Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Appendix B: Rating Sheets/Questionnaires
Pages 305-329

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 305...
... Web-Based Questionnaire for NIDRR Stakeholders 306 B Web-Based Questionnaire for NIDRR Peer Reviewers 311 2.
From page 306...
... This list, along with the data collected, will be stored securely at the National Research Council. Only the study personnel will have access to the master list, and only for research purposes.
From page 307...
... Have used NIDRR website or related resources to search for information about grants Have spoken with NIDRR staff in person or on the phone about specific professional issues Have attended NIDRR trainings, workshops, or conferences Other (Please specify in box below) Funding Have received funding from NIDRR for research & development grants Have received funding from NIDRR for training, knowledge transfer, or dissemination grants Have received funding from NIDRR for activities other than grants (e.g., contract or agreements to conduct an evaluation, provide expert consultation, or write a paper, etc.)
From page 308...
... Federal Register Professional list serve University grants source Professional newspaper Personal invitation to our organization from NIDRR Other (please specify) : Don't know 7.
From page 309...
... : Not at all Somewhat Very Don't Much know Transparent 1 2 3 4 5 Publicized 1 2 3 4 5 Relevant to your 1 2 3 4 5 organization Responsive to emerging 1 2 3 4 5 issues in disability rehabilitation and research Welcoming of stakeholder 1 2 3 4 5 feedback Responsive to stakeholder 1 2 3 4 5 feedback 10. In your opinion, how do NIDRR's long range planning and priority setting processes compare with those of other federal research agencies?
From page 310...
... 15. What three things might NIDRR do to enhance its long range planning and priority setting processes?
From page 311...
... This list, along with the data collected, will be stored securely at the National Research Council. Only the study personnel will have access to the master list, and only for research purposes.
From page 312...
... In your experience, how would you rate the following aspects of the NIDRR peer review processes (Please check the boxes beneath the responses -- select only one per row) : Poor Adequate Excellent DON'T NOT KNOW APPLI CABLE Quality of the training to prepare 1 2 3 4 5 you for the review Adequacy of time for review of 1 2 3 4 5 materials before the meeting Level of expertise of the peer 1 2 3 4 5 review panel members Appropriateness of the evaluation 1 2 3 4 5 criteria to applications under review Clarity of the criteria when 1 2 3 4 5 applying them to applications B-9
From page 313...
... Use of reviewers' time during the 1 2 3 4 5 panel meeting Support and facilitation of the 1 2 3 4 5 review panel by NIDRR staff Guidance in writing your 1 2 3 4 5 reviewer comments Integrity of the peer review 1 2 3 4 5 process overall Consistency in the overall quality of the peer reviews across panels 2 3 4 5 1 (if you have served on three or more panels)
From page 314...
... Yes No 11. How would you compare the following characteristics of NIDRR peer reviews with those of other federal agencies?
From page 315...
... Contact Information (Click on the leftmost portion of the line to enter text.) E-mail address: Phone number: B-12
From page 316...
... and its Grantees that is being conducted by an expert committee of the National Research Council of the National Academies. This independent evaluation is being sponsored by NIDRR for the purpose of: 1)
From page 317...
... Sincerely, Jeanne Rivard, Ph.D., Co-Study Director Mary Ellen O'Connell, Co-Study Director The National Academies The National Academies National Research Council National Research Council 500 Fifth Street, NW 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 Washington, DC 20001 Phone: 202-334-2967 Phone: 202-334-2607 E-mail: jrivard@nas.edu E-mail: moconnell@nas.edu B-14
From page 318...
... Having outputs produced under your grant peer reviewed through a quality assessment by an expert panel.
From page 319...
... . This list, along with the data collected, will be stored securely at the National Research Council, and will be accessible only by the Study personnel.
From page 320...
...  For the other outputs, materials for review would include:  o Electronic or hard copies of the measures, tools, intervention protocols, manuals; or links to websites, pictures or other graphic representations of tools or devices that have been produced. o An abstract or summary of each output, which briefly describes: o what the output is, o its purpose, B-17
From page 321...
...  Your completed Grantee Questionnaire Please send these materials by ___DATE___ to: Matt McDonough The National Academies National Research Council 500 Fifth Street, NW WS 1134 Washington, DC 20001 We are enclosing an addressed FedEx form that can be used when mailing your package of materials to us. We estimated a shipment cost that would cover a weight up to 10 lbs.
From page 322...
... 2. INSERT GRANTEES' PROJECTS TABLE HERE The table below lists all of the publications and other outputs that were listed in the APR data provided by NIDRR.
From page 323...
... Technical Quality of Output In the space below, please describe examples of the technical quality of your output, such as: The particular approach or methodology used in developing your output  Relevant peer recognition such as peer reviews or evaluations, peer endorsements,  invitations to present at professional forums or conferences, invitations to present testimony, receipt of awards or honors, etc. Receipt of a patent, FDA approval, or use of your output in standards development  Evidence of the usability and accessibility of the output  B2.
From page 324...
... Other  Include information about how this potential impact was tested, and what the results were.
From page 325...
... C3. Please share any perspectives you may have about how NIDRR's key processes (e.g., priority setting, peer review, and/or grants management)
From page 326...
... All reviewers will independently rate outputs using the following quality criteria (Dimensions of these criteria are shown on the attached rating sheet.) :  Technical quality of output  Advancement of knowledge or the field (research, practice, or policy)
From page 327...
... If there is a subgroup member with a significantly divergent view, his/her score and rationale will be captured separately. Staff will document discussion points that lead to the consensus group ratings and  will record the subgroup's rationale for each criterion, the overall rating, and the grant performance rating in a brief narrative.
From page 328...
... 328 REVIEW OF DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION RESEARCH 2E: COMMITTEE MEMBER RATING SHEET OF THE QUALITY OF OUTPUTS Committee Member: Output ID: Grantee ID: Date of Review: Output to Be Reviewed: To be completed by NRC staff Output Title: _______________________________________________________ Research Output: ______ Development Output: ________ Type and Subtype of Output (marked below) : Type of Type of Tool, Type of Technology Type of Informational Publication Measure, or Product or Device Product Intervention Protocol 1.
From page 329...
...  Consumers (people with disabilities: health, quality of life, participation)  Provider practice  Health and social system  Social and health policy  Private sector/commercialization  Other Score Rationale: Dissemination  Identification and tailoring of materials for reaching different audience/user types  Collaboration with audience/users in identifying content and medium needs/preferences  Delivery of information through multiple media types and sources for optimal reach and accessibility  Evaluation of dissemination efforts and impacts  Commercialization/patenting of devices, if applicable Score Rationale: Overall Score Score Rationale: B-26


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.