Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
E Data Solicitation and Collection Data Solicitation from Federal Agencies Eight federal agencies (Air Force Office of Scientific Research, Army Research Office, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Office of Naval Research, Department of Energy, National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology) that fund atomic, molecular, and optical (AMO) research were asked to provide the following information: 1. Data showing the evolution of the size of your agencyâs AMO program for the past 10 years, in as- spent dollars and 2005 dollars. 2. The number of grantees supported each year for the last 10 years. 3. The number of applicants, and the ratio of successful proposals, each year over the past 10 years. 4. Please provide an estimate of how much turnover there has been in your program over the last few years. In particular, how many new starts have you been able to provide? 5. Please provide a percentage breakdown of how your funds are distributed across the major segments of AMO science today. How much goes to theoretical work, and how much to experiment? 6. What is the average grant size for an award in experimental AMO and in theoretical AMO? 7. Has the number of grants of the same quality level as the ones you have been funding in recent years dropped due to budget shortfalls? How much would the AMO budget at your agency have to expand to maintain the previous levels of grant numbers? 8. What would be the ideal size of a grant in experimental AMO? In theoretical AMO? How much would it cost to raise all grants to these levels? 9. If you track demographics, what has been the age distribution of the grantees in your program in 2004 and how has that distribution shifted in the last decade? 10. The committee is particularly interested in the percentage participation by women and underrepresented minorities each year for the last 10 years and whether there have been any substantial shifts in the last decade. 11. The number of students supported and Ph.D.s granted each year for the last 10 years. 12. Has your agency begun supporting any special centers or larger group efforts in AMO science? If so, please provide us with a short paragraph or two describing their intellectual thrusts and the size of the award(s). PREPUBLICATION COPY â SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION E-1
13. Please describe how the intellectual balance of the support for AMO science has shifted over the last decade. What are the major areas of interest today? 14. Please describe the extent to which your agency supports interdisciplinary activities that include AMO science. Demographic Questionnaire: In order to ensure that opportunities in AMO sciences are accessible to a diverse set of practitioners, the committee would like to understand the level of participation for women and underrepresented minorities. To this end, we pose the following questions to professional societies that fund or support atomic, molecular, and optical (AMO) research. 1. Over the past 10 years, what is the total number of PhD degrees granted at U.S. institutions each year? 2. Of that total, how many degrees each year were granted in an AMO-related field? 3. Of the degrees granted in an AMO-related field, how many each year were granted to a. Women b. Underrepresented minorities These data will be used to make a plot that shows the number of AMO-related PhDs relative to total physics PhDs granted as a function of time, as well as the fraction of those AMO-related degrees that go to women and underrepresented minorities. PREPUBLICATION COPY â SUBJECT TO FURTHER EDITORIAL CORRECTION E-2