ITM SR&T: Competition for new FY 1997 programs

It is our working assumption that the best we could hope for in Supporting Research and Technology (SR&T) funding is that FY 1997 SR&T budgets will hold steady at approximately FY 1996 levels. In this case, the total Ionospheric, Thermospheric and Meospheric (ITM) Physics SR&T budget for FY 1997 should be on the order of $3.9 M. Of this amount, slightly more than $2.8 M will be required to fund the multiyear grants that are already in place as a result of proposal competitions in 1994 and 1995. Thus, there should be, under this assumption, on the order of $1.1 M available for funding new investigations. If selected proposals were funded at approximately the $75-80K level, then on the order of 14-15 proposals could be accommodated within this budget. One hundred and eleven letters of intent to propose to the ITM SR&T program have been received in response to NRA-96-OSS-09. Thus, if the number of submitted proposals matches the number of letters, it will be possible to fund one out of every seven or eight proposals.

Given this environment, proposers are urged to consider carefully the appropriateness of proposed projects in light of the ITM program description in the NRA. They should also remember that the requirements for a successful proposal include (1) a clear description of a specific scientific investigation, (2) a cogent description of how this investigation is to be carried out, (3) a discussion of how the proposed effort will contribute to the resolution of the target problem, and (4) an explanation of the relevance of the proposed research to NASA's current and/or future Space Physics programs.

The following definition of terms for "Overall Evaluation" will be used for the final appraisals of proposals submitted in response to this NRA.

EXCELLENT - The investigation is of the highest scientific and technical merit, is fundamentally important for the advancement of the goals of NASA's Space Science Program, and is well defined in a compelling manner in the proposal. The investigator and his/her institution are highly competent and fully capable of conducting the proposed effort. There is strong confidence that the investigation can be carried out in the proposed manner and for the proposed cost. The proposed cost is tenable within available program budgets. The proposal strongly deserves support with the highest priority.

VERY GOOD - The investigation is of high scientific and technical merit, is important for the NASA Space Science Program, and is adequately defined in the proposal. The investigator is competent as is his/her institutional support. There is strong confidence that the investigation can be carried out in the manner and for the cost that are proposed. The proposal deserves support but at a lower priority than a proposal rated as Excellent.

GOOD - The scientific and technical merit of the investigation is adequate but the investigation is not at the frontier of its field. The investigation is relevant to NASA's Space Science program in broad terms but not for specific or immediate needs. The proposal is well written but not particularly compelling. Resources permitting, the proposal deserves support but at lower priority than a Very Good proposal.

FAIR to POOR - The investigation is seriously deficient in one or more of the following factors: its scientific and technical merit, its programmatic relevance to NASA's Space Science missions, its proposed cost, and/or its clarity of purpose. It does not deserve support.

If past competitions are a good guide, then the competitive range for selection for this competition will include Excellent but not necessarily Very Good proposals. It is thus particularly important, if proposers wish to compete well, that thet make a strong case for the compelling nature of the science which they propose and address this problem with a well-considered methodology. Such cases are strengthened by evidence of wide impact for the anticipated results.