oor-nsf07601
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [oor-nsf07601] NSF Proposal was not accepted

To: oor-nsf07601 <oor-nsf07601@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: John Graybeal <graybeal@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 22:07:53 -0700
Message-id: <8D95614C-171A-4961-9FFF-D4F2C7772242@xxxxxxxxx>

[ *** This list is for use by the OOR nsf-07061 team only - please do not share 
or forward message without consent from the team! *** ]    (01)

I'll say a few words based on my 3 out of 9 record on NSF grants (2 of  
the 3 were unsolicited, though).    (02)

In a competitive grant like this, where a lot of money is involved and  
a lot of proposals are submitted, I think you need very close to all  
Excellent ratings.  (This bar will be somewhat lower for solicitations  
just reviewed or about to be reviewed, due to the flood of stimulus  
money.  And then maybe for a while after, as everyone tries to spend  
the money they just won, rather than get more grants.  But then the  
demand will go back up, maybe even higher.)    (03)

With less competition on smaller grants, I've averaged Very Good  
without success. Without sniffing success, in fact.  And I was on a  
review committee that was basically the same result, Very Good on  
average wasn't enough to consider funding.    (04)

This kind of NSF grant is maybe a bit unusual in that it is very hard  
to game the peer-reviewed grants, because the reviewers conclusions  
carry almost all the weight -- NSF program managers have little room  
to influence that. For what they call *unsolicited* proposals -- that  
is, the kind you want a program manager to solicit from you -- there  
is a little more maneuvering room.  There I squeaked by with an  
average of Very Good once.  But I think they really wanted the program.    (05)

I am sure that these 2 major themes you cite were the major points  
affecting the ratings.  There are other NSF solicitations where this  
proposal, or one like it, would fit very neatly.  But not for anywhere  
near that much money.    (06)

Hope those thoughts help.    (07)

John    (08)


On Apr 17, 2009, at 7:06 PM, Obrst, Leo J. wrote:    (09)

>
>
> [ *** This list is for use by the OOR nsf-07061 team only - please  
> do not share or forward message without consent from the team! *** ]
>
> I'm looking at the reviews and they basically summarize to 2 main  
> points:
>
> 1) NETWORK: Proposal does not create a network. ... The project is  
> interesting and valuable, but not really broad enough or "network"  
> enough to meet the criteria of the DataNet program. ... The proposal  
> is very strong on vision and rationale but doesn't appear to meet  
> the program call for a data network--the focus on ontologies is  
> compelling and will hopefully find funding through another  
> directorate.
>
> 2) DATA CURATION SERVICES:  It is in my opinion too narrowly focused  
> around semantic technologies to be a real DataNet candidate. It is  
> difficult to tell from the submission what if any data storage,  
> management, curation services are to be offered to scientific data  
> (as opposed to scientific ontologies). ... does not address the  
> preservation and curation of actual data sets created and used by  
> the community.
>
> There are some minor themes too.
>
> I think to win an NSF grant you need Excellents, Very Goods  
> predominantly. Fairs and Goods won't do it.
>
> Leo
>
> _____________________________________________
> Dr. Leo Obrst         The MITRE Corporation, Information Semantics
> lobrst@xxxxxxxxx      Information Discovery & Understanding, Command &  
> Control Center
> Voice: 703-983-6770   7515 Colshire Drive, M/S H305
> Fax: 703-983-1379     McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: oor-nsf07601-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>[mailto:oor-nsf07601-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> ] On Behalf Of K Goodier
> Sent: Friday, April 17, 2009 8:09 PM
> To: oor-nsf07601
> Subject: Re: [oor-nsf07601] NSF Proposal was not accepted
>
>
> [ *** This list is for use by the OOR nsf-07061 team only - please  
> do not share or forward message without consent from the team! *** ]
>
> Since I am I'm DC I could save you the trip.
>
> Of course I know there are few grants and lots of proposals, but the
> game around the beltway typically benefits those who go the extra mile
> to do the f2f. I have won many millions in the non-grant part of this
> game, but I certainly bow to your expertise on the grant side of this
> fence.
>
> K Goodier
>
> On Apr 17, 2009, at 5:43 PM, Ken Baclawski <kenb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>
>> [ *** This list is for use by the OOR nsf-07061 team only - please
>> do not share or forward message without consent from the team! *** ]
>>
>> I could go to DC and speak with the PM F2F, but it would be best if
>> I had
>> a better idea of how we can deal with the issues we know about
>> already.
>>
>> Generally speaking, the scores, even for a single reviewer, reflect
>> all of
>> the review criteria. To merit an overall score of "Excellent", one
>> must be
>> excellent on every criteron.  In other words, we can't expect a
>> weakness
>> with respect to one of the review criteria to be counteracted by
>> strength
>> on another criterion.  Remember that there are a lot of proposals
>> and only
>> a few grants.
>>
>> -- Ken
>>
>>> Sometimes you get some better ideas about the comments if you ask
>>> for a
>>> face-to-face feedback review.  I was concerned that we only rated  
>>> one
>>> "Very Good"
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-nsf07601/
>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/community/project/OOR/nsf07601/
>> Wiki: 
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository_Proposal/Nsf_07601
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-nsf07601/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/community/project/OOR/nsf07601/
> Wiki: 
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository_Proposal/Nsf_07601
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-nsf07601/
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/community/project/OOR/nsf07601/
> Wiki: 
>http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository_Proposal/Nsf_07601    (010)


John    (011)

--------------
John Graybeal   <mailto:graybeal@xxxxxxxxx>  -- 831-775-1956
Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
Marine Metadata Interoperability Project: http://marinemetadata.org    (012)



_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/oor-nsf07601/  
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/community/project/OOR/nsf07601/ 
Wiki: 
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OpenOntologyRepository_Proposal/Nsf_07601    (013)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>