FACACLASSIC

Note: An Annual Comprehensive Review, as required by §7 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, is conducted each year on committee data entered for the previous fiscal year (referred to as the reporting year). The data for the reporting year is not considered verified until this review is complete and the data is moved to history for an agency/department. See the Data From Previous Years section at the bottom of this page for the committee’s historical, verified data.

Details on agency responses to committee recommendations can be found under the Performance Measures section for each committee in the fields “Agency Feedback” and “Agency Feedback Comment.”

NSF - 59 - Proposal Review Panel for Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings - Agency Authority

GENERAL INFORMATION

Committee Name	Proposal Review Panel for Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings	Agency Name	National Science Foundation
Fiscal Year	2025	Committee Number	59
Original Establishment Date	9/7/1990	Committee Status	Chartered
Actual Termination Date		Committee URL
Actual Merged Date		Presidential Appointments*	No
New Committee This FY	No	Max Number of Members*	Unlimited
Terminated This FY	No	Designated Fed Officer Position Title*	Division Director
Merged This FY		Designated Federal Officer Prefix	Dr.
Current Charter Date	6/27/2025	Designated Federal Officer First Name*	Evan
Date Of Renewal Charter	6/27/2027	Designated Federal Officer Middle Name	K.
Projected Termination Date		Designated Federal Officer Last Name*	Heit
Exempt From Renewal*	No	Designated Federal Officer Suffix
Specific Termination Authority		Designated Federal Officer Phone*	(703) 292-4305
Establishment Authority*	Agency Authority	Designated Federal Officer Fax*	(703) 292-9456
Specific Establishment Authority*	ADM IV-100	Designated Federal Officer Email*	ekheit@nsf.gov
Effective Date Of Authority*	10/4/1990
Exempt From EO 13875 Discretionary Cmte	Not Applicable
Committee Type*	Continuing
Presidential*	No
Committee Function*	Grant Review Committee

RECOMMENDATION/JUSTIFICATIONS

Agency Recommendation*	Continue
Legislation to Terminate Required	Not Applicable
Legislation Status	Not Applicable
How does cmte accomplish its purpose?*	Four to twelve panelists prepare written summaries and reviews. Each proposal is discussed by the entire panel and a panel summary is prepared. After careful reading of the proposals and extensive panel discussion, recommendations were given. Advice was given on the merit of special initiative proposals or applications submitted to NSF for financial support. Proposals funded were from the following programs: Advancing Informal STEM Learning (AISL), Information Technology Experiences for Students and Teachers (ITEST), Faculty Early Career (CAREER), Discovery Research PreK-12 (DRK-12), and EHR Core Research (ECR).
How is membership balanced?*	Panel membership was balanced with educators, researchers, evaluators, scientists, mathematicians, and technologists. Based on their expertise, members are chosen as advisors for agency decisions that might not be as accurately assessed without said expertise. All recommendations for panelists were approved by the Division Director who ensures consideration is given to recruiting the best panelists.
How frequent & relevant are cmte mtgs?*	Meetings are held in accordance with the program solicitation guidelines. All programs hold panel meetings once a year. The panels were separated into sub-panels based on discipline.
Why advice can't be obtained elsewhere?*	Outside expert advice on the merit and potential of proposals is an essential component of the division's funding decisions. The value of the committee is in its diverse makeup, both academically and professionally, creating a more discerning system for weighing the merits of proposals. Discussion by panelists helps Program Directors to discern possible conflicts-of-interests or other sources of bias, calibrate the reviews, and resolve differences of opinion among the panelists. Other sources do not allow for group analysis across disciplines.
Why close or partially close meetings?	To review proposals that included information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including technical information; financial data such as salaries; and personal information concerning individuals associated with the proposals.
Recommendation Remarks

PERFORMANCE MEASURES

Outcome Improvement To Health Or Safety*	No	Action Reorganize Priorities*	No
Outcome Trust In Government	No	Action Reallocate Resources	No
Outcome Major Policy Changes	No	Action Issued New Regulations	No
Outcome Advance In Scientific Research	Yes	Action Proposed Legislation	No
Outcome Effective Grant Making	Yes	Action Approved Grants Or Other Payments	Yes
Outcome Improved Service Delivery	No	Action Other	No
Outcome Increased Customer Satisfaction	No	Action Comment	NA
Outcome Implement Laws/Reg Requirements	No	Grants Review*	Yes
Outcome Other	No	Number Of Grants Reviewed	1,657
Outcome Comment	NA	Number Of Grants Recommended	235
Cost Savings*	Unable to Determine	Dollar Value Of Grants Recommended	$222,054,235.00
Cost Savings Comment	The use of panelists to review proposals for the Agency is an invaluable asset. The cost of obtaining the expertise, insight, and information received by the Division using alternative methods, such as hiring the expertise as full or part-time employees, would be extremely high.	Grants Review Comment	The panelists/advisory committee members provided information on the merit of the proposal, which includes an overall rating. The number of proposals above includes pre-proposals submitted to NSF for review. The pre-proposals are not included in the number of “grants recommend” or “dollar value of grants” recommended for approval.
Number Of Recommendations*	1,657	Access Contact Designated Fed. Officer*	Yes
Number Of Recommendations Comment	This is an ongoing committee. Therefore, the number of recommendations produced by the committee is for the fiscal year.	Access Agency Website	No
% of Recs Fully Implemented*	100.00%	Access Committee Website	No
% of Recs Fully Implemented Comment	The word implement is not applicable to grant review panels. All recommendations are considered by the agency.	Access GSA FACA Website	No
% of Recs Partially Implemented*	0.00%	Access Publications	No
% of Recs Partially Implemented Comment	Not applicable. Please see answer directly above.	Access Other	No
Agency Feedback*	Yes	Access Comment	N/A
Agency Feedback Comment*	Although panelists may not receive direct feedback, each committee member may use the NSF FastLane, a public web-based program, which provides information on awards made by the agency to determine the outcome of proposals reviewed by the panel	Narrative Description*	The NSF mission is set out in the NSF Act of 1950 authorizes and directs the Agency to initiate and support: basic scientific research and research fundamental to the engineering process; and science and engineering education programs at all levels and in all fields of science and engineering. The involvement of knowledgeable peers from outside the Foundation in the review of proposals is the keystone of NSF's proposal review system. Their judgments of the extent to which proposals address the merit review criteria are vital for informing NSF staff and influencing funding recommendations.

COSTS

1. Payments to Non-Federal Members*		1. Est Paymnts to Non-Fed Membrs Nxt FY*
2. Payments to Federal Members*		2. Est. Payments to Fed Members Next FY*
3. Payments to Federal Staff*		3. Estimated Payments to Federal Staff*
4. Payments to Consultants*		4. Est. Payments to Consultants Next FY*
5. Travel Reimb. For Non-Federal Membrs*		5. Est Travel Reimb Non-Fed Membr nxtFY*
6. Travel Reimb. For Federal Members*		6. Est Travel Reimb For Fed Members*
7. Travel Reimb. For Federal Staff*		7. Est. Travel Reimb to Fed Staf Nxt FY*
8. Travel Reimb. For Consultants*		8. Est Travel Reimb to Consltnts Nxt FY*
10. Other Costs		10. Est. Other Costs Next FY*
11. Total Costs	$0.00	11. Est. Total Next FY*	$0.00
Date Cost Last Modified	2/19/2025 11:03 AM	Est. Fed Staff Support Next FY*
Federal Staff Support (FTE)*		Est Cost Remarks
Cost Remarks

Interest Areas

Category Area Applied Science Applied Sciences Mathematics Arts Arts and Humanities Education Education Schools and Academic Institutions Training Science and Technology Science and Technology Social Sciences History Social Sciences

Custom Links

Committee Level Reports