Research Funding

Proposal Review Process

The initial step in applying for funds is submitting a planning letter, which is evaluated by a review panel for technical merit, relevance, likelihood of success, and suitability for funding. After the planning letter review, investigators may submit a full proposal if encouraged to do so. The review panel reconvenes to make project-funding recommendations to the Northeast Consortium Representatives, who then make the final selection decisions. Recommended projects are then reviewed by NMFS staff for potential environmental impacts prior to the issuance of an award. The proposal review process of the Northeast Consortium is well illustrated by a flow chart.

How many projects are funded?

Cooperative Research Awards

Project Development Awards

The Northeast Consortium receives nearly $5M annually, of which nearly $4M is available for competitively awarded collaborative research projects. With these funds, 18-22 collaborative research projects and 10-12 project development awards are funded each year, depending upon the size of the project budgets. The graphs below show the numbers of planning letters and full proposals received each year, as well as the numbers funded. The goal is to fund roughly half of the full proposals, and the planning letter serves as an initial screening step in the selection process.

Who serves on the review panel?
The Northeast Consortium staff select panelists from the Advisory Committee and others from the fishing industry, science, management, and non-profit sectors throughout New England. The goal is to convene a geographically diverse panel, with a broad and sufficient background to adequately assess the proposals. All panelists reviewing projects must follow the Conflict of Interest Policy of the Northeast Consortium. We encourage you to consider serving as a review panelist for any funding cycle in which you are not submitting a proposal. Panelists find that the experience helps them to be more informed about the review process and to improve their own proposal writing skills. Please contact a Northeast Consortium staff member if you are interested in serving as a reviewer. New panelists are always welcome, although we cannot guarantee your participation as a reviewer in the round you volunteer for, due to our goal of maintaining a diverse panel.

What do the panelists do?

To prepare for a review, the Northeast Consortium staff group the submitted projects into 4-5 topic areas and choose 6-8 panelists for each group, according to their specific areas of expertise. At least two weeks prior to the day of the review, the panelists receive their group’s proposals and all abstracts. Panelists rate the merit of each proposal; proposals are not ranked against each other.
At the panel meeting, the small groups discuss each proposal and try to reach a consensus on funding recommendations. Consensus is not required and not all proposals receive a single group rating. A summary of the small group discussion is then presented to the entire panel, allowing all panelists to comment. At the end of the day, the review panel makes final funding recommendations to the Northeast Consortium Representatives. In some cases, a panel will suggest integration of projects with similar interests and goals. They may suggest ways in which proposals not recommended for funding might be improved for future competitions. Although the Representatives make the final funding decisions, they rarely differ from the panel’s recommendations.

How are the proposals evaluated?
Funding decisions for collaborative research projects are based upon evaluation of proposals according to the following criteria, which are published in the Request for Proposals:

Importance of the proposed idea for oceanographic and fisheries research and management.
Technical merit of the project as proposed (e.g., adequacy of the research design and technical feasibility of the work plan).
Opportunities for partnership between commercial fishermen and scientists.
Impact of the proposed work on fishermen, fisheries managers, scientists, educators, or others who would benefit from knowing the results of the project.
Qualifications of the project participants and availability resources for the project.
Results from prior collaborative research funding.

You should be sure to consider these criteria carefully as you prepare your proposals, and to explain how your project will meet these standards. All aspects of the Northeast Consortium review process are based on these criteria.

How are project budgets reviewed?
Over the course of several proposal review cycles, panels have raised questions about the appropriateness of proposed budgets (e.g., equipment and vessel costs). Panels have recommended that more time be spent to review budgets than the technical panel meeting allows, particularly since cost is not an evaluation criteria. In FY2004, a separate budget panel was formed to look more specifically at the budgets of just the projects that were recommended for funding by the technical panel. The budget panel determines whether the industry/science funding allocation is accurate and within range of the target ratio (75/25). They also assess whether the project costs are reasonable and fair for the work involved.

What comes after a “yes” response?
After a project is recommended for funding by the Representatives, the Northeast Consortium staff work with the project leader to finalize a work plan and budget, based on the technical and budget review panels’ recommendations. All recommended projects are required to undergo a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). This is a condition of the Northeast Consortium’s contract from NMFS. After completion of this review, an award agreement can be issued and funds become available.

In addition, many projects may need an exempted fishing permit (EFP), letter of acknowledgement (LOA), or scientific or educational permits to conduct the research. The Northeast Consortium staff work with the project leaders and NMFS to facilitate a preliminary review of the proposal to identify and concerns regarding permitting. This preliminary review assists the project leaders to more thoroughly prepare permit applications.

May I have some funding tips?

Provide all necessary information in the document. The panel has access to past Northeast Consortium project reports, but the proposals should be self-contained.
Write your proposal for all stakeholder perspectives and backgrounds.
Detail and justify overlap or partnership with other projects.
Describe the project’s background and prior results, perhaps chronologically.
Be clear about which steps are complete or underway and which are being proposed. A chart or graphic may be a helpful illustration. This especially applies to continuation projects.
Be clear about how the project will make a difference. Identify end users and explain why the data and results will matter to them.
Do everything practicable to meet the program-wide target for a 75% to 25% budget allocation ratio between industry and science, respectively. Some research may not be suited to this ratio, for example, if costly laboratory analyses are required. Northeast Consortium funds could be leveraged with funds from other sources that are dedicated for the science costs (e.g. Sea Grant, NMFS funds). Be sure to explain if and how other resources are leveraged.
Demonstrate that the project will result in good science for the money spent.
Break up big project ideas into prioritized, fundable steps.
Follow responsible fishing practices. Aim to minimize any negative environmental impacts and be consistent with accepted ethical research practices.
Spell out acronyms in the proposal.
Call us. The Northeast Consortium Representatives and staff can discuss your idea with you or help find project partners.