1 / 8

Assessing ARS Research

Assessing ARS Research. P. Bretting pkb@ars.usda.gov C. Gardner gardnerc@iastate.edu K. Simmons kws@ars.usda.gov. ARS’s evolving national research programs.

kasimir-garner
Download Presentation

Assessing ARS Research

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Assessing ARS Research P. Bretting pkb@ars.usda.gov C. Gardner gardnerc@iastate.edu K. Simmons kws@ars.usda.gov

  2. ARS’s evolving national research programs • ARS’s research is now organized into National Programs, which provide frameworks for focusing and coordinating more than 1,200 individual research projects, including the two that support GEM research. • Congress mandated that the National Programs and their constituent projects undergo periodic external peer review.

  3. Experience to date • 120+ ARS “in-house” plant genebank, breeding, and/or genetic programs have been externally reviewed, including the GEM-Ames project. • Common themes in reviewers’ comments: • Set clear project priorities • Focus on fewer research objectives, of strong scientific importance, with significant impact • Coordinate research across projects, locations, etc.

  4. Future developments • So far, ARS “in-house” projects have been reviewed. We anticipate that, in the near future, research projects conducted by ARS cooperators under the framework of Specific Cooperative Agreements (SCAs) will be reviewed by external panels. • At some point, probably within two years, this would affect SCA-supported GEM projects.

  5. More details • Research supported by SCAs would likely be reviewed in conjunction with ARS “in-house” project. • SCA-supported research should advance the objectives of the “in-house” project. • SCA-supported research would either be reviewed as part of the “in-house” project plan, or a separate project plan would be written for the SCA (see example).

  6. Implications • ARS research projects focus on fewer, high(er) priority objectives, coordinated nationally, and concentrate fiscal and human resources on the latter so as to yield greater “impact.” • SCA-supported research may similarly focus on fewer objectives, strongly linked to “in-house” project goals, with lengthier commitments of larger quantities of resources, i.e., fewer, larger, SCAs with multi-year commitments, with the potential of yielding greater “impact.”

  7. Conclusions • We can anticipate these developments by considering how GEM resources are deployed so as to yield greater impact. • Change(s) would likely be evolutionary, occurring during a multi-year (2-3?) period.

More Related