ELibrary 3-Panel Review Evaluation Ex.pdf

PDF 12 KB Posted

Attached to
NRESS III RFP 80HQTR26R0002
Solicitation number
80HQTR26R0002
Issued by

About this file

This document is a Panel Review form for a TRISH (Translational Research Institute for Space Health) Postdoctoral Fellowship proposal. The review template provides a structured evaluation process with five key assessment sections, each weighted differently: scientific merit and relevance (50%), training environment and mentoring plan (30%), postdoctoral fellow's qualifications (20%), an overall evaluation, and additional comments section. The review focuses on evaluating research proposals related to mitigating risks in NASA's Human Research Roadmap (HRR), with an emphasis on innovative projects that advance scientific knowledge or technology. The document includes specific guidance for reviewers to assess the proposal's strengths and weaknesses across research objectives, training plan, mentoring approach, and the candidate's background, with a noted preference for high-risk, potentially breakthrough research projects.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
AMD 05-Attachment A-SOW.pdf PDF
NRESS III 80HQTR26R0002 Questions and Answers 1-163.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
AMD 04-Enclosure 3-GPM Labor Hours and PDs.pdf PDF
AMD 04-NRESS III SF30 80HQTR26R0002.pdf PDF
NRESS III 80HQTR26R0002 Questions and Answers 1-164.pdf PDF
AMD 3-NRESS III SF30 80HQTR26R0002.pdf PDF
NRESS III 80HQTR26R0002 Questions and Answers 1-56.pdf PDF
AMD 2-Exhibit 1A-1B All IDIQ Std by CY.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
AMD 2-NRESS III RFP 80HQTR26R0002.pdf PDF
AMD 2-Attachment A-SOW.pdf PDF
AMD 2-Exhibit 2-11 All IDIQ by CY.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
Amendment 01-NRESS III SF30 80HQTR26R0002.pdf PDF
ELibrary 16-Human Research Program Work Plan H-12-Redacted.pdf PDF
ELibrary 18-Lunar Data Analysis Program Work Plan S-311-Redacted.pdf PDF
ELibrary 2-NSPIRES System Diagram.pdf PDF
ELibrary 8-Correspondence-Courtesy Status.pdf PDF
ELibrary 9-Correspondence-Selectable.pdf PDF
ELibrary 11-Ex Step-1 Discourage Letter.pdf PDF
ELibrary 20-Space Technology Research Grant Work Plan T-23-Redacted.pdf PDF
ELibrary 5-Split-Funding Advice to Award Office Ex.pdf PDF
ELibrary 7-Correspondence-Selected Notification Letter.pdf PDF
ELibrary 10-Correspondence-Declined Notification Letter.pdf PDF
ELibrary 12-Ex Step-1 Encourage Letter.pdf PDF
ELibrary 17-Management and IT Support Work Plan M-04-Redacted.pdf PDF
ELibrary 19-Discovery AO 2019 Work Plan S-346-Redacted.pdf PDF
ELibrary 1-NSPIRES IT and Software Components.pdf PDF
ELibrary 4-Selection and Evaluation Statement Ex.pdf PDF
Attachment G-Contract Historical Data.pdf PDF
Attachment H-OCI Avoidance Plan.pdf PDF
Attachment J-OCI DRD.pdf PDF
Enclosure 1-Contract Historical Data-Incumbent.pdf PDF
Enclosure 4-QASP.pdf PDF
Exhibit 2-11 All IDIQ by CY.pdf PDF
Attachment C-Financial Management Reporting (NF 533).pdf PDF
Enclosure 8-Optional C-SCRM Questionnaire.pdf PDF
Attachment E-Contract Data Requirements List.pdf PDF
Attachment I-Information Systems Security Plan.pdf PDF
Attachment K-Security Requirements DRD.pdf PDF
Attachment L-Requirements Statements List.pdf PDF
Enclosure 3-GPM Labor Hours and PDs.pdf PDF
Enclosure 6-RTO 2.pdf PDF
Enclosure 7-RTO 3.pdf PDF
NRESS III RFP 80HQTR26R0002.pdf PDF
Attachment A-SOW.pdf PDF
Attachment B -DL Rates_ Indirect Rates_ and Fee.pdf PDF
Attachment D-GFP.pdf PDF
Attachment F-DOL Wage Determination 2015-4281.pdf PDF
Enclosure 2-Past Performance Questionnaire.pdf PDF
Enclosure 5-RTO 1.pdf PDF
Exhibit 1A-1B All IDIQ Std by CY.pdf PDF
Show 40 more

50 files listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION

Panel Review

Solicitation:

Proposal Number:

Investigator:

Organization:

Title:

Score:

This Panel Review expresses the judgment of the Panel resulting from both panel discussion of the proposal and preliminary individual reviews.

1) Proposal Summary (as provided by the PI)

2) Evaluation of scientific merit and programmatic/operational relevance of the proposal and the probability that the stated research objectives will be accomplished with the resources available (50%) (strengths and weaknesses) Specifically, the TRISH Postdoctoral Fellowship Committee will consider whether or not the proposed project addresses research emphases that have the potential to mitigate one or more risks detailed on NASA’s HRR. This committee will also consider what will be the effect of these studies on the concepts, methods, or products that drive this field and, if the aims of the application are achieved, how scientific knowledge or technology will be advanced. Peer reviewers will also evaluate whether or not it is likely that the stated research objectives will be accomplished with the resources available and if the approach is sufficient and appropriate to give confidence that the objectives will be achieved. TRISH has a high risk threshold and projects that are particularly innovative should be encouraged.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

3) Evaluation of training environment and mentoring plan (30%) (strengths and weaknesses) Specifically, the TRISH Postdoctoral Fellowship Committee will consider whether the mentor provided a clear training plan and included professional development in appropriate areas such as research ethics, human subject research, use of animals in research, proposal preparation, career interview skills, scientific writing and communication skills, and mentoring skills. This committee will also consider if the training environment is adequate.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

4) Evaluation of research, teaching and educational outreach background and qualifications of the Postdoctoral Fellow candidate (20%) (strengths and weaknesses) Specifically, the TRISH Postdoctoral Fellowship Committee will consider if the candidate possesses the educational background and, with guidance from the mentor, the research experience to achieve the research objectives as outlined in the proposal. Moreover, this committee will evaluate whether or not the candidate has demonstrated the ability to learn and/or develop new strategies or procedures. The committee will also consider whether or not the candidate has demonstrated teaching and educational outreach activities that qualify him/her to be an effective communicator to peers and diverse public audiences.

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

5) Overall Evaluation Please indicate the balance of strengths and weaknesses for the entire proposal. For example, “the strengths of this proposal outweigh any minor weaknesses identified.”

6) Additional Comments Please use this section for comments regarding eligibility, missing proposal requirements, and other non-scoring issues. These items should not affect your merit score. These comments will be considered by TRISH separately from the merit evaluations.

7) Vertebrate Animal Scientific Review (VASR) Each proposal that uses vertebrate animals must address the five points outlined in Section D of the solicitation. This two-page response is similar to the NIH 5-points. The reviewer should code this response as “Acceptable”, “Unacceptable”, or "Not Applicable". This coding should NOT be considered in the merit scoring of the proposal unless major changes to the study are required to correct an “Unacceptable” evaluation.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .