SAGA Progress Report - Attachment 5

SAGA
B16 MVR Hall
Ithaca, NY 14853
(607) 255-8931
Fax (607) 255-0178
saga@cornell.edu

SAGA Progress Report
October, 2002

ATTACHMENT 5.

SAGA/CRGP
PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA

Title of Proposed Research:

Principal Investigator(s):

Conformity to selection criteria (Please comment briefly):

The scientific merit with respect intrinsic importance of the topic in terms of potential impact on growth and access.
Relevance of the study to potential policy measures promoting growth and access.
Technical feasibility and quality of the proposed research, including the soundness of the methodology.
Likelihood that the research results will be used.
Applicability and Adaptability to other countries in the region.
Level of interest on the part of host-research institute, and the overall conformity of the proposal to SAGA's priority areas.
Involvement of local researchers; potential for enhancing local capacity for policy-oriented research and the degree of linkages with the local researchers.
Qualifications of the researcher

Applying the criteria:

These criteria will be used to evaluate proposals into two categories: necessary/essential, and sufficient/preferential.

1st Step:	Criteria 1-5 are essential type, and will be used by two anonymous reviewers to order proposals, from "excellent" to "do not consider" (or a scale from 4 to 1).
2nd Step:	Those proposals that received "favorable" ranking (those received a 4 or a 3, for example) from the first step will then be forwarded to the review/selection committee for final decision. This committee will then utilize criteria 6-8 to select the final grantees.

Please use the following scale for your overall evaluation score:

4 = excellent conformity to the indicated criteria
3 = recommended after modest revision
2 = substantial changes required
1 = not meriting further consideration

In effect, 4 means a go-ahead; 3 means provisional approval subject to modifications; 2 means do not fund, but a concept that may be worth pursuing for the next funding cycle; and 1 is a absolute rejection.

Overall evaluation score = _______________

Comments on strengths and weaknesses:

Recommendations on conditionality for approval (for proposals scored as 3 only):

Previous Section

Return to SAGA Progress Report (October 2002) Table of Contents