Turning Goals into Reality (TGIR) Award

**Nomination, Evaluation and Selection**

**Guidelines**

![](media/image1.pct){width="6.4944444444444445in"
height="3.0729166666666665in"}

**Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate**

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Washington, D.C.

[http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/aero/events/tgir.htm]{.underline}

May 2005

**TABLE OF CONTENTS**

I. Purpose 1

II\. Award Categories 1

III\. Eligibility 2

IV\. Nomination Process 2

V. Evaluation and Selection Processes 2

VI\. Process Participants 3

VII\. Schedule 4

VIII\. Awards 5

APPENDIX A --- Nomination Form 6

APPENDIX B --- Evaluation and Scoring 7

APPENDIX C --- Award Process and Participants 9

2005 Participants Schedule

**2005 OAT TGIR AWARD**

**I. PURPOSE**

The Turning Goals into Reality (TGIR) Award acknowledges outstanding
contributions and exceptional progress toward achieving any of the
Program Goals and Objectives of the Aeronautics Research Mission
Directorate (ARMD) of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA). The presentation of the TGIR Award signifies ARMD's recognition
that each award recipient has demonstrated excellence in making
outstanding progress toward achieving the Program Goals and/or
Objectives.

**II. AWARD CATEGORIES**

Particularly distinguished organizations, teams or individuals may be
recognized for outstanding contributions to the primary goals and
objectives of the ARMD programs and supporting Enterprise Education and
Outreach goals as identified in the Aerospace Technology Enterprise
Strategy, dated November 1, 2003. Furthermore, in each of the past
years, the Panel of Judges has awarded an Administrator's Award. Thus, a
total of as many as 7 Awards may be given each year. Alternatively, some
or all TGIR awards may be withheld in the absence of exceptional
accomplishments.

The Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate goals and objectives are as
follows:

Aeronautics Technology Theme

> Enable a safe environmentally-friendly expansion of aviation.
>
> • Objective 2.1: Aviation Safety
>
> Decrease the aircraft fatal accident rate, reduce the vulnerability of
> the air transportation system to hostile threats, and mitigate the
> consequences of accidents and hostile acts.
>
> • Objective 2.2: Protect the Environment
>
> Protect local and global environmental quality by reducing aircraft
> noise and emissions.
>
> • Objective 2.3: Increase Capacity and Mobility
>
> Enable more people and goods to travel faster and farther, with fewer
> delays.
>
> • Objective 3.1: Partnerships for National Security
>
> Enhance technology development and transfer through partnerships with
> DoD, DHS, and other U.S. or international government agencies.
>
> • Objective 10.5: Explore Revolutionary Aeronautics Concepts
>
> Create novel aeronautics concepts and technology to support science
> missions and terrestrial and space applications.
>
> Enterprise Education and Outreach
>
> Inspire and motivate students, and engage the public
>
> • Goals 6 and 7: Inspire and motivate students to pursue careers in
> science, technology, engineering, and mathematics; and, engage the
> public in shaping and sharing the experience of exploration and
> discovery.

**III. ELIGIBILITY**

Components and individuals of all NASA organizations, other U.S.
Government agencies, prime and subcontractors, universities, private
research and technology firms, international partners and/or
combinations (teams) of these groups are eligible to be nominated for
the TGIR Award.

**IV. NOMINATION PROCESS**

The ARMD Headquarters office and all NASA Field Centers participating in
the Mission Directorate Programs will nominate candidates for the TGIR
Award. [Nominations should be for accomplishments during Fiscal Year
2004 through June 2005 with the nomination write-up clearly identifying
the technical / leadership accomplishments for which the nomination is
being made]{.underline}. Nominations will be submitted through the
respective Centers to the ARMD Headquarters TGIR Award Coordinator.
Nominations will then be screened and evaluated by the ARMD TGIR Award
Review and Validation Board. This Board will make recommendations for
selection by the Panel of Judges.

Each nomination document will be submitted electronically (Microsoft
Word), a total of no more than one page (in addition to the nomination
cover sheet shown in Appendix A) and adhere to the following criteria:
minimum of 12-point, Times font, and minimum 1-inch margins, except at
the bottom of each page where the margin may be 1/2 inch. Graphics in
the nomination application are not encouraged unless critical for
clarity. Nominations not conforming to these guidelines will not be
considered.

Specific NASA Center points of contact for nomination submittals will be
posted on the ARMD web site at
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/aero/events/tgir.htm.

**V. EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCESSES**

**Evaluation Factors**

Throughout the nomination and selection processes, the Factors shown in
Appendix B will be used to evaluate potential Award candidates relative
to achievements toward ARMD Program Goals and Objectives:

• Technical Accomplishments

• Leadership and Organizational Accomplishments

**Scoring**

Review and Validation Board members review and develop a numerical
ranking for each nomination using their personal expertise and judgment
and based on the Evaluation Factors and Guidelines shown in Appendix B.
The maximum number of points a candidate can receive is 1000.

This document will be the primary reference for evaluating Award
nominations. Board members may, independently, solicit information from
the appropriate NASA officials such as those identified below, for
feedback on a candidate\'s performance and customer satisfaction:

• Contracting officers and/or representatives (NASA, other agencies
and/or prime contractors).

• NASA Headquarters and Center Contracting Officers and Contracting
Officer\'s Technical Representatives.

• NASA Headquarters and Center program officers with knowledge of the
nominee\'s performance.

However, though outside advice may be sought and obtained, neither
Award-competitive nor business-competitive information will be revealed
outside the NASA teams evaluating the nominations.

**Review and Validation of Finalists**

Each nominating Center, including Headquarters (for its own nominees),
will review and screen nominations against the Evaluation Factors. Those
nominations judged to be worthy will be forwarded to the Review and
Validation Board and evaluated by the Board according to the Evaluation
Factors. As many as 7 recommended Award recipients (along with any
appropriate "backup" recommendations) will be forwarded by the Board to
the Panel of Judges. However, some or all TGIR awards may be withheld at
the discretion of the Board and/or the Judges if there are deemed to be
insufficient accomplishments to justify an award. If, on the other hand,
a particular nomination is determined by the Board and accepted by the
Panel of Judges as truly exceptional, that nomination will be
recommended to the NASA Administrator for the Administrator\'s Award.

**Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure**

Names of nominees, nomination reports, commentary, and scoring and
ranking information will be kept confidential, and such information will
be available only to those NASA employees directly involved in the
assessment process. All Review and Validation Board and Panel of Judges'
deliberations, papers, findings, and recommendations will be treated in
this confidential manner. Further, all contractor-related information
and material will be handled as proprietary to protect contractor
interests.

**Notification of Award**

Upon final selection of Award winners by the Panel of Judges, the Award
winners will be notified by written letter from the ARMD Associate
Administrator to the nominator. Award winners will then be requested to
submit graphics in support of the TGIR Awards Program Banquet.

**VI. PROCESS PARTICIPANTS**

**TGIR Award Panel of Judges**

The Panel will be composed of six judges: the Directors of the four NASA
Field Centers involved in ARMD programs (Ames, Dryden, Glenn, and
Langley) and the Associate Administrator for Aeronautics Research who
will chair the Panel. The final award decisions will be made by this
Panel of Judges.

**TGIR Award Review and Validation Board**

The TGIR Award Coordinator will convene a Board of no fewer than five
voting members and will administer the selection of a chairman. This
Board will consist of a senior-level, technically-qualified
representative from the ARMD Headquarters office and one from each of
the four NASA Field Centers involved in ARMD programs (Ames, Dryden,
Glenn, and Langley). The voting members will be the Headquarters and
NASA Field Center TGIR Award representatives. Alternate members may also
be selected and included. The Board will review the candidates submitted
for the TGIR Awards to verify eligibility and to assess the candidates
relative to the TGIR Award nomination factors (Appendix B). The Board
will examine and score nomination documents and select the finalists
recommended to the Panel of Judges. The Board may exercise discretion in
reviewing, validating, and recommending award recipients as it deems
necessary.

**Consultants**

Although they will not be members of the TGIR Award Panel of Judges or
the Review and Validation Board, other NASA offices involved in ARMD
programs may be consulted throughout the evaluation process for relevant
input. These NASA Offices may include, but not necessarily limited to,
the General Counsel, the Office of the Inspector General, the Office of
Procurement, the Office of Equal Opportunity Programs, and the Office of
Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization.

**VII. 2005 SCHEDULE**

(Also see Appendix C.)

**May 2005**

• The Associate Administrator for Aeronautics Research identifies the
ARMD TGIR Award Coordinator.

• A Call Memo from the ARMD Mission Directorate Associate Administrator
(AA) to the Center Directors opens the 2005 TGIR Award cycle.

**June 2005**

• Each NASA Field Center Director (as well as the ARMD AA) identifies
one technically-qualified, senior-level representative for the TGIR
Award Review and Validation Board to review and evaluate all
nominations.

• Nominators prepare one-page (maximum) nomination documents for
submission and preliminary screening through the NASA Centers.

**July 2005**

• The TGIR Award Coordinator receives the Centers' nominations, screened
by each respective Center for qualifications and award-worthiness.

• The Review and Validation Board convenes. The Board selects and
forwards the list of Award recommendations to the TGIR Award Panel of
Judges.

**August 2005**

• The Panel of Judges meets to select the final Award recipients.

• Award winners are notified.

• Award trophies are ordered.

**September 2005**

• Award winners submit graphics, write-ups, and video materials in
support of the TGIR Awards Program Banquet.

**October 2005**

• The ARMD Associate Administrator presents the TGIR Award(s) at the
Turning Goals into Reality Awards Ceremony.

**VIII. AWARDS**

Award winners, as determined by the Panel of Judges, will receive the
TGIR Awards as follows:

• moderately sized trophies for exceptional accomplishments toward
individual technology enabling program goals and objectives.

• larger trophies for the Administrator's Award for particularly
outstanding achievements toward goals and objectives.

If appropriate, duplicate awards will be made as follows:

• If an awardee is a team or group made up of organizations (e.g.,
Federal agency, company, university, etc.), each organization will
receive a duplicate award and the participating individuals will receive
certificates.

• If an awardee is a team within an organization, that organization will
receive the award trophy or plaque and the participating individuals
will receive certificates.

• If the awardee is an individual, that individual will receive the TGIR
Award trophy.

The Associate Administrator for Aeronautics Research will present the
TGIR Awards at a major public gathering.

**APPENDIX A --- NOMINATION FORM**

NASA Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD)

**Turning Goals into Reality (TGIR) Award Nomination**

Control/ID No.: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Nominator and contact info:**

**Award Candidate/Team:**

Name(s):

Organization(s):

Address(es):

Phone Number(s):

Fax Number(s):

Email(s):

(Additional names, contact information, etc. may be continued on an
additional page.)

**ARMD Program Connection:**

Theme(s) --- (AT or E&O): Primary [\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

Objective(s) --- (2.1, 2.2 ...8.1, etc.): Primary [\_\_]{.underline}
Secondary Tertiary

Program/Project:

**Briefly describe program/project and connection to ARMD Goals and
Objectives:**

Note: Nominations must not exceed one page in length (not including this
form). They should describe the candidate's contribution to the ARMD
Goals and Objectives and include significant examples for the technical
and/or leadership Award criteria. Nominations must adhere to the
following criteria: minimum of 12 point, Times font, and minimum
one-inch margins (except at the bottom of each page where the margin may
be one-half inch). Graphics are not encouraged unless critical for
clarity.

**APPENDIX B --- EVALUATION AND SCORING**

**EVALUATION FACTORS**

During the nomination, review, evaluation and validation process, the
following factors and their content will be used for reference and as
tools in the rating and ranking activity:

**1. Technical Accomplishments**

• Significant, demonstrated technical achievements on relevant ARMD
program(s) resulting in or contributing to major progress toward Goal(s)
and/or Objective(s)

• Originality and innovation of technical contributions

• Level of accomplishment and technical performance

• Advances to the state of the art

• Development of enabling technologies

• Effectiveness in strategic and tactical planning for technical
activities

• Approaches to solving complex problems

**2. Leadership and Organizational Accomplishments**

• Development of partnerships that made significant progress toward
Goal(s) and/or Objective(s)

• Level of cooperation and contributions to the ARMD Team

• Effectiveness in schedule and cost performance

• Innovation in and/or effective use of modern management and business
practices to improve leadership and/or organizational performance

• Technology transfer and commercialization efforts

**SCORING GUIDELINES**

These guidelines are provided as suggestions for reference and
assistance in assessment and relative ranking of the nominees.

+----+----------------+---+---------------------------------------------+
|    | **Adjective**  |   | > **Performance**                           |
|    |                |   | >                                           |
|    | *              |   | > **[\_\_\                                  |
|    | *Description** |   | _\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ |
|    |                |   | \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}** |
|    | **[\_\_\_\     |   |                                             |
|    | _\_\_\_\_\_\_] |   |                                             |
|    | {.underline}** |   |                                             |
+----+----------------+---+---------------------------------------------+
|    | Exceptional    |   | > World-class work or performance           |
+----+----------------+---+---------------------------------------------+
|    | Excellent      |   | > Major advancements; excellent performance |
+----+----------------+---+---------------------------------------------+
|    | Very good      |   | > Important advancements; above average     |
|    |                |   | > performance                               |
+----+----------------+---+---------------------------------------------+
|    | Good/Fair      |   | > Average or minimal advancements; expected |
|    |                |   | > performance                               |
+----+----------------+---+---------------------------------------------+
|    |                |   |                                             |
+----+----------------+---+---------------------------------------------+

![](media/image2.pct)

**APPENDIX C --- AWARD PROCESS AND PARTICIPANTS**

**2005 Schedule**

**Process Step Participant(s)**

**Date and Event AA Center Board Award Others**

**Dir. Reps. Chair Coord.**

5/24 Issue nomination call memo **X** x

5/24 Appoint Award Coordinator **X**

5/26 Initiate nomination process **X** **X**

6/23 Appoint Review & Validation Board Reps. **X** **X**

7/7 Submit nominations to Center POCs. x x **X**

7/14 Send best nominations to HQ Award Coord. **X** x x

7/21 Distribute nomination copies to Board Reps. **X**

7/21-7/28 Perform independent preliminary screening **X**

7/28 Convene Board and select Board Chair x **X**

7/28 Select Award candidates **X** **X** x

8/11 Forward recommendations to Judges **X** x

8/16 Convene Panel of Judges **X** x x

8/16 Brief Panel on Board recommendations x x x **X** x

8/16 Deliberate and select awardees **X** x

8/19 Order awards **X** x

8/19-10/13 Create/manufacture Awards **X**

8/19 Notify & Congratulate Award nominees **X** **X** x

8/19 Invite awardees to TGIR Awards Ceremony **X** x

9/12 Audio/Visual presentation material due x x x **X**

9/12 Exhibit poster materials due x x x **X**

10/25 Present Awards at TGIR **X**

10/27 Review lessons learned x **X** x

10/31 Issue updated draft 2006 Award guidelines **X**

Note: **X =** Activity Leader x = Activity Contributor