Center for Multimodal Solutions for Congestion Mitigation (CMS) University of Florida

2008-2009

Pre-Proposal Evaluation Form

(Evaluation due November 27, 2007 by 5 p.m. e-mail to )

1.Information on Proposal
Project Title:
PI Name: / Proposal Type: (Research, Education, Tech Transfer)
Requested Funding: / From CMS / Matching (indicate source)
$ / $
2. CMS Internal Evaluator
Name: / Date:
Affiliation:
Address:
E-mail: / Phone: / Fax:
3. Evaluation Part I(Fill out only Part A for Research proposals and only Part Bfor Education and Technology Transfer proposals)
Use the scoring criteria below to assign a value to each section.
5 – Highly exceeds expectations
4 – Exceeds expectations
3 – Reasonably exceeds expectations
2 – Barely meets expectations
1 – Does not meet expectations
A. Research(Answer all questions as they relate to the Pre-Proposal) / SCORE
  1. How do you rate the pre-proposal in terms of research type and proposal type?

  1. How do you rate the pre-proposal in terms of the relevance to:

  1. CMS Theme

  1. USDOT Congestion Initiative

  1. 2025 Florida Transportation Plan

  1. How does the proposed research project rate in terms of objectives, methodology and anticipated results?

  1. How does the proposed research rate in terms of possible contributions to research in transportation and state-of-the-art?

  1. How does the proposed research rate in terms of creating new technology transfer initiatives?

Section TOTAL
B. Education and Technology Transfer (Answer all questions as they relate to the Pre-Proposal) / SCORE
  1. How does the proposal rate in terms of developing educational and/or technology transfer activities for recurring and non-recurring congestion problems through multimodal solutions?

  1. How does the proposal rate in terms of considering the national strategy for surface transportation?

  1. How does the proposal rate in terms of creating strategies for attracting students to the transportation field?

  1. How does the proposal rate in terms of generating external partnerships with public or private agencies?

  1. How does the proposal rate in terms of interdisciplinary collaboration?

Section TOTAL
4. Evaluation Part II(For Research, Education or Technology Transfer proposals)
General / SCORE
  1. Rate the originality of the proposal

  1. Rate the proposal on its creativityand organization

Expertise / SCORE
  1. How does the team of researchers rate in terms of qualifications and skills?

  1. Howlikely is it for this proposed project to be successfully completed given the resources requested and the team’s expertise?

Budget / SCORE
How does the proposed budget rate in terms of:
  1. Resources requested vs. proposed work

  1. Student support under this project

  1. Budget vs. timeline

Section TOTAL
5. What is your OVERALL RATING on the Pre-Proposal? / Overall Rating
5 – Excellent: overall outstanding proposal; deserves highest priority
4 – Very Good: high quality proposal in nearly all respects; should be supported
if funding is available
3 – Good: a quality proposal worthy of support
2 – Fair: proposal needs revision in order to receive funding
1 – Poor: proposal has serious deficiencies and should not be funded
6. Evaluator’s Recommendation / Select choice with an ‘X’
Fund project as submitted
Fund with scope modifications
Fund with budget modifications
Do not fund
7. Evaluator’s Comments(Write comments in blank space below)

CMS Pre-Proposal Evaluation Form 2008-2009 1