<mods xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" version="3.3" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-3.xsd" ID="P0b002ee1803973bc">
<name type="corporate">
 <namePart>United States Government Publishing Office</namePart>
 <role>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">publisher</roleTerm>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">pbl</roleTerm>
</role>
 <role>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">distributor</roleTerm>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">dst</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="corporate">
 <namePart>United States</namePart>
 <namePart>Government Accountability Office</namePart>
 <namePart>Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division</namePart>
 <role>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">aut</roleTerm>
</role>
 <description>Government Organization</description>
</name>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<genre authority="marcgt">government publication</genre>
<language>
 <languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
</language>
<extension>
 <collectionCode>GAOREPORTS</collectionCode>
 <category>Legislative Agency Publications</category>
 <waisDatabaseName>gao</waisDatabaseName>
 <branch>legislative</branch>
 <dateIngested>2010-08-12</dateIngested>
</extension>
<originInfo>
 <publisher>U.S. Government Printing Office</publisher>
 <dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1998-02-26</dateIssued>
 <issuance>monographic</issuance>
</originInfo>
<physicalDescription>
 <note type="source content type">deposited</note>
 <digitalOrigin>born digital</digitalOrigin>
 <extent>8 p.</extent>
</physicalDescription>
<classification authority="sudocs">GA 1.13:T-RCED-98-92</classification>
<identifier type="uri">https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-92</identifier>
<identifier type="local">P0b002ee1803973bc</identifier>
<identifier type="former package identifier">f:rc98092t</identifier>
<recordInfo>
 <recordContentSource authority="marcorg">DGPO</recordContentSource>
 <recordCreationDate encoding="w3cdtf">2010-08-12</recordCreationDate>
 <recordChangeDate encoding="w3cdtf">2011-03-24</recordChangeDate>
 <recordIdentifier source="DGPO">GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-92</recordIdentifier>
 <recordOrigin>machine generated</recordOrigin>
 <languageOfCataloging>
  <languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
</languageOfCataloging>
</recordInfo>
<accessCondition type="GPO scope determination">fdlp</accessCondition>
<extension>
 <docClass>REPORT</docClass>
 <accessId>GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-92</accessId>
 <reportNumber>T-RCED-98-92</reportNumber>
 <subject>Research and development</subject>
 <subject>Funds management</subject>
 <subject>Research program management</subject>
 <subject>Economic analysis</subject>
 <subject>Technical proposal evaluation</subject>
 <identifier>NIST Advanced Technology Program</identifier>
 <type>Testimony</type>
 <seriesAbbrev>RCED</seriesAbbrev>
</extension>
<titleInfo>
 <title>Federal Research: Information on the Advanced Technology Program&apos;s 1997 Award Selection</title>
</titleInfo>
<abstract>GAO discussed the National Institute of Standards and Technology&apos;s
(NIST) Advanced Technology Program&apos;s (ATP) fiscal year (FY) 1997 award
selection process, focusing on identifying the information that ATP used
to determine whether to accept or reject competing project proposals.&lt;p/&gt;GAO noted that: (1) according to program officials, for the FY 1997
competition, NIST made the determination of whether the applicant could
probably find funding elsewhere based on information gathered throughout
the proposal review process; (2) this included questioning the
applicants during the oral review phase if doubt remained as to whether
the applicants could have found project funding elsewhere; (3) for the
FY 1997 competition, there was no requirement that applicants report
that they could not find funding elsewhere; (4) however, in December
1997, ATP revised its requirements such that in the future applicants
must indicate on the proposal application their efforts to find private
funding; (5) likewise, program officials told GAO that information
acquired during the proposal review was used to determine if program
support was important to the project from a national economic
perspective; (6) specifically, according to ATP officials, one of the
five selection criteria for evaluating program proposals, &quot;Potential Net
Broad-based Economic Benefits,&quot; relates to whether or not funding a
project would create a serious national economic concern; (7) according
to the guidance to applicants for preparing project proposals, the
review process would include a review of the proposal by panels of
outside experts in business and economics to determine the proposed
project&apos;s potential for broad-based benefits and its commercial
viability; and (8) however, program officials neither defined what they
meant by a serious national economic concern nor how the ATP reviews
resulted in a determination that a delay in project progress would not
be a serious national economic concern.</abstract>
<location>
 <url displayLabel="HTML rendition" access="raw object">https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-92/html/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-92.htm</url>
 <url displayLabel="PDF rendition" access="raw object">https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-92/pdf/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-92.pdf</url>
</location>
<identifier type="preferred citation">GAO/T-RCED-98-92</identifier>
<location>
 <url displayLabel="Content Detail" access="object in context">https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-92</url>
</location>
<note>Testimony</note>
<extension>
 <searchTitle>GAO/T-RCED-98-92; Federal Research: Information on the Advanced Technology Program&apos;s 1997 Award Selection;
            </searchTitle>
</extension>
<subject>
 <topic>Research and development</topic>
 <topic>Funds management</topic>
 <topic>Research program management</topic>
 <topic>Economic analysis</topic>
 <topic>Technical proposal evaluation</topic>
 <topic>NIST Advanced Technology Program</topic>
</subject>
</mods>