The Measure of STAR Review of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Science To Achieve Results (STAR) Research Grants Program (2003) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Appendix B: Previous Reviews of the STAR Program
Appendix B: Previous Reviews of the STAR Program
Pages 153-164
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 153... ...
One of the centers was the National Center for Environmental Research and Quality Assurance (NCERQA) , now known as the National Center for Environmental Research (NCER)
|
From page 154... ...
2000 REVIEW BY A SPECIAL JOINT COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED BY EPA'S SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD AND ORD'S BOARD OF SCIENTIFIC COUNSELORS In the latter part of 1999, EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) and ORD's BOSC established a joint committee to review the STAR program (EPA/SAB/BOSC 2000~.
|
From page 155... ...
· The Agency should assess how well the needs and issues of the regional offices are factored into the STAR planning process and consider additional mechanisms for ensuring adequate regional involvement in STAR Program activities. · The Agency should request feedback on the success ofthe program review workshops and should expand the workshop proceedings to include a record of discussions regarding the relevancy of STAR results to the Agency's research and regulatory agenda and to environmental decision making.
|
From page 156... ...
that reviewed the STAR grants program with emphasis on three issues: whether funding amounts awarded for the grants align with EPA's strategic goals, ORD's researchpriorities, andprogram-off~ce priorities; the extent to which the completed focused grants have provided research that is being used by EPA's program offices; and how ORD could enhance its management of the program to help to ensure that it meets its objectives. Broadly speaking, GAO found that STAR grant funding had generally been aligned with EPA's, ORD's, and the program offices' broadly defined priorities.
|
From page 157... ...
2000 JOINT REVIEW BY EPA AND NSF In 2000, the National Science Foundation (NSF) and EPA convened experts from outside the agencies and users of socioeconomic research, including EPA program and regional staff, to conduct an interim assessment of the Decision Making and Valuation for Environmental Policy grants program (DMVEP)
|
From page 158... ...
Encourage research on group and institutional as well as individual valuation and decision making for environmental policy." Although EPA did not respond formally to those recommendations, it did implement many of the recommendations in the 2001 and 2002 DMVEP solicitations. 2002 SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD REVIEW OF PARTICULATE-MATTER CENTERS In February 2002, the PM Research Centers Interim Review Panel of EPA's SAB convened a review of the particulate-matter research centers program.
|
From page 159... ...
has a strong and dynamic research program that is well connected to the Office of Research and Development (ORD) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
|
From page 160... ...
However, streamlining measures should tee taken to reduce the time demands on staffwhile preserving the essence of an integrative process. Recommendation 5: Progress of NCER in partnering with other federal agencies has been excellent, firmly establishing it as a leader in environmental research and significantly raising its visibility.
|
From page 161... ...
assuring that NCER's research results reach those who are in a position to apply them to health anchor environmental 161 improvement. NCER shouIc!
|
From page 162... ...
As the Center shifts the responsibilities of staff, the following are offered as suggestions: Link resource type and quantity to activities defined by the Strategic Plan; Develop innovative approaches to solve paperwork bottlenecks that currently are personnel intensive (the digital processes at NSF and other agencies are recommended starting places) ; and Develop performance measures for internal and external communication plans." EPA had not prepared a response to those recommendations by the beginning of December 2002.
|
From page 163... ...
EPA/SAB (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Science Advisory Board)
|
From page 164... ...
S Environmental Protection Agency Science Advisory Board and Board of Scientific Counselors)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.