RESEARCH PROPOSALS SUBMITTED UNDER NSF'S RESEARCH APPLIED TO NATIONAL NEEDS (RANN) PROGRAM WERE EVALUATED BY THE AGENCY'S PROGRAM MANAGERS AND PEER REVIEW GROUPS. THIS STUDY EXAMINED HOW THE EVALUATION RATINGS GIVEN BY THESE TWO GROUPS RELATED TO THE ULTIMATE USAGE OF THESE RESEARCH PROJECTS. A 1975 SURVEY, BASED ON A STRATIFIED RANDOM SAMPLE OF 100 NEW PROJECTS FUNDED DURING 1972 AND 1973, WAS CONDUCTED AMONG 700 POTENTIAL USERS. SURVEY RESULTS INDICATED THE 30 MOST- AND 30 LEAST-USED REPORTS. THE DATA FURNISHES NO BASIS FOR BELIEVING THAT PROPOSALS WHICH WERE HIGHLY RATED BY PEER REVIEW GROUPS WERE USED MORE OFTEN THAN WERE PROPOSALS WHICH RECEIVED LOWER RATINGS. HOWEVER, THERE IS STATISTICAL EVIDENCE THAT RANN PROGRAM MANAGERS VIEWED THE PROPOSALS LEADING TO THE 30 MOST-USED REPORTS MORE FAVORABLY THAN THOSE LEADING TO THE 30 LEAST-USED REPORTS. THESE PROJECT PROPOSALS WERE PROCESSED FASTER AND WERE EVALUATED BY MORE PEER REVIEWERS. DATA SUGGEST THAT THE PROJECT MANAGERS ALSO CONSIDERED THE 'APPLIED' RESEARCH PROPOSALS MORE USEFUL TO PRACTITIONERS AS OPPOSED TO ACADEMICIANS. THE PEER REVIEW GROUPS WHICH EVALUATED THESE MOST-USED PROPOSALS HAD FEWER UNIVERSITY PERSONNEL AND MORE RANN PERSONNEL THAN DID THE LEAST-USED PROJECTS. ALTHOUGH IT APPEARS THAT PROGRAM MANAGERS ARE MORE AWARE OF THE ULTIMATE USEFULNESS OF RESEARCH PROPOSALS THAN ARE PEER REVIEW GROUPS, MANAGERS STILL FEEL THAT THE COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS MADE BY THESE PEER REVIEW GROUPS ARE INSTRUMENTAL IN SHAPING AND IMPROVING RESEARCH PROPOSALS. STATISTICAL TABLES, NOTES, AND REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (KCP)