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 - 1209 - Proposal Review Panel for Polar Programs - Agency Authority

GENERAL INFORMATION

Committee Name	Proposal Review Panel for Polar Programs	Agency Name	National Science Foundation
Fiscal Year	2025	Committee Number	1209
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, Division of Polar Programs
Merged This FY		Designated Federal Officer Prefix	Dr.
Current Charter Date	6/28/2024	Designated Federal Officer First Name*	Jean
Date Of Renewal Charter	6/28/2026	Designated Federal Officer Middle Name
Projected Termination Date		Designated Federal Officer Last Name*	Cottam Allen
Exempt From Renewal*	No	Designated Federal Officer Suffix
Specific Termination Authority		Designated Federal Officer Phone*	(703) 292-8030
Establishment Authority*	Agency Authority	Designated Federal Officer Fax*	703-292-9081
Specific Establishment Authority*	ADM IV-100	Designated Federal Officer Email*	jcallen@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?*	Panel deliberations resulted in the ranking and recommendations of awards made in Antarctic and Arctic sciences and the Antarctic Artists and Writers proposals. The panel's advice is weighed carefully by the program staff in making funding recommendations.
How is membership balanced?*	Panel membership includes individuals with expertise in all areas of the sciences involved, selected for broad geographical distribution, and to provide an appropriate mix of types of colleges and universities. Represented were women and minorities, plus industrial scientists. The Antarctic Artists and Writers panel is comprised of professional artists, writers, scientists, and educators—some, current or former NSF award recipients with first-hand Antarctic experience.
How frequent & relevant are cmte mtgs?*	Panels meet at least once a year as soon as practical after proposal deadlines. Continuance of the panel is essential to fair and equitable decision-making as to which proposals are supported.
Why advice can't be obtained elsewhere?*	The breadth of expertise required for fair peer evaluation of the variety of proposals received transcends the ability of NSF staff, so outside advice from scientists from all polar disciplines is essential. Panel review is the only viable means to obtain adequate review of proposals in these varied programs.
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	Proposal review panels provide advice only on specific proposal competitions. Thus, this advice informs the NSF decision to make awards or declinations only.
Outcome Implement Laws/Reg Requirements	No	Grants Review*	Yes
Outcome Other	No	Number Of Grants Reviewed	294
Outcome Comment	N/A	Number Of Grants Recommended	71
Cost Savings*	Unable to Determine	Dollar Value Of Grants Recommended	$34,633,301.00
Cost Savings Comment	N/A	Grants Review Comment	Not all proposals ae taken to review panels. Some reviews are done by ad-hoc review only. Both are acceptable forms of merit review within NSF.
Number Of Recommendations*	296	Access Contact Designated Fed. Officer*	Yes
Number Of Recommendations Comment	Varies, depending on the number of proposals taken to panel. The number of recommendations is for the fiscal year.	Access Agency Website	Yes
% of Recs Fully Implemented*	100.00%	Access Committee Website	No
% of Recs Fully Implemented Comment	Proposal review panels provide advice to NSF to inform NSF's decision on funding or declining to fund research proposals. The advice is not binding in NSF and NSF does not track exactly how recommendations from panels track to decisions.	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*	No	Access Comment	N/A
Agency Feedback Comment*	N/A	Narrative Description*	NSF accomplishes its mission through monetary awards (grants) for research and education and science and engineering. Grants are awarded in response to proposals submitted to the Foundation. Proposal review panels are often used as part of the merit review process that gathers information about the strengths and weaknesses of proposals. This advice is one of the principal inputs to NSF's decisions to either make an awards or decline to support a particular proposal.

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 Basic Science Basic Sciences Physics Environment Earth Sciences Environmental Issues Oceans and Atmospheric Sciences Government Federal Government Health Safety International International Law Social Sciences Social Sciences Space Space and Aeronautics

Custom Links

Committee Level Reports