By the very nature of its work, NSF is steeped in performance information. Our research and education investments are made through a rigorous process of merit review with peer evaluation. When NSF grantees return to us for further support, they include information about results of prior work in their applications, and we require reviewers to take this information into account in decisions about further funding. With larger, more complex activities that stretch out over longer periods of time, our level of attention to performance and results is correspondingly higher. Centers, for example, generally go through an intensive review in their third and sixth years, in addition to regular site visits and evaluation of annual reports.
Facilities receive similar regular reviews and recompetition.
Finally, our portfolio of education activities receives intensive monitoring for results in addition to regular program evaluation. Our mission was set in our organic act, and every year, we translate that mission into a set of projected investments in the form of our budget request. In formulating the plans represented in the budget, we consult broadly, both with the research and education communities and with other partner institutions, such as state and local governments, industrial firms, nonprofit organizations, academic institutions, professional societies, international organizations, and other federal agencies. This rich network of consultation is the steering mechanism that keeps the Foundation's activities, from broad allocations of funds through the design and implementation of new programs to the selection of specific projects, moving in directions that are widely seen as fruitful for the nation. GPRA, however, does ask us to summarize and present the results of these information-gathering and consultative processes differently than we have in the past.