Table of Contents

NOFO Field: Review and Selection Process

NOFO Location: Application Review Information - second field
- Preceding Field: Evaluation Criteria
- Subsequent Field: Selection Factors

OMB Guidance:
V. Application Review Information
        2. Review and Selection Process -- Required.
        This section may vary in the level of detail provided. The announcement must list any program policy or other factors or elements, other than merit criteria, that the selecting official may use in selecting applications for award (e.g., geographical dispersion, program balance, or diversity).
        You also may include other details you deem appropriate. For example, this section may indicate who is responsible for evaluation against the merit criteria (e.g., peers external to the agency or Federal agency personnel) and/or who makes the final selections for award. If you have a multi-phase review process (e.g., an external panel advising internal agency personnel who make final recommendations to the deciding official), you may describe the phases. You also may include: the number of people on an evaluation panel and how it operates, the way reviewers are selected, reviewer qualifications, and the way that conflicts of interest are avoided. In addition, if you permit applicants to nominate suggested reviewers of their applications or suggest those they feel may be inappropriate due to a conflict of interest, that information should be included in this section.-01

Additional Guidance:

• Do not enter the field name (shown in bold in the examples). The NOFO generator will enter the field name.
• Review and Selection Process is the second of 4 subsections under Application Review Information.
• The following language should be included at the end of this section in your NOFO (See FAM 2013-01 From the Department):
  In accordance with current Federal appropriations law, NOAA will provide a successful corporate applicant a form to be completed by its authorized representatives certifying that the corporation has no Federally-assessed unpaid or delinquent tax liability or recent felony criminal convictions under any Federal law.

Published Examples:

        B. Review and Selection Process:

        An initial administrative review/screening will be conducted to determine compliance with requirements/completeness. All proposals will then be evaluated and individually ranked in accordance with the assigned weights of the above evaluation criteria by a review panel consisting of three to seven NOAA/NWS experts. The reviewers’ ratings are used to produce a rank order of the proposals. The Selection Official selects proposals after considering the reviews’ ratings and selection factors listed below. In making the final selections, the Selecting Official will award in rank order unless the proposal is selected out of rank order based upon one or more of the selection factors.


        B. Review and Selection Process:

        An initial evaluation of the pre-proposals will be carried out, and the authors of those pre-proposals deemed of interest to the Office of Hydrologic Development will be invited to submit a full proposal. An initial administrative review is conducted to determine compliance with requirements and completeness of the application. Merit review is conducted by peer panel reviewers. Each reviewer will individually evaluate and rank proposals using the evaluation criteria provided above. Three to seven NWS experts representing NWS Regions and Centers may be used in this process. The merit reviewers= ratings are used to produce a rank order of the proposals. The Selecting Official selects proposals after considering the peer panel reviews and selection factors listed below. In making the final selections, the Selecting Official will award in rank order unless the proposal is justified to be selected out of rank order based upon one or more of the selection factors below. The Selecting Official may negotiate the funding level of the proposal. The Selecting Official makes final recommendations for award to the Grants Officer who is authorized to obligate the funds.


        B. Review and Selection Process:

        Each step in the selection process is based on the evaluation criteria listed. The panel will include representation from the Sea Grant Association, the National Sea Grant Review Panel, and the current class of Fellows. Each panel member is assigned applications to review before the panel meeting. During the panel meeting each application will be individually discussed. Following this discussion, an individual score will be provided by each panel member. Once all applications have been discussed and scored, a numerical ranking will be created for each of the panel member’s scores by the Knauss program manager or designee. An average ranking will then be computed for each applicant. In general, the successful applicants will be selected based on the average ranking; however, the selecting official may select lower ranking applicants based on the selection factors below. The successful applicants will then be placed into either the legislative or executive group by the selecting official based upon the applicant’s stated preference, the application materials submitted, and the individual comments of the panel members.


        B. Review and Selection Process:

        An initial administrative review is conducted at both the preliminary and final proposal stages to determine compliance with requirements and completeness of the application.

        Preliminary proposals will not be subjected to a selection process. Preliminary proposals will be used to provide feedback to applicants, select appropriate technical reviewers for final proposals, and to tailor technical, formatting and content guidance that will be supplied to applicants who submitted preliminary proposals, to assist them in writing the full proposal. All those (and only those) who submitted preliminary proposals meeting the deadline and other requirement of this notice are eligible to submit full proposals.

        Full proposals will be sent to peer reviewers for written reviews. Reviewers will be asked to evaluate the proposals using the evaluation criteria listed in this announcement. A peer review panel consisting of government, academic, and industry representatives will evaluate each final proposal and accompanying written reviews in accordance with the above criteria and their assigned weights. Panel members will provide individual evaluations of each proposal, and their ratings will be used to produce a rank order of the proposals. The review panel will provide no consensus advice to the Program Officer.

        The Program Officer will consider these evaluations when recommending to the Selecting Official which applications should be selected for award.