EPA’s STAR Grants Program Presentation for CFARE/NAAEA Preconference Montreal, CA July 26,2003

1. EPA’s STAR Grants ProgramPresentation for CFARE/NAAEA PreconferenceMontreal, CAJuly 26,2003 Will Wheeler U.S. EPA, ORD/NCER wheeler.william@epa.gov

2. Overview • Basics at EPA • Research Strategy & associated RFAs • Grants process • Tips for success

3. STAR Grants • Science to Achieve Results: grants and fellowships • Open competitions and peer review • National Center for Environmental Research (NCER) • Part of Office of Research & Development • http://www.epa.gov/ncer/ • Announcements: http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncer_list/elists/

4. EPA Offices Involved • Other offices assist with planning, solicitations, and reviewing grants • National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE) • Part of Office of Policy, Economics, & Innovation • Coordinate research activities • Home page: http://www.epa.gov/ncee • Announcements list: http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eed.nsf/pages/announce

5. Other EPA Offices • Rest of ORD • Four other labs and centers • Coordinate research programs • Most other offices have some involvement • Clients • Media Offices (Water, Air, Solid Waste, Pesticides & Toxics) • Chief Financial Officer, Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, Environmental Information • Regional Offices

6. Economics Solicitations • Request for Applications (RFAs) • Several subject areas per year • Valuation for Environmental Policy • Market Mechanisms and Incentives • Corporate Environmental Behavior • Other occasional solicitations • Each subject area runs a few years/takes a break

7. Decision Sciences • Component of (former) Decision-Making and Valuation RFA • Joint with National Science Foundation • Topic areas split • Under review at National Academy of Sciences (due April 2004) • Will not resume before review

8. Economics ResearchStrategy • Will define areas of focus for economics research at EPA • Interviews with 21 offices • Currently at Science Advisory Board for peer review • Available at http://es.epa.gov/ncer/events/news/2003/06_23_03a.html

9. Strategy—Next Steps • State of the Science Reports to identify key research gaps • Plan internal and external research • NCER will produce multi-year plan for future RFAs • Specific topics within each broad area • Long-term questions • Practical and “pure” research

10. Strategy Priorites • Ecological and Health Valuation • Environmental (Compliance) Behavior and Decision-making • Market Mechanisms and Incentives • Benefits of Environmental Information Disclosure

11. Valuation • Valuation for Environmental Policy RFA (January) • Merger of two previous solicitations • Decision-Making and Valuation • Valuation of Children’s Health • Ecological and Human Health both came out high

12. Valuation Directions • Human Health Valuation • Morbidity, children’s health, mortality • Ecological Valuation • Two focus areas • Widely applicable or transferable values • Use of indicators • Improving accuracy of benefit transfer

13. Market Mechanisms and Incentives • Market Mechanisms and Incentives RFA (planned March, opened July, closes October 22) • Trading in practice and trading in new contexts • Apply lessons learned from existing markets to new or redesigned markets

14. Environmental Behavior • Corporate Environmental Behavior RFA (planned July, probably October) • Surprise” of strategy • How entities make process, disposal, and location decisions • Perceptions of costs • Reactions to interventions (voluntary and information programs)

15. Benefits of Information Disclosure • Proposed new RFA • Examine benefits of information disclosure rules such as Toxics Release Inventory, Consumer Confidence Reports

16. Grants Process • Write solicitation • Announced on NCEE & NCER web pages and email lists, RESECON • Three levels of review • (External) Peer Review • (Internal) Programmatic Review • (Internal) NCER Director

17. Peer Review • Interdisciplinary panel of external reviewers • Evaluate • Originality and creativity of proposal • Qualifications of PI(s) • Availability/adequacy of equipment • Responsiveness of proposal • Appropriateness/adequacy of budget • Five-point scale: “very good” or “excellent” proposals move to relevancy review

18. Relevancy Review • Interdisciplinary panel of EPA economists and other scientists • NCEE, ORD (not NCER), media programs and other offices,Regions participate • Evaluate relevance to program priorities

19. NCER Director • Final decision • Inputs: • Reviews • Portfolio—research gaps • Priorities (plan, Administrator) • Available budget (how much?)

20. Tips for Success--General • Average success rate of 12%-15% • Depends on solicitation and funding • Fund about half of proposals that pass peer review • DON’T CRAM • Solicitations are open for 3+ months • Research plan will be on website • Look at previous solicitations and abstracts of successful proposals

21. Tips for Success—Process • Follow instructions (NCER’s Guidance page) and read FAQs • http://es.epa.gov/ncer/guidance/ • Six characteristics of successful proposals • Responsiveness, scale, simplicity, clarity, knowledge of the subject matter, appropriate expertise

22. Six Characteristics (1) • Responsive • Scale • Budget within maximum • Appropriate scale and complexity • Simplicity • Focus on approximately one to three research objectives

23. Six Characteristics (2) • Clarity • Explicitly state hypotheses, data, and analytic (econometric) tools • Focused, not vague • Knowledge of the subject matter • Be up-to-date • Appropriate expertise