Proposals are evaluated for scientific merit, novel approaches, and rationale for conducting investigative activities at the Powell Center. The Powell Center’s Science Advisory Board (SAB) reviews proposals and makes recommendations to the Directors who make the final decisions about which proposals to support. Reviewers recuse themselves from proposal review if conflict of interest is perceived, according to the terms of the Powell Center Code of Ethics.
A context statement and reviews are returned to principal investigators, often within six weeks after submission. Reviews are not paired with SAB member identities to promote objectivity and candor of the reviews. Reviews may not reflect SAB meeting discussions, which focus less on specific content than the nature, scope, and innovation of the proposed project.
Proposals that are clearly inappropriate for the Powell Center (e.g., those requesting overhead, funds to be spent at the investigator's home institution, new data collection, exploratory workshops, etc.) will be returned without review.
If proposals are selected for additional support by NSF, proposals and budgets may be requested by the appropriate NSF Program to satisfy NSF funding guidelines (after discussions with the relevant NSF Program Director). These proposals will be subject to the normal eligibility requirements for NSF proposals, but do not require additional peer review. NSF funds for specific Working Groups may also be transferred directly to Powell Center for dissemination, but in either situation, NSF support is determined by NSF and not by principal investigators.