© 2019 NASA Nebraska Space Grant

  • Facebook Social Icon

NASA Nebraska Space Grant

Mini-Grant Review Criteria

RESEARCH MINI-GRANT REVIEW CRITERIA

Statewide Competition Review

A statewide review committee, made up of members of the Nebraska Technical Advisory Committee, will review and score the proposals on each of the following criteria:

 

  • Quality of the short abstract, including its relevance to NASA and ability to be understood by the general public

  • Alignment of the project with one or more of the NASA Mission Directorates

  • Collaboration or potential collaboration with NASA scientists and/or engineers

  • Diversity component of the project, both faculty and students

  • Potential for resulting peer-reviewed publications and presentations

  • Potential for resulting proposals for future funding to NASA and other agencies or industry

  • Potential to contribute to the economic development of the state, or to state science and technology priorities

  • Evaluation methodology appropriate to the content and scale of the project, including measurable outcomes, and how data will be acquired, aggregated, and then compared against pre-award baseline data

  • Quality and feasibility of the proposed timetable, including milestones for achievement of specific objectives

  • Quality of the research described (the science)

 

Administrative Budget Review

In addition to the statewide competition review, the proposal will undergo an administrative budget review which will include:

 

  • Allowability of items in the budget

  • Adequate level of detail in the budget justification

  • The feasibility of the budget

  • The budget as compared to the scope of the project

  • Relevance of items in the budget to complete the objectives of the project

HIGHER EDUCATION MINI-GRANT REVIEW CRITERIA

 

Statewide Competition Review

A statewide review committee, made up of members of the Nebraska Technical Advisory Committee, will review and score the proposals on each of the following criteria:

 

  • Quality of the short abstract, including its relevance to NASA and ability to be understood by the general public

  • Alignment of the project with one or more of the NASA Mission Directorates

  • Collaboration or potential collaboration with NASA scientists and/or engineers

  • Diversity component of the project, both faculty and students

  • Potential for resulting peer-reviewed publications and presentations

  • Potential for resulting proposals for future funding to NASA and other agencies or industry

  • Potential to contribute to the economic or workforce development of the state, or to state science and technology priorities

  • Contribution in terms of institutional development activities (e.g., new major, new minor or emphasis, new center, new course, etc.)

  • Contribution in terms of curriculum and instructional developments (e.g., course outline, course revision, lab, lecture, software, problem sets, demonstration / lab tour, video, book, etc.)

  • Evaluation methodology appropriate to the content and scale of the project, including measurable outcomes, and how data will be acquired, aggregated, and then compared against pre-award baseline data

  • Quality and feasibility of the proposed timetable, including milestones for achievement of specific objectives

  • Quality of the higher education project described

 

Administrative Budget Review

In addition to the statewide competition review, the proposal will undergo an administrative budget review which will include:

 

  • Allowability of items in the budget

  • Adequate level of detail in the budget justification

  • The feasibility of the budget

  • The budget as compared to the scope of the project

  • Relevance of items in the budget to complete the objectives of the project