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 - 1194 - Proposal Review Panel for Civil, Mechanical, and Manufacturing Innovation - Agency Authority

GENERAL INFORMATION

Committee Name	Proposal Review Panel for Civil, Mechanical, and Manufacturing Innovation	Agency Name	National Science Foundation
Fiscal Year	2025	Committee Number	1194
Original Establishment Date	11/17/1988	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*	Director, CMMI
Merged This FY		Designated Federal Officer Prefix	Dr.
Current Charter Date	6/28/2024	Designated Federal Officer First Name*	Daniel
Date Of Renewal Charter	6/28/2026	Designated Federal Officer Middle Name
Projected Termination Date		Designated Federal Officer Last Name*	Linzell
Exempt From Renewal*	No	Designated Federal Officer Suffix
Specific Termination Authority		Designated Federal Officer Phone*	(703) 292-7571
Establishment Authority*	Agency Authority	Designated Federal Officer Fax*	(703) 292-9053
Specific Establishment Authority*	ADM IV-100	Designated Federal Officer Email*	dlinzell@nsf.gov
Effective Date Of Authority*	8/16/1990
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?*	These panels reviewed approximately 2,007 unsolicited proposals submitted to the six Division program elements as well as submissions in response to special initiatives (i.e., EPA/NSF, NSF/DARPA initiatives, etc.) and NSF-wide annual solicitations (CAREER, REG, MRI, SBIR, NIRT, NER, NSEC). These panels review and make recommendations for the disposition of 95% of the proposals received in the Division. The other 5% are mail reviewed and, in special cases, internally reviewed.
How is membership balanced?*	Membership in all panels reflects an appropriate mix of academic and industrial expertise in accordance with each program area. Efforts are also made to reflect an appropriate balance of women, minorities and disabled members, as well as geographic representation.
How frequent & relevant are cmte mtgs?*	During FY24 167 proposal review panels were held to review these proposals.
Why advice can't be obtained elsewhere?*	The only other option for the proposal review process is mail review. This option is not feasible given the current volume of proposals received in the Division of Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing Innovation (CMMI). Further, it is our assessment that providing the opportunity for reviewers to discuss and compare proposals improves the quality of the review process.
Why close or partially close meetings?	To review proposals that included information of a proprietary nature, including technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and personal infromation concerning individuals associated with the proposals.
Recommendation Remarks	None

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	2,007
Outcome Comment	NA	Number Of Grants Recommended	314
Cost Savings*	Unable to Determine	Dollar Value Of Grants Recommended	$142,649,779.00
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 ratingThe 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*	2,027	Access Contact Designated Fed. Officer*	Yes
Number Of Recommendations Comment	The number of recommendations 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 Engineering

Custom Links

Committee Level Reports