63.6—Evaluation of applications.

(a) Review procedures. All applications filed in accordance with § 63.3 shall be evaluated by the Assistant Secretary through officers, employees, and such experts or consultants engaged for this purpose as he/she determines are specially qualified in the areas of research pursued by this office. The evaluation criteria below will be supplemented each fiscal year by a program announcement outlining priorities and objectives for policy research, and by other general or specialized solicitations. Such supplements may modify the criteria in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section to provide greater specificity or otherwise improve their applicability to a given announcement or solicitation.

(b) Criteria for evaluation of Policy Research Projects. Review of applications under paragraph (a) of this section will take into account such factors as:

(1) Scientific merit and the significance of the project in relation to policy objectives;

(2) Feasibility of the project;

(3) Soundness of research design, statistical technique, and procedures and methodology;

(4) Theoretical and technical soundness of the proposed plan of operation including consideration of the extent to which:

(i) The objectives of the proposed project are sharply defined, clearly stated, and capable of being attained by the proposed procedures;

(ii) The objectives of the proposed project show evidence of contributing to the achievement of policy objectives;

(iii) Provisions are made for adequate evaluation of the effectiveness of the project and for determining the extent to which the objectives are accomplished; and

(iv) Appropriate provisions are made for satisfactory inservice training connected with project services.

(5) Expected potential for utilizing the results of the proposed project in other projects or programs for similar purposes;

(6) Sufficiency of size, scope, and duration of the project so as to secure productive results;

(7) Adequacy of qualifications and experience, including managerial, of personnel;

(8) Adequacy of facilities and other resources; and

(9) Reasonableness of estimated cost in relation to anticipated results.

(c) Criteria for evaluation of Telecommunications Demonstrations Projects. Review of applications for Telecommunications Demonstrations grants will take into account such factors as are listed in paragraphs (c) (1) through (10) of this section. Each applicant must include in the application, prior to final evaluation by the Assistant Secretary, documentation indicating specifically and separately how and to what extent each of these criteria have been or will be met:

(1) That the project for which application is made demonstrates innovative methods or techniques of utilizing nonbroadcast telecommunications equipment or facilities to satisfy the purpose of this authority;

(2) That the project will have original research value which will demonstrate to other potential users that such methods or techniques are feasible and cost-effective;

(3) That the services to be provided are responsive to local needs as identified and assessed by the applicant;

(4) That the applicant has assessed existing telecommunications facilities (if any) in the proposed service area and explored their use of interconnection in conjunction with the project;

(5) That there is significant local commitment (e.g., evidence of support, participation, and contribution by local institutions and agencies) to the proposed project, indicating that it fulfills local needs, and gives some promise that operational systems will result from successful demonstrations and will be supported by service recipients or providers;

(6) That demonstrations and related activities assisted under this section will remain under the administration and control of the applicant;

(7) That the applicant has the managerial and technical capability to carry out the project for which the application is made;

(8) That the facilities and equipment acquired or developed pursuant to the applications will be used substantially for the transmission, distribution, and delivery of health, education, or social service information, and that use of such facilities and equipment may be shared among these and additional public or other services;

(9) That the provision has been made to submit a summary and factual evaluation of the results of the demonstration at least annually for each year in which funds are received, in the form of a report suitable for dissemination to groups representative of national health, education, and social service telecommunications interests; and,

(10) That the project has potential for stimulating cooperation and sharing among institutions and agencies, both within and across disciplines.

(d) Applicant's performance on prior award. Where the applicant has previously received an award from the Department of Health and Human Services, the applicant's compliance or noncompliance with requirements applicable to such prior award as reflected in past written evaluation reports, memoranda on performance, and completeness of required submissions: Provided, That in any case where the Assistant Secretary proposes to deny assistance based upon the applicant's noncompliance with requirements applicable to a prior award, he shall do so only after affording the applicant reasonable notice and an opportunity to rebut the proposed basis for denial of assistance.

[40 FR 23295, May 29, 1975, as amended at 42 FR 36149, July 13, 1977]

CFR

63.6—Evaluation of applications.