Merit Review and Selection

The selection process is highly competitive and intended for outstanding DOE National Laboratory scientists/engineers/technical professionals with a sustained track record of effective mentoring in science, technology and technical skills, who demonstrate their tangible impacts on preparing a strong future DOE workforce. Nomination packages are comprehensively reviewed by internal and external experts in STEM workforce development.

Assessment Criteria

The following criteria will be used to evaluate DOE Distinguished Mentors for Workforce Development nominees in the Science & Technology Mentor or Technical Mentor categories, respectively.

Science & Technology Mentor Category

  1. The nominee must have a strong track record of excellence in mentoring in SULI, CCI, VFP, and/or SCGSR programs that leads to tangible, sustained contributions to advance DOE science and technology workforce, evidenced by quality of mentoring received by mentees, the mentees’ research outputs and notable professional accomplishments, and the number of mentees. Accomplishments in mentoring for training programs other than the above WDTS programs are desirable, but not required.
  2. Impact to the workforce and development community through promoting best mentoring practices and supporting others as mentors in the DOE national laboratory system.
  3. Demonstrated scientific/technical qualifications in science discovery and technology development, as evidenced by providing well-defined research projects for placing participants, helping program them acquire new knowledge, or guiding them in research, in areas of importance to DOE Science and Technology mission.

Technical Mentor Category

  1. The nominee must have a strong track record of excellence in mentoring in SULI, CCI, VFP, and/or SCGSR participants that leads to tangible, sustained contributions to advance DOE technical workforce and development, evidenced by quality of mentoring received by the mentees, the mentees’ skill development and notable professional accomplishments, and the number of mentees. Accomplishments in mentoring for training programs other than the above WDTS programs are desirable, but not required.
  2. Impact to the workforce and development community through promoting best mentoring practices in the DOE national laboratory system.
  3. Demonstrated technical skills and expertise, as evidenced by helping program participants acquire new skills or techniques, or guiding them in solving problems, in areas of importance to DOE Science and Technology mission.

The nomination pool is applicable to mentors or laboratory collaborators in CCI, SULI, VFP, and/or SCGSR programs. At DOE national laboratories, students or faculty work with a team of experts to learn new scientific knowledge, acquire novel skills, and practice the use of scientific facilities or state-of-art equipment. The mentors can be researchers who guide students on a science or technology project or technical experts who teach them a specialized technique important to carry out their research projects. To recognize excellence in technical mentorship, nominees in this category may include CCI mentors or technical experts regularly providing mentorships to enable the WDTS programs’ participants to succeed in their training, even if they might not be officially designated as the mentors.

Merit Review

The nominees will be reviewed in their nominated category.

To be considered, a nominee must meet all eligibility criteria and have a nomination package comprising all required materials. Prior to a comprehensive merit evaluation, DOE will perform an initial review to determine that: (1) the applicant is eligible for the award; (2) the information required by the call for nominations has been submitted; (3) all mandatory requirements are satisfied; (4) the nomination is responsive to the objectives of the award program. Nominations that fail to pass the initial review will not be forwarded for merit review.

Eligible nominees will be evaluated via independent, anonymous peer review by experts in STEM workforce development, which may include experienced mentors from DOE national laboratories who do not have a conflict of interest. The nomination materials received will provide the sole basis for the review and selection of nominees. The peer review will comprise a thorough, consistent, and objective examination of eligible nominees based on pre-established criteria by experts, selected by Federal Officials, to serve as reviewers. Reviewers must be independent of the nominees and must comply with all applicable DOE rules or directives concerning the use of outside evaluators. Reviewers may not participate in the merit review of a nominee where this is a conflict of interest. The identity of all reviewers shall remain anonymous, and all nomination and review materials shall remain confidential.

Reviewers are expected to provide independent reviews for each nominee they have been assigned to evaluate. Reviewers are not empaneled as a Federal Advisory Committee and therefore will not be asked to form formal consensus opinions regarding nominees under review. All merit reviewers serve as evaluators and their recommendations are not binding. As part of their evaluation, reviewers will be asked to provide their individual overall assessments of the nominees in the form of an adjective score and a rank ordering. Scores and rankings are only one component of evaluations used to inform selection officials and will be interpreted within the context of full reviewer evaluations.

Selection

In the context of the assessment criteria, WDTS Program and SC Federal Officials will review the nomination packages and analyze the peer reviewer’s independent final evaluations. Selection officials may apply program policy factors at the time of award selection. The purpose of program policy factors is to maximize the effectiveness of available Government funding and to best achieve DOE program objectives when all other factors are reasonably equal among highly qualified candidates based on merit review. Selection Officials may consider any of the following program policy factors in making the selection, listed in no order of significance: (a) Availability of funds; (b) Relevance to SC priorities; (c) Assurance of an appropriate balance of activities among DOE offices and SC programs; (d) Variety of institutions receiving awards; (e) Recognition for individuals not recently selected for other DOE honorary awards; (f) Assurance that awardees reflect a significant level of engagement in mentoring and workforce development at the DOE National Laboratory.