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 - 1191 - Proposal Review Panel for Chemistry - Agency Authority

GENERAL INFORMATION

Committee Name	Proposal Review Panel for Chemistry	Agency Name	National Science Foundation
Fiscal Year	2025	Committee Number	1191
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*	Acting Division Director, CHE
Merged This FY		Designated Federal Officer Prefix	Dr.
Current Charter Date	6/28/2024	Designated Federal Officer First Name*	Lin
Date Of Renewal Charter	6/28/2026	Designated Federal Officer Middle Name
Projected Termination Date		Designated Federal Officer Last Name*	He
Exempt From Renewal*	No	Designated Federal Officer Suffix
Specific Termination Authority		Designated Federal Officer Phone*	(703) 292-4956
Establishment Authority*	Agency Authority	Designated Federal Officer Fax*	703-292-9037
Specific Establishment Authority*	ADM IV-100	Designated Federal Officer Email*	lhe@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?*	The Proposal Review Panels reviewed proposals for the following special initiative activities : Faculty Early Career Development; Research Experiences for Undergraduates; Chemistry Research Instrumentation and Facilities; Technology for a Sustainable Environment; Professional Opportunities for Women in Research and Education; and Environmental Molecular Science Institutes and Collaborative Research Activities in Environmental Molecular Science. Additionally, panels convened for the purpose of reviewing proposals in Analytical and Surface Chemistry, Experimental Physical Chemistry, and several CAREER panels in the various subdisciplines with the Chemistry Division. Panels met to review proposals for Research Sites for Education in Chemistry. For each of these activities the panels provided an approximate priority for the funding of the competing proposals. For each of these activities it is important to compare the relative merit of the competing proposals or, in the case of the NSF Career Application, the relative merit of the competing individuals. The broadly-based panels, the membership of which is carefully balanced (see below), provides a depth of insight into all of the important factors which the staff must consider in making its decisions. The panel recommendations are a major factor in the final decisions, but in some cases the Division must take other factors into account in arriving at a final list of successful proposals. For each proposal, the committee prepares a Panel Summary which is provided to the applicant as partial justification for the final decision.
How is membership balanced?*	Panel membership includes individuals with expertise in all areas of the science involved, selected for broad geographical distribution, and to provide an appropriate mix of types of colleges and universities, and with women and minority representation at least equal to that in the applicant pool. Industrial scientists are included on virtually all panels.
How frequent & relevant are cmte mtgs?*	The timing of the meetings is determined by Foundation-wide deadlines and the need to provide timely reviews and decisions within the six-month interval allowed by Foundation policy. A fair and efficient review requires the use of panels.
Why advice can't be obtained elsewhere?*	There is no other standing or ad hoc group that exists that has the blend of backgrounds--technical, institutional, and personal--to provide the Division with the necessary technical review of the proposals being considered.
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	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	1,263
Outcome Comment	NA	Number Of Grants Recommended	386
Cost Savings*	Unable to Determine	Dollar Value Of Grants Recommended	$237,187,829.00
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.The number of recommendations are for the fiscal year.
Number Of Recommendations*	1,296	Access Contact Designated Fed. Officer*	Yes
Number Of Recommendations Comment	The number of recommendations is for fiscal year 2024.	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 Basic Science Chemistry Civil Rights Disabled Equal Opportunity Minorities Native Americans Women Education Education Energy Energy Trade Competitiveness

Custom Links

Committee Level Reports