text-only page produced automatically by LIFT Text
Transcoder Skip all navigation and go to page contentSkip top navigation and go to directorate navigationSkip top navigation and go to page navigation
National Science Foundation
Merit Review
design element
Merit Review Home
Phase I: Proposal Preparation and Submission
Phase II: Proposal Review and Processing
Phase III: Award Processing
Non-Award Decisions and Transactions
Merit Review Facts
Why You Should Volunteer to Serve as an NSF Reviewer
Additional Resources
Contact Us
Proposals and Awards
Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide
Proposal Preparation and Submission
bullet Grant Proposal Guide
  bullet Grants.gov Application Guide
Award and Administration
bullet Award and Administration Guide

Award Conditions
Other Types of Proposals
Merit Review
NSF Outreach
Policy Office

Merit Review

NOTICE: Effective January 14, 2013, the National Science Foundation implemented revised merit review criteria based on the National Science Board (NSB) report, National Science Foundationís Merit Review Criteria: Review and Revisions. While the two merit review criteria remain unchanged (Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts), guidance has been provided to clarify and improve the function of the criteria. Revisions based on the NSB report have been incorporated into the Foundationís policies and procedures manuals, websites, and systems. Proposers should familiarize themselves with the Merit Review Principles and Criteria described in GPG Chapter III.A. For comprehensive outreach and training materials visit the Revised Merit Review Criteria Resource site.

Through its merit review process, the National Science Foundation (NSF) ensures that proposals submitted are reviewed in a fair, competitive, transparent, and in-depth manner. The merit review process is described in detail in Part I of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG): the Grant Proposal Guide (GPG). The GPG provides guidance for the preparation and submission of proposals to NSF.

The goal of this Merit Review website is to help you better understand the NSF merit review process as well as identify resources for additional information (including applicable chapters in the GPG). Sections of this website include:

An overview of the NSF Proposal and Award Process is presented in the diagram below. The text in the following sections correspond to the different areas on the diagram. 

Download a printable version of the Merit Review Process Illustration. PDF (37KB)

Phase II

  • Proposal Review and Processing
  • 6 Months

4 - Reviewers Selected

Reviewers are selected based on their specific and/or broad knowledge of the science and engineering fields; their broad knowledge of the infrastructure of the science and engineering enterprise, and its educational activities; and to the extent possible, diverse representation within the review group.

Sources of reviewers can come from the program officer's knowledge of the research area; references listed in the proposal; recent professional society programs; computer searches of S&E journal articles related to the proposal; reviewer recommendations included in proposal or sent by email. Proposers are invited to suggest persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal, as well as identify persons they would prefer not review the proposal.

4 Reviewers Selected

5 - Peer Review

All NSF proposals are reviewed through use of the two NSB-approved merit review criteria: Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts. Some solicitations may have additional review criteria.

External reviewers' analyses and evaluation of the proposal provide information to the NSF Program Officer in making a recommendation regarding the proposal.

5 Peer

6 - Program Officer Recommendation

After scientific, technical and programmatic review, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be recommended for an award or declined for funding.

Due to the large number of proposals received, the review and consideration process can take up to six months. Large or particularly complex proposals may require additional review and processing time.

6 Program Officer Recommendation

7 - Division Director Review

If the decision is made to decline the award, the organization is notified and review information is available in the FastLane System.

If the decision is to award, the recommendation is submitted to a Grants & Agreements Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements(DGA).

7 Division Director



Phase I: Proposal Preparation and Submission

GPG Chapter I. Pre-Submission Information and GPG, Chapter II, Proposal Preparation Instructions provide detailed information on preparation and submission of proposals to the NSF. The NSF website provides a comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. The topics below provide additional information on the activities in this phase of the merit review process:

Proposal Preparation and Submission - steps 1 through 3


  1. NSF announces funding opportunity
  2. Organization prepares/submits proposal
  3. NSF receives proposal

View the Merit Review Process Illustration

Phase II: Proposal Review and Processing

Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program. NSF Program Officers identify experts in their particular fields to review the proposal. Usually, a proposal is reviewed by at least three external reviewers. Activities in this phase include:

Proposal Review and Processing - steps 4 through 7


  1. Cognizant program officer receives proposal and selects peer reviewers
  2. Peer reviewers review proposal
  3. Program officer analyzes input and makes recommendation to Division Director
  4. Division Director review of recommendation

View the Merit Review Process Illustration

Phase III: Award Processing

If the Program Officer recommends funding of the proposal, and final division or other programmatic approval is obtained, then the recommendation goes to a Grants and Agreements Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. The Grants and Agreements Officer reviews the proposal for business, financial and policy implications, as well as the processing and issuance of a grant or cooperative agreement.

Award Processing - steps 8 through 9


  1. Grants and Agreements Officer conducts business review
  2. Grants and Agreements Officer notifies organization of award decision

View the Merit Review Process Illustration

Non-Award Decisions and Transactions

This section covers topics regarding non-award decisions and other transactions:

Merit Review Facts

This section identifies important facts about the NSF merit review process.

  1. All proposals submitted to NSF are reviewed according to the two merit review criteria: Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts
  2. NSF implemented revised merit review criteria in January 2013
  3. NSF Program Officers make recommendations to fund or decline a proposal
  4. Most proposals that are awarded do not receive all "Excellents"
  5. NSF Program Officers are encouraged to recommend high risk science and engineering projects for funding
  6. Principal Investigators submit on average about 2.3 proposals for every award they receive
  7. NSF promotes broadening participation in science and engineering
  8. NSF annually has active awards at over 2,000 awardee organizations

Why You Should Volunteer to Serve As An NSF Reviewer

This section provides information on why you should volunteer to serve as an NSF Reviewer.

Additional Resources

These resources provide additional and detailed information on funding, proposal preparation, and award management policies and procedures:

Contact Us

If you have additional questions regarding the NSF Merit Review Process or proposal submission and preparation, please contact us:


Email this pagePrint this page

Back to Top of page