1 / 5

QoLT project review plan

QoLT project review plan. Goal: a concrete response to the Site Visit Team’s criticisms that we don’t have processes for selecting new projects or evaluating current projects Approach: each research cluster leader does an internal evaluation for each individual project, address:

ttobias
Télécharger la présentation

QoLT project review plan

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. QoLT project review plan • Goal: • a concrete response to the Site Visit Team’s criticisms that we don’t have processes for selecting new projects or evaluating current projects • Approach: • each research cluster leader does an internal evaluation • for each individual project, address: • NSF’s two criteria of scientific merit and broader impact • selected metrics from our evaluation chart (at least one impact, one relevance, and execution quality) • for the cluster as a whole, address all metrics in our evaluation chart • a) research leaders & QoLT directors discuss the evaluations internally;b) leaders propose fate of projects (continue/don’t; budget up/down/same; scope change/not)c) research leaders propose additional (new) projects • ITERATE: • QoLT Directors discuss with SAB and IPAB; AB’s provide recommendations • feedback to research leaders • research leaders propose next year portfolio to Directors

  2. QoLT Project Evaluation Criteria Quality of Life Technology Center 2 Carnegie Mellon University | University of Pittsburgh

  3. Project SPICE (example, with apologies to HERB) recommendation continue & increase budget continue & decrease budget score as ✔+ , ✔ , ✔- continue at same budget discontinue

  4. who reviews what Quality of Life Technology Center 4 Carnegie Mellon University | University of Pittsburgh

  5. who prepares initial evaluations • Human-System Interaction Thrust (HSIT) Dan Siewiorek • Perception & Awareness Thrust (PAT) Martial Hebert • Person & Society Thrust (PST) Rich Schulz • Mobility & Manipulation Thrust (MoMaT) Chris Atkeson • Active Home (AH) Chris Atkeson • Personal Mobility & Manipulation Appliance (PerMMA) Rory Cooper • Safe Driving (SD) Aaron Steinfeld • Virtual Coach (VC) Dan Siewiorek • Natural Environment Testbeds (NET) Howard Wactlar

More Related