1. Intellectual Merit & Broader Impact Statements August 2016
NSF Merit Review
Intellectual Merit & Broader Impact Statements
August 2016

2. Purpose
The Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts review criteria together capture the important elements that should guide the evaluation of all NSF proposals and fellowship applications.
Use of the review criteria should be informed by a guiding set of core principles.
Three guiding review principles
Two review criteria
Five review elements

3. Three Guiding Review Principles
All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge.
NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals.
Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF-funded projects should be based on appropriate metrics [Not necessarily a criterion for GRFP applicants]

4. Two Review Criteria
Intellectual Merit: The potential to advance knowledge
Broader Impact: The potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes

5. Reviewer’s Instructions
In assessing intellectual merit AND broader impact, reviewers must consider:
What applicants want to do
Why they want to do it
How they plan to do it
How they will know if they succeed
What benefits would accrue if the project is successful
This leads to the Five Review Elements….

6. Five Review Elements for Both Criteria
What is the potential for the proposed activity to:
Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit)
Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impact)
To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts? (both criteria)
Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to ensure success? (both criteria)

7. Five Review Elements for Both Criteria
How well qualified is the individual, team, or institution to conduct the proposed activities? (both criteria)
Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home institution or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities? (both criteria)

8. Merit Review Criteria and GRFP
Panelists are instructed to review the applications holistically in the context of:
Applying NSF's Merit Review Criteria
GRFP emphasis on demonstrated potential for significant achievements in science and engineering

9. Merit Review Criteria and GRFP
Intellectual Merit Criterion:
Reviewers may consider the potential of the applicant to advance knowledge based on a holistic analysis of the complete application, including:
Personal, Relevant Background, and Future Goals Statement
Graduate Research Plan Statement
Strength of the academic record
Description of previous research experience
Publication/presentations
References

10. Merit Review Criteria and GRFP
Broader Impacts Criterion:
Reviewers may consider the potential of the applicant for future broader impacts as indicated by:
Personal experiences
Professional experiences
Educational experiences
Future plans

11. Writing Intellectual Merit & Broader Impact Statements

12. The potential to advance knowledge
Intellectual Merit
The potential to advance knowledge

13. Five Review Elements Primary Question: Also must consider:
What is the potential for the proposed activity to advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields?
Also must consider:
To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale?
How well qualified is the individual, team, or institution to conduct the proposed activities?
Are there adequate resources available to the applicant (either at the current/future institution or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?

14. How to Structure
Focus is on the intellectual contribution to your field
How is your research and education plan contributing to the knowledge base of your field?
Does the research/education plan represent original, or potentially transformative concepts in your field?
Is your research plan well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale?
How well qualified are you to conduct the proposed activities?
Are there adequate resources available to you (at your current/future institution or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?

15. Broader Impacts
The potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes

16. Five Review Elements Primary Question:
What is the potential for the proposed activity to benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes?
Also must consider:
To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? How well qualified is the individual, team, or institution to conduct the proposed activities?
Are there adequate resources available to you (current/ future institution) to carry out the proposed activities?

17. What Are Broader Impacts?
Potential outcomes from the project that benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes
Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to the project.
NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to. . .

18. What Are Broader Impacts?
Potential outcomes include:
• Full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
• Improved STEM education; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology
• Improved well-being of individuals in society
• Development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce
• Increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others
• Improved national security
• Increased economic competitiveness of the United States
• Enhanced infrastructure for research and education

19. How to Structure
A well-written broader impacts section should describe your potential for future broader impacts as indicated by:
Personal experiences
Professional experiences
Educational experiences
Future plans

20. How to Structure “Indicators” of Broader Impacts
Leadership roles on and off campus
Teaching, mentoring and outreach
Engagement with diverse audiences
Past research with societal benefits
Research topic with potential societal benefits
Proposed broader impact activity related to your research
Career goals that include a sincere interest in addressing the needs of society