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 - 1196 - Proposal Review Panel for Electrical, Communications, and Cyber Systems - Agency Authority

GENERAL INFORMATION

Committee Name	Proposal Review Panel for Electrical, Communications, and Cyber Systems	Agency Name	National Science Foundation
Fiscal Year	2025	Committee Number	1196
Original Establishment Date	11/17/1988	Committee Status	Chartered
Actual Termination Date		Committee URL	http://www.nsf.gov/div/index.jsp?div=eccs
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, ECCS
Merged This FY		Designated Federal Officer Prefix
Current Charter Date	6/28/2024	Designated Federal Officer First Name*	Anthony
Date Of Renewal Charter	6/28/2026	Designated Federal Officer Middle Name
Projected Termination Date		Designated Federal Officer Last Name*	Maciejewski
Exempt From Renewal*	No	Designated Federal Officer Suffix
Specific Termination Authority		Designated Federal Officer Phone*	(703) 292-7027
Establishment Authority*	Agency Authority	Designated Federal Officer Fax*
Specific Establishment Authority*	ADM IV-100	Designated Federal Officer Email*	amacieje@nsf.gov
Effective Date Of Authority*	8/30/1990
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	No
Legislation Status	Not Applicable
How does cmte accomplish its purpose?*	The Proposal Review Panel met 86 times in FY 2024. They provided competitive review analysis for each proposal as well as panel summaries. Each of these panels resulted in a invaluable review process that includes the following: a ranking matrix, written reviews, panel summary, minutes, the latest state-of-the art processes and a funding recommendation. Panelists reviewed and evaluated over 1090 proposals submitted to the division.
How is membership balanced?*	Panelists represent a broad balance of the research community to include women, minorities, geographic distribution, industry, academe, Federal government and laboratories, age distribution and appropriate research disciplines.
How frequent & relevant are cmte mtgs?*	Within the ECCS Division, there are 3 research clusters that have panels each year. The ECCS Division had 86 meetings this year with each panel focusing on subareas of the 3 research clusters.
Why advice can't be obtained elsewhere?*	Proposals submitted from the research community demonstrate methods of incorporating the latest state-of-the-art expertise into their subject matter. The community of subject matter experts provides qualified peer review specific to the proposals.
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	No Comments

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	1,090
Outcome Comment	NA	Number Of Grants Recommended	240
Cost Savings*	Unable to Determine	Dollar Value Of Grants Recommended	$121,759,633.00
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*	1,090	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	Yes
% 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 Research.gov, 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 Engineering Research Basic Research

Custom Links

Committee Level Reports