[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 200 (Thursday, October 15, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65436-65438]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22755]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Notice of Intent To Seek Approval To Establish an Information 
Collection

AGENCY: National Science Foundation.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The National Science Foundation (NSF) is announcing plans to 
request approval for the collection of research and development data 
through the 2021 Merit Review Survey. In accordance with the 
requirement of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, we are providing 
opportunity for public comment on this action. After obtaining and 
considering public comment, NSF will prepare the submission requesting 
that OMB approve clearance of this collection for no longer than 3 
years.

DATES: Written comments on this notice must be received by December 14, 
2020 to be assured of consideration. Comments received after that date 
will be considered to the extent practicable.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance 
Officer, National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, 
Alexandria, VA 22314; 703-292-7556, or send email to [email protected]. 
Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may 
call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339, 
which is accessible 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year 
(including federal holidays).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title of Collection: Merit Review Survey--2021 Assessment of 
Applicant and Reviewer Experiences.
    OMB Approval Number: 3145-NEW.
    Expiration Date of Current Approval: Not applicable.
    Type of Request: Intent to establish an information collection.
    Abstract: The National Science Foundation (NSF) receives close to 
50,000 proposals for funding annually, each of which undergoes a 
rigorous

[[Page 65437]]

merit review process that is designed to ensure all proposals are 
fairly and thoroughly reviewed. The merit review process comprises 
three phases:
    1. NSF announces funding opportunities on the NSF website and 
Grants.gov. Applicants prepare proposals in response to these 
opportunities and submit their proposals via FastLane (NSF's web-based 
system for proposal submission and review) or Grants.gov.
    2. Proposals are assigned to the appropriate program(s) for review. 
Each proposal is assigned a Program Officer (PO) who selects external 
reviewers to evaluate the proposal according to the two NSF merit 
review criteria, Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts. The 
Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance 
knowledge. The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to 
benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired 
societal outcomes. Programs may have additional review criteria 
particular to the goals and objectives of the program. The NSF 
guidelines for the selection of reviewers are designed to ensure 
selection of experts who can give program officers the proper 
information needed to make a recommendation in accordance with the 
merit review criteria. POs utilize the proposal's reference list, the 
investigator's suggested reviewers, and personal knowledge of 
individual reviewers to identify a pool of diverse experts with respect 
to type of organization represented, demographics, experience, and 
geographic balance, selecting appropriate reviewers with no apparent 
potential conflicts. Most proposals are reviewed by three to ten 
content expert reviewers who provide written feedback on the proposal 
through FastLane. POs synthesize reviewer comments and issue a 
recommendation to either decline or award funding based on reviewer 
feedback, panel discussions, the amount of available funding, and 
portfolio balances (i.e., the diversity of a portfolio, including 
factors such as award type, career stage, demographic characteristics, 
geographic location, institution type, research topic, laboratory 
funding status, and intellectual risk). The proposal and PO 
recommendation is then forwarded to the appropriate Division Director 
or other NSF official for additional review and action to either 
decline or award.
    3. Each proposal recommended for award undergoes an administrative 
review conducted by NSF's Office of Budget, Finance, and Award 
Management. If it passes this review, the proposal is awarded.
    Through this review process, NSF aims to identify the highest 
quality proposals to receive funding. The success of this process 
hinges on the assumptions that applicants will continue to submit to 
NSF their ideas for cutting-edge research and that experts in their 
respective fields will continue to provide high-quality reviews of 
those proposals.
    The goal of this data collection is to assess the experiences of 
applicants and reviewers and their satisfaction with the NSF's merit 
review process. The data collection for which this OMB approval is 
requested includes a Web-based survey that will be administered to all 
applicants and reviewers who participated in the merit review process 
between fiscal years (FY) 2018 and FY 2020. The specific research 
objectives are to--
    1. Examine applicant and reviewer perceptions of, and satisfaction 
with, the merit review process, including how it may vary by respondent 
gender or race.
    2. Document the time burden the proposal submission and merit 
review process places on applicants and reviewers.
    3. Examine applicant and reviewer perceptions of the quality of 
reviews and of proposals, including how it may vary by respondent 
demographics such as gender or race.
    4. Describe the extent to which respondent familiarity with NSF's 
reviewer orientation pilot is associated with reported use of review 
strategies to mitigate bias.
    5. Describe the extent to which the experience with proposal 
deadlines has affected applicants and reviewer burden and satisfaction.
    6. Examine applicants' and reviewers' experiences receiving 
financial support as a student.
    Data from the survey will be used to improve NSF's implementation 
of the merit review process.
    Use of the information: The primary purpose of collecting this 
information is program evaluation. The data collected will enable NSF 
to assess the satisfaction, including perceptions of burden and 
quality, of applicants and reviewers who participate in the merit 
review process in order to monitor and improve the program and assess 
its implementation. Findings will inform continual improvement 
activities related to the merit review process.
    Respondents: All applicants who have submitted proposals and 
reviewers who have reviewed NSF proposals between FY 2018 and 2020 will 
be invited to participate in the survey. This is estimated to be 
approximately 87,000 individuals.
    Estimated number of respondents: It is estimated that there will be 
26,000 respondents (representing an approximate 30 percent response 
rate).
    Average time per reporting: The online survey is comprised 
primarily of close-ended questions and is designed to be completed by 
respondents in under 30 minutes.
    Frequency: Eligible applicants and reviewers will be asked to the 
complete the 2021 Merit Review survey one time in fall 2021.
    Estimate burden on the public: The collection occurs once for each 
respondent. The total estimate for this collection is 8,667 burden 
hours. The calculation is shown in table 1.

                    Table 1--Estimated Burden To Survey Merit Review Applicants and Reviewers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Number of     Participation
                     Category of respondent                         respondents   time (minutes)  Burden (hours)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSF applicants and reviewers....................................          26,000              20           8,667
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Totals......................................................          26,000              20           8,667
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comments: Comments are invited on (a) whether the proposed 
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of 
the functions of the NSF, including whether the information shall have 
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the NSF's estimate of the burden 
of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the 
quality, utility, and clarity of the information on respondents, 
including through the use of automated collection

[[Page 65438]]

techniques or other forms of information technology; and (d) ways to 
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are 
to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, 
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or 
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: October 8, 2020.
Suzanne H. Plimpton,
Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation.
[FR Doc. 2020-22755 Filed 10-14-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P