Application Evaluation and Selection

Completed applications submitted to the SCGSR Program before the application deadline will be evaluated using the DOE Office of Science’s standard merit review processes. Each application will be reviewed by external subject matter experts based on the established merit review criteria below. The application materials received, including the applicant’s SCGSR research proposal, will provide the sole basis for the evaluation.

Applicants are encouraged to carefully read the merit review criteria prior to completing their application to ensure that their application materials and their research proposal contain the sufficient and appropriate detail in order to be evaluated.

SCGSR Program Merit Review Criteria

The merit review criteria are listed below. Each criterion is further elaborated through a set of questions to help evaluate the merit of an application.

  1. Scientific and/or Technical Merit of the Proposed Research1
    1. Is the proposed research well-conceived, and does it demonstrate a clear understanding of the scientific and technical challenges involved?
    2. Is the proposed method and approach for the proposed research appropriate?
    3. Is the applicant (graduate student) sufficiently well prepared to conduct the proposed research?
    4. Are the DOE laboratory resources adequate? If applicable, has the necessary access to a scientific user facility been secured by the DOE laboratory collaborating scientist?
  2. Relevance of the Proposed Research to Graduate Thesis Research and Training
    1. Does the proposed research have the potential to make a significant contribution to the applicant’s (graduate student’s) thesis research project?
    2. Will the proposed research enhance the applicant’s graduate training and research skills?

Applications will first be subject to an eligibility and compliance review. All eligible and compliant applications will then be reviewed externally by experts in the field of the proposed research. Applications will be selected for award based on the results of peer review and other program policy factors (e.g. availability of funds, etc.).