§7613 Relevance and Merit of Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Funded by the Department

Summary

The Secretary must set up scientific peer review for every competitive agricultural research grant run by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture. The Secretary must also set up relevance and merit reviews for every competitive agricultural research, extension, or education grant. The Advisory Board must be consulted continuously when the merit review rules are made. Neither peer nor merit review may take the offer or availability of matching funds into account. Each year the Advisory Board must check whether Department-funded research, extension, and education work fits the priorities in section 7612(a) and whether funding is adequate. The Secretary must use the Board’s findings when writing requests for proposals and when judging applications, and must get input from people who do or use agricultural research about the prior year’s request. The Secretary must ensure scientific peer review of all Department research. Review panels must verify at least once every 5 years that each research activity and program has scientific merit and relevance. For work in the research, education, and economics mission area, panels must consider the priorities in section 7612 and the national or multistate importance of the work. Panels must be made up of scientific experts, a majority who are not agency employees, and should use college and university scientists when possible. Panel results go to the Advisory Board. Effective October 1, 1999, each 1862 and 1890 Institution must establish and use a merit review process to get research or extension funds; effective October 1, 1999, each 1994 Institution must do the same for extension funds; Hispanic-serving agricultural colleges and universities must also establish and use a merit review process to receive extension funds.