AWG Comments on the ROSS98 NRA

1998 September

At the 1998 Spring meeting of the AWG, we were asked to comment on our experience with the omnibus NRA Research Opportunities in Space Science 1998 (ROSS98) which was released in 1998 February. The object of this omnibus NRA was to simply the grant proposal process for both proposers and for NASA Headquarters. The intent is to release a similar omnibus NRA each year for all programs that will be soliciting proposals in a given year. Since this was the first time this was done by Code SR, there are obviously going to be some rough spots. NASA has asked us to comment on this process from the users point of view, identifying in particular things that would aid in simplifying the process.

AWG MEMBERS COMMENTS ON ROSS98

Members of the AWG who have submitted proposals in response to the ROSS98 NRA were generally quite pleased with the way the process worked, and encourages NASA to continue this practice. The uniform format and requirements were regarded as especially attractive features.

Specific comments from AWG members:

• Proposers were happy to have all the information for the programs in one place.
• In addition to the programs for which proposals are currently being solicited, it would be useful to include a list of ALL Code SR programs with the next planned solicitation date given for programs that are not open in a given year.
• The way the NRA is currently formated, one must read through a lot of material to determine whether or not it is applicable to a particular program. This was probably regarded as the most annoying problem from the proposers point of view.
• The electronic cover page is obviously here to stay, and getting better all the time. There is, however, no way to see how it is formatted until it is entirely printed out. This can involve having to log back in, a necessarily non-trivial process. It would be good to have the option of including the name/title of the institutional representative who will sign the cover page. If not too difficult, a spelling checker would be a nice feature.
• Budget information is requested in a non-intuitive fashion; budget information is required in some 3 or 4 different places, including the cover page, personnel commitments, budget summary, and current and pending support page. The detailed budget breakdown for personnel is given before the budget summary, which left many of us confused.
• The budget summary page has to be filled in with a typewriter, which is terribly inconvenient for many people. An electronic form, such as is used for the cover page, would be a distinct improvement, or electronic forms in MS Word or Excel would be a good alternative for some people.