How NIH, NSF, DOE, and DARPA evaluate proposals, criterion by criterion, and what each one rewards in practice.
Understanding how proposals are evaluated is critical for writing competitive applications.
Intellectual Merit (primary): - What is the potential for the proposed activity to advance knowledge? - How well-conceived and organized is the proposed activity? - Is there sufficient access to resources? - How well-qualified is the individual, team, or institution to conduct proposed activities?
Broader Impacts (equally important): - What is the potential for the proposed activity to benefit society? - To what extent does the proposal address broader impacts in meaningful ways?
Additional Considerations: - Integration of research and education - Diversity and inclusion - Results from prior NSF support (if applicable)
Scored Criteria (1-9 scale, 1 = exceptional, 9 = poor):
Aligns with NIH mission
Investigator(s)
Adequate training and expertise
Innovation
Addresses important problem in creative ways
Approach
Feasible within timeline
Environment
Additional Review Considerations (not scored but discussed): - Protections for human subjects - Inclusion of women, minorities, and children - Vertebrate animal welfare - Biohazards - Resubmission response (if applicable) - Budget and timeline appropriateness
Varies by program office, but generally includes: - Scientific and/or technical merit - Appropriateness of proposed method or approach - Competency of personnel and adequacy of facilities - Reasonableness and appropriateness of budget - Relevance to DOE mission and program goals
DARPA-specific considerations: - Overall scientific and technical merit - Potential contribution to DARPA mission - Realism of proposed costs and availability of funds
Frame proposals with DARPA-style impact questions when appropriate: - What if you succeed? — Impact if the research works - What if you're right? — Implications of your hypothesis - Who cares? — Why it matters for national security
Core Evaluation Dimensions: 1. Innovation (創新性): Novelty of concept and approach. 2. Feasibility (可行性): Methodology rigor and preliminary data. 3. PI Capability (主持人能力): Track record and expertise. 4. Value (價值): Academic contribution and societal/industrial impact.
For detailed review criteria, refer to references/nstc_guidelines.md.