Criteria for Selection ...
The evaluation
criteria used to select a proposal for funding and their respective
weights are found in 15 C.F.R. § 295.6 and are listed
below. No proposal will be funded unless ATP determines that
it has scientific and technological merit and that the proposed
technology has strong potential for broad-based economic
benefits for the nation. Additionally, no proposal will be funded that
does not require federal support, that is product development
rather than high-risk R&D, that does not display an appropriate
level of commitment from the proposer, and that does not have
adequate technical and commercialization plans. Meeting the
scientific and technological merit criterion will not make
up for major flaws in the potential for broad-based economic
benefits selection criterion and vice versa. Detailed guidance
on how to address the selection criteria is provided in Chapter
3 of ATP's Proposal Preparation
Kit.
-
Scientific
and Technological Merit (50 percent).
This selection criterion has three critical components:
(1)
Technical Innovation,
(2) Technical Risk With Evidence of Scientific Feasibility, and
(3) Technical Plan.
The proposed technology must be highly innovative. The research must
be challenging, with high technical risk. It must be aimed at overcoming
an important problem (or problems) or exploiting a promising opportunity.
The technical leverage of the technology must be adequately explained.
The research must have a strong potential for advancing the state
of the art and contributing significantly to the U.S. scientific
and technical knowledge base. The technical plan must be clear and
concise and must clearly identify the core innovation, the technical
approach, the major technical hurdles, and the attendant risks, and
it must clearly establish feasibility through adequately detailed
plans linked to major technical barriers. The plan must address the
questions of “what, how, where, when, why, and by whom” in
substantial detail. ATP will assess the proposing team’s relevant
experience for pursuing the technical plan. The team carrying out
the work must demonstrate the high level of scientific/technical
expertise needed to conduct the R&D and have access to the necessary
research facilities.
- Potential
for Broad-Based Economic Benefits (50 percent).
This selection criterion has three critical components:
(1)
National Economic Benefits,
(2) Need for ATP Funding, and
(3) Pathway to Economic Benefits.
The proposed technology must have a strong potential to generate
substantial benefits for the nation that extend significantly beyond
the direct returns to the proposing organization(s). The proposal
must explain why ATP support is needed and what difference ATP funding
is expected to make in terms of what will be accomplished with the
ATP funding versus without it. The pathway to economic benefits must
be described, including the proposer’s plan for getting the
technology into commercial use as well as additional routes that
might be taken to achieve broader diffusion of the technology. The
proposal should identify the expected returns that the proposer expects
to gain as well as returns that are expected to accrue to others—that
is, spillover effects. ATP will assess the proposer's relevant experience
and level of commitment to the project; the project’s organizational
structure and management plan, including the extent to which participation
by small businesses is encouraged and is a key component in a joint
venture proposal; and for large single-company proposers, the extent
to which subcontractor/subrecipient teaming arrangements are featured
and are a key component of the proposal.
Date created: June 2004
Last updated:
May 9, 2007
|
