"The memo said the changes 'enable Program Officers to expedite award and decline decisions,' including by moving away from the 'usual three or more reviews' of proposals. It said that, now, 'full proposals requiring external review must be reviewed by a minimum of two reviewers or have a minimum of two reviews. An internal review may substitute for one.' NSF spokesperson Mike England didn't provide Inside Higher Ed the memo."
"The NSF memo says the government shutdown, which ended in November, hampered its progress toward doling out all its funding by the end of the new fiscal year. It said 'we lost critical time' and 'now face [a] significant backlog of unreviewed proposals and canceled review panels. In parallel, our workforce has been significantly reduced.' The memo said the changes 'enable Program Officers to expedite award and decline decisions,'"
The NSF reduced its external review requirements for full proposals to a minimum of two reviews, allowing one internal review to substitute, to address a backlog caused by a government shutdown and reduced workforce. The change permits program officers to expedite award and decline decisions and to move away from the usual three-or-more reviewer model. An NSF spokesperson framed the change as streamlining processes and reducing administrative burden while maintaining external merit review rigor. The NIH issued guidance directing program officers to use a "text analysis tool" to search for certain phrases when reviewing and potentially terminating grants, prompting mixed reactions from experts and critics.
Read at Inside Higher Ed | Higher Education News, Events and Jobs
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]