Laserfiche WebLink
<br />However, the information provided in the proposals is too vague or <br />. incomplete for evaluation as to scientific merit through a peer review. <br />It is recommended that the scopes-of-work be written as research <br />proposals. Specifically, they should be written as complete study <br />proposals for all newly proposed work so that they contain sufficient <br />detail and can be evaluated through the peer review process. <br /> <br />A. Research ProoosalB. <br /> <br />(1) Title. The title should be concise but descriptive sO that the <br />proposed study topic and relation to other topics is clear. <br /> <br />(2) PrinciDal Investiaatorlsl. The principal investigator(s) and <br />organization(s) should be clearly identified in the research <br />proposal rather than the project leader who is the overall <br />manager of studies by an agency or field station. The past <br />experience and performance of the principal investigator(s) on <br />similar projects should be provided. <br /> <br />(3) Obiectives. The objectives should be precisely stated so that <br />the intended outputs are measurable (i.e., the quantity and <br />quality of the proposed action) with a defined target date for <br />completion. <br /> <br />(4) Relation to the Recoverv Action Plan. In addition to <br />identifying the topic as stated in the Recovery Action Plan <br />(RIPRAP), the purpose and need of the study should be discussed <br />as background with an explanation of how it will help to solve <br />the issue or problem, wholly or in part. A literature review <br />related to the issue or problem should be concisely summarized <br />to help justify that the proposed study is necesaary and its <br />relation to the published .literature. The expected results or <br />benefits of the proposed study should clearly identified with a <br />discussion of how the results will be applied or integrated with <br />work from other studies or disciplines. <br /> <br />(5) Methods or ADoroach. The methods or approach should be <br />described concisely with references on the proposed methodes) <br />that provide a detailed description and application of the <br />methods. It would be desirable to provide rationale and <br />justification for the method(s) selected. The level of <br />precision or statistical tests to be performed should be <br />defined. The approach sections of the scopes-of-work were not <br />described in terms of statistically sound experimental designs. <br />This recommended expansion of the methods or approach section <br />will enable peer reviewers to evaluate information presented <br />relative to their scientific discipline or expertise. <br /> <br />(6) References. A literature cited or references section should <br />contain the literature relevant to the proposed study. Proposed <br />studies should contain a summary of pertinent published and <br />"grey" literature to ensure that the proposed study will be <br /> <br />9 <br />