Proposal Evaluations for Citrus Research with CRDF

Full Proposals will be evaluated first for compliance with administrative requirements. Formal peer review for technical and scientific merit will be conducted by a panel assembled by the Foundation. The review panel will rely on the following evaluation criteria:

• Proposal Relevance: Clear articulation of objectives, relevance to CATP focus areas (priorities), strength of rationale, practical application;
• Proposal Quality: Appropriateness of experimental approach, methodology and data interpretation, consistency of timelines and milestones with the nature of the project and level of effort, feasibility/probability of success;
• Personnel, Facilities and Budget: Appropriateness and relevance of expertise involved, experience of key personnel, suitability of research facilities, and appropriateness of budget.

Following technical and scientific review and evaluation by the Scientific Advisory Board (SAB), CRDF’s Research Management Committee will consider the SAB review of each proposal and conduct an additional assessment of scientific merit and applicability of the project delivering solutions to the problems (research priorities). The Research Management Committee’s support of proposals will be recommended for funding approval by the CRDF Board of Directors.

Proposal Confidentiality: Proposals and reviews will not be available to the public, but information from the proposals will be described in the recommendations of the review panel. Please do not include proprietary information in the proposal. If you believe disclosing proprietary information is essential to the evaluation of your proposal, describe the circumstances of your situation in an email and send it to catp@citrusrdf.org;

Award Notification: All who submitted a full proposal will receive comments from the proposal reviews. Those PIs whose proposal has been approved for funding will be contacted regarding any funding contingencies and budget reductions requested.