Skip to main content

Evaluating Federal Research Programs Research and the Government Performance and Results Act (1999) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

3 Measuring and Evaluating Federally Funded Research
Pages 29-36

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 29...
... Results of applied research can often be evaluated in quantitative terms according to specific timelines; basic research in science and engineering cannot always be evaluated in quantitative terms but can be assessed against carefully designed measures that serve as guides to research direction, funding allocations, and policy decisions. In applied research programs of mission agencies, specific practical outcomes can be documented and progress evaluated annually.
Read the entire page →
From page 30...
... Basic research programs can be evaluated meaningfully on a regular basis, but as explained in Chapter 2, ultimate outcomes of research into fundamental processes are seldom predictable or quantifiable in advance. It is normal and necessary for basic research investigators to modify their goals, change course, and test competing hypotheses as they move closer to the fundamental understandings that justify public investment in their work.
Read the entire page →
From page 31...
... The worldwide market for positioning systems is expected to surpass $30 billion in the next decade. Annual evaluations of quality and leadership give a strong indication of the likelihood of important long-term practical outcomes of basic research, but a historical review can provide reality.
Read the entire page →
From page 32...
... . For example, economic-impact studies conducted annu ally are useful for applied research but inappropriate for basic research, although they can ne useful in tne retrospective review of the practical outcomes of basic research; citation analyses require .
Read the entire page →
From page 33...
... Relevance review should also consider basic research projects funded by federal agencies. Although the ultimate practical outcomes of basic research cannot be predicted, it is important to ascertain whether a given line of research is likely to contribute to an agency's mission.
Read the entire page →
From page 34...
... Enhancing the Expert Review Process Because of the great variation in structure and mission of federal agencies that support research, the ways in which various agencies review their research will inevitably differ. Each agency must develop the approach that serves best as a management and reporting vehicle.
Read the entire page →
From page 35...
... The agencies should encourage comment from the research community. Members of the research community also must be part of the expert-review process of measuring and evaluating results of research programs.
Read the entire page →
From page 36...
... performed and funded by federal agencies. Ultimately, decisions regarding the selection and funding of research programs must b made by agency managers informed by expert review.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • practical outcomes
  • relevance review
  • evaluated meaningfully
  • regular basis
  • patent analyses

  • require expert
  • cosepup believes
  • citation analyses
  • evaluate research
  • quantitative terms

  • solar energy
  • ultimate practical
  • cheaper solar
  • expert evaluation
  • public investment

  • atomic physics
  • mission agencies
  • leadership positions
  • consider basic
  • cosepup assessed

  • extremely valuable
  • analyses require
  • fundamental understandings
  • desired outcomes
  • specific measurable

  • specific practical
  • evaluated annually
  • adequate information
  • third form
  • international standing


    • 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.