The NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office is developing a Cooperative Research Program in the Chesapeake Bay to formalize and expand collaborative research among the Chesapeake Bay's commercial fishing industry, marine and estuarine scientists, and fishery management communities. The goal of this initiative is to enhance the data upon which fishery management decisions are made, as well as to facilitate communication and collaboration among commercial fishermen, scientists, and fishery managers. Through this initiative, NCBO will develop a collaborative and cooperative program to set research priorities that meet management and fishing industry needs.
Fishery management is by nature a multiple-year endeavor following long time series of fishery-dependent and independent information. In addition, there are specific needs for immediate short-term biological and habit-related information to help solve fishery management issues. Thus, the cooperative science initiative will operate with two avenues of potential funding.
Long-Term Monitoring Program Designs: The long-term cooperative research programs focus on fisheries independent data as well as fishery-dependent data. Support for the design and pilot of potentially longer-term monitoring programs is acceptable.
Short-Term Research Projects: The program encourages short-term cooperative research projects such as habitat studies, biological information and stock structure studies, and socioeconomic research, with an initial focus on blue crab, menhaden, or striped bass. Projects in this area should aim to provide more detailed information on fish stocks, marine habitat, and bycatch reduction through the use of more selective fishing gears.
This funding provides a significant opportunity for the NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office to develop collaborative relationships with the fishing industry. These Cooperative Research Programs are a mechanism to build trust and understanding among the various players in the fisheries community and management agencies. It is recommended that proposals consist of partnerships between fishermen, academia, and/or NOAA staff.
Chesapeake Bay Integrated Science Program Details
Anticipated Timeline: Letters of Intent (LOI) are requested within 30 days and full proposals 30-45 days after LOI. Applicants must submit a full proposal by the deadline, regardless of whether they
have heard back from NOAA following the LOI submission. The deadline for proposal submission is usually within the March/April timeframe.
Eligibility: Eligible applicants are institutions of higher education, other nonprofits, commercial organizations, foreign governments, organizations under the jurisdiction of foreign governments, international organizations, state, local and Indian tribal governments. Federal agencies or institutions are not eligible to receive Federal assistance under this notice.
Drivers: All projects supported through the Fisheries component must address recommendations of A Fisheries Ecosystem Planning for the Chesapeake Bay, the Chesapeake 2000 Agreement 
, the Report from the December 2003 STAC Workshop: Identifying and Prioritizing Research Required to Evaluate Ecological Risks and Benefits of Introducing Diploid Crassostrea ariakensis to Restore Oysters in Chesapeake Bay, 
and provide timely information for making resource management decisions in an ecosystem context. Specific fisheries management needs defined on an annual basis may also be a driver (i.e. Menhaden in FY2005.)
Current Priorities: Priority areas are modified slightly each year but may include stock assessment research and management, and multispecies research, management and fisheries ecosystem plan implementation, including ecosystem understanding, retrospective analyses, and ecosystem modeling.
Previously Funded Projects
How We Make Decisions:
- Notice and Announcement: A public notice of this funding program is included in the NOAA omnibus notice published in the Federal Register. More detailed information about the program can be found in the announcement of federal funding opportunity (FFO), which is posted on the NCBO website and on www.grants.gov .
- Submitting Applications: Application packages must be submitted electronically through www.grants.gov . Although previously optional, electronic submission is now mandatory.
- Initial Screening: The Federal Program Officer responsible for this program conducts an initial screening to determine compliance with all application requirements.
- Evaluating Proposals: Proposals are evaluated based on importance and relevance and applicability of the proposed project to: 1) program goals; 2) technical/scientific merit; 3) overall qualifications of applicants; 4) project costs, and 5) outreach and education components. All proposals are evaluated and scored individually in accordance with the assigned weights of the above evaluation criteria and any additional criteria published in the FFO by an independent technical mail review. The technical mail reviewers are individuals with expertise in the subjects addressed by particular proposals, but who do not have a conflict of interests with the applicant. Each mail reviewer sees only certain individual proposals within their area of expertise. In addition to their review narrative, reviewers are required to comment on each of the five review criteria (listed above), to obtain an overall score for the proposal.
Upon completion of the mail review, the evaluation process moves to the review panel. The review panel is an ad hoc assembly of independent reviewers with a range expertise appropriate to the proposals to be considered. A panel is comprised of four to eight individuals, with individuals having expertise in either the scientific, management or implementation aspects of the program. Both nonfederal and federal scientists, managers and environmental education experts may be used as panel members. Like mail reviewers, panelists are asked to evaluate proposals individually, but they are asked to look at each proposal in comparison with similar proposals, and with all submitted proposals. The panel has access to all mail reviews of proposals, and uses the mail reviews in discussion and evaluation of the entire slate of proposals. All proposals are considered, and each individual panel member numerically ranks the proposals (1 through n). The individual panelist rankings are averaged for each application and this average ranking is the primary factor in final selection. No consensus advice is given by the independent technical mail review or the review panel.
- Selection: The NCBO program officers neither vote nor score proposals as part of the peer review panel. The program officer (a) selects the proposals to be recommended for funding based upon the averaged panel rankings, and/or any specific objectives published in the FFO; and (b) determines the amount of funds available for each proposal subject to the availability of fiscal year funds. Most proposals are funded in order of descending mean score, except in a few cases where proposals are funded out of rank order because they meet program priorities more closely than proposals that had higher mean scores. Recommendations for funding are then forwarded to the selecting official, the Director of NCBO, for the final funding decision. The Director makes final funding decisions based upon the program officials’ recommendations, project funding priorities, and availability of funds.