9396 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

RECOMMENDATIONS Although the roundtable discussion covered a broad array of topics. the following general recommendations will be confined to (1) content of research proposals and annual reports, (2) summary of available information, (3) integration of available information. (4) identifying research gaps. (5) lack of an overall strategic plan, and (6) considerations for future peer reviews. 1. Content of Research Proposals and Annual Reports. The format used by the Recovery Program for research proposals contains the correct information. However. the information provided in the proposals is too vague or incomplete for evaluation as to scientific merit through a peer review. It is recommended that the scopes-of-work be written as research proposals. Specifically, they should be written as complete study proposals for all newly proposed work so that they contain sufficient detail and can be evaluated through the peer review process. A. Research Proposals. (1) Title. The title should be concise but descriptive so that the proposed study topic and relation to other topics is clear. (2) Principal Investiqator(s). The principal investigator(s) and organization(s) should be clearly identified in the research proposal rather than the project leader who is the overall manager of studies by an agency or field station. The past experience and performance of the principal investigator(s) on similar projects should be provided. (3) Objectives. The objectives should be precisely stated so that the intended outputs are measurable (i.e., the quantity and quality of the proposed action) with a defined target date for completion. (4) Relation to the Recovery Action Plan. In addition to identifying the topic as stated in the Recovery Action Plan (RIPRAP). the need for the study should be discussed as to how it will solve the issue or problem. wholly or in part. A literature review related to the issue or problem should be concisely summarized to demonstrate that the proposed study is necessary and how it relates to the published literature. The expected results or benefits of the proposed study should clearly describe the expected results and how the results will be applied or integrated with other disciplines. (5) Methods or Approach. The methods or approach should be described concisely with references on the proposed methodes) that provide even more detailed description and application of the methods. It would be desirable to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the methods selected over others that were considered. The level of precision or statistical tests to be performed should be defined. The approach sections of the 8