
Rita Colwell's 'Important Notice'
Neal Lane's 1997 publication that introduced the new NSF criteria.
The NSF report to the National Science Board detailing how their merit review system worked during FY 1998.