What are the two main criteria that the National Science Foundation (NSF) uses to evaluate grant proposals?

The National Science Foundation (NSF) evaluates grant proposals primarily based on two criteria: intellectual merit and broader impacts.

Intellectual merit refers to the potential of the proposed research to advance knowledge and understanding within its field. This includes the significance of the research questions posed, the rigor of the methodology proposed, and the qualifications of the researchers involved. A strong proposal will demonstrate how it can contribute to the academic community or lead to significant advancements in science and technology.

Broader impacts encompass the potential benefits of the research to society at large. This includes how the proposed work can enhance education, stimulate public engagement with science, promote diversity in the workforce, and address societal challenges. The NSF seeks to ensure that research benefits not just the academic community but also the general public and broader society.

While other options mention important aspects like ethical integrity, legal compliance, sustainability, innovation, and quality, they do not represent the specific evaluation criteria that the NSF uses in its grant proposal review process. Focusing specifically on intellectual merit and broader impacts aligns with NSF's mission to promote the progress of science and serves as the backbone for funding decisions.