skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 235892 Find in a Library
Title: Improving NIJ's Peer Review Process: The Scientific Review Panel Pilot Project
Journal: NIJ Journal  Issue:268  Dated:October 2011  Pages:22-24
Series: NIJ Journal
Author(s): Thomas E. Feucht; Phyllis Newton
Date Published: October 2011
Page Count: 3
Document: HTML|PDF
Type: Research (Applied/Empirical)
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This article, Improving NIJ’s Peer Review Process: The Scientific Review Panel Pilot Project, discusses NIJ’s new grant application peer review process.
Abstract: This article discusses NIJ’s new grant application peer review process. The 2010 evaluation of the NIJ by the National Research Council (NRC) found that NIJ needs to do a better job in its research program development and planning and to institute more rigorous processes and policies related to its research. Following this recommendation, in fiscal year 2012 NIJ will establish five scientific review panels in four topic categories: criminal justice systems, violence and victimization, forensics (two panels), and science and technology. The panels will consist of 12 scientists and 6 practitioners to review the research proposals. Steps in the review process will include: 1) verification by NIJ staff that the application meets the basic minimum requirements as stated in the solicitation; 2) assessment by 3 members of the scientific review panel to determine the application’s technical merits and comment on their assessment; 3) an opportunity for all 18 members of the scientific review panel to review every application and participate in the consensus review; and 4) based on the results of the scientific review panel, NIJ staff will make recommendations to the NIJ director regarding each application.
Main Term(s): Criminal justice research
Index Term(s): Corrections research; Evaluative research; Research design; Research methods
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.