Page 1 of 9

Guidelines for Evaluation

Technical Research & Development Proposal

National ICT R&D Fund is dedicated to creating an innovation centric research and development
ecosystem that is congruent to socioeconomic landscape in Pakistan. The fund promotes the view
that an incremental innovation removes bottlenecks and alleviates rate limiting factors from value
chains. Funded proposals are expected to perform research and development that leads to
innovation and resulting wealth generation in the country. We encourage proposals that perform
original research as well as leverage results of existing research to develop solutions for important
industrial, commercial and social problems.

The probability of wealth generation through incremental innovation depends upon the following
factors:

1. Economic, industrial, commercial and social importance of the value chain.
2. Importance of the rate limiting factors addressed.
3. Level of success in alleviating rate limiting factors.
4. The price point at which the rate limiting factors are alleviated.
5. Time frame in which the rate limiting factor are alleviated. This is also known as the window of
opportunity. Delays in providing solution could result in decreased importance of the value
chain by the time the rate limiting factor is alleviated.

Evaluators are expected to take a nurturing attitude and guide Principal Investigator toward
developing proposals that achieve the objective of wealth generation through innovation. It is
expected that an approved R&D proposal will provide the following information:

1. Concrete objectives.
2. Succinct description of
a. Value chains that are focus of the proposal,
b. Key bottlenecks and rate limiting factors associated with these value chains.
3. Literature search related to important and well known solutions that focus on these value
chains and rate limiting factors.
4. Known key strengths and weaknesses of these solutions.
5. Weaknesses of well known and established solutions that will be removed by the proposed
solution.
6. Techniques used to achieve improvements mentioned above.
7. J ustification for using these techniques.
8. High level description (outlines, design, and algorithmic description etc.) of proposed solution.
9. Progress that has already been made and positive results received so far.
10. Project plan and intermediate deliverables.
11. Plan to integrate proposed solution with the existing industrial or academic environment.
12. Capabilities of Principal Investigator and the infrastructure and support provided by the
institution.

A detailed evaluation form is provided to assist evaluators achieve the objective of guiding Principal
Investigators towards developing superior quality proposal.

Page 2 of 9

(Note: Please click in the box to check or uncheck. To write your comments, click on the shaded
area and start typing.)
Request for: Internal Evaluation External Evaluation
Date of Request: June 01, 2012 Due Date: June 14, 2012

The Proposal:
Title of Proposal:
Principal Investigator:
Title/Department:
PIs Organization:
Address:
Items included in the proposal:
Cover Page Table of Contents Proposal Summary
Proposed Objectives Research Background Benefits / Outputs
Milestones Time Lines Budget (with breakup)
Resumes Additional Items:


Evaluators Details:
Name:
Designation:
Institution:
Address:
Tel #: Cell #: Fax:
Email: Home Page:

To The Evaluator: To what degree are you familiar with the proposed topic/project?
(Mark all that are applicable)
I am actively engaged in research and developmental work in this specific area.
I have carried out research and developmental work in the past in this specific area.
I have taught courses in this specific area.
My experience is in the general area but I have not worked in this specific area.
Other Comments:


Page 3 of 9

1. Research and Development Background: [section 2 of the proposal]
Evaluate the key strengths and weaknesses of the efforts of PI in referencing the literature/
research background of the proposed area and assessing current state of the art and
challenges associated with it. Also rank accordingly.
Yes/No
a. Does the literature review describe the value chain and justify its importance?
b. Does the literature review describe key bottlenecks and rate limiting factors
associated with the relevant value chain?

c. Does the literature review provide succinct information about existing solutions
to the key bottleneck and rate limiting factors?

d. Are challenges and shortcomings in the existing solutions discussed?
e. Has PI justified need and motivation for the proposed project?
f. Is the research background summary and references relevant to the proposed
project?


Key Strengths:
Key Weaknesses:
Research Background
Section Evaluation Ranking:
Unsatisfactory Needs
Improvement
Satisfactory Above
Average
Well Above
Average


Other Comments:


2. Proposed Objectives: [section 3 of the proposal]
(a) From a research point of view, evaluate the key strengths and weaknesses of the proposed
research objectives (if any) and rank accordingly:
Key Strengths:
Key Weaknesses:

(b) From a development point of view, evaluate the key strengths and weaknesses of the
proposed development objectives (if any) and rank accordingly.
Yes/No
a. Do the proposed objectives targets ICT related research and/or development?
b. Are the objectives measurable and clearly defined?

Key Strengths:
Key Weaknesses:

Page 4 of 9
Objectives Section Evaluation
Ranking:
Unsatisfactory Needs
Improvement
Satisfactory Above
Average
Well Above
Average


Other Comments:

3. Methods and Approach: [section 4 of the proposal]
Evaluate the key strengths and weakness of the methods and approach described by PI in the
methodology section to achieve the ultimate project objectives and rank accordingly.
Yes/No
a. Does the proposed approach suggest how key bottlenecks will be removed?
b. Does the proposed approach address the current key challenges in the
proposed area?

c. Does the proposed approach contain analysis, design, development,
implementation and testing plans?

d. Does the proposed approach include high-level information like block-
diagrams/ schematics etc. for proposed hardware/software solution?

e. Is the proposed approach implementable?
f. Will proposed objectives be achieved through implementing the proposed
research and/or development process?


Key Strengths:
Key Weaknesses:
Methods and Approach
Evaluation Ranking:
Unsatisfactory Needs
Improvement
Satisfactory Above
Average
Well Above
Average


Other Comments:


4. Project Structure/Design: [section 4.D&8 of the proposal]
Evaluate the key strengths and weaknesses of the project structure/design and rank
accordingly.
Yes/No
a. Do project activities support proposed approach? Special attention should be
paid to activities that are focused at addressing key challenges in the relevant
domain.

b. Does the Gantt chart list activities in enough details to be evaluated?
c. Is there possible overlap in project activities so that goals can be achieved in a
timely fashion and within the window of opportunity?



Page 5 of 9
Key Strengths:
Key Weaknesses:
Project Structure/Design
Section Evaluation Ranking:
Unsatisfactory Needs
Improvement
Satisfactory Above
Average
Well Above
Average


Other Comments:


5. Monitoring and Evaluation of the Project Plan: [section 4.E of the proposal]
Evaluate the key strengths and weaknesses of the monitoring and evaluation of the project plan
and rank accordingly.
Yes/No
a. Do the deliverables target proposed objectives?
b Are deliverables concrete and tangible?
c. Are milestones and deliverables aligned with completion of major phases and
activities of the project?

d. Are the deliverables defined on quarterly basis?

Key Strengths:
Key Weaknesses:
Monitoring & Evaluation
Section Evaluation Ranking:
Unsatisfctory Needs
Improvement
Satisfactory Above
Average
Well Above
Average


Other Comments:


6. Utilization Plan: [section 5 of the proposal]
Evaluate the key strengths and weaknesses of the project utilization plan and rank accordingly.
Yes/No
a. Are the benefits for stakeholders, described in the proposal related to the
value chain?

b. Are there any major impacts of the proposed project discussed?
c. Is the commercialization aspect of the project elaborated?
d. Does the proposed product/solution address the current and future needs of
relevant industry?

e. Does the proposal describe process for technology transfer to potential
beneficiaries and utilization by relevant stakeholders?


Page 6 of 9
f. Are achievable plans for producing, marketing, distributing and diffusion of the
developed products/solutions provided?


Key Strengths:
Key Weaknesses:
Utilization Plan Section
Evaluation Ranking:
Unsatisfactory Needs
Improvement
Satisfactory Above
Average
Well Above
Average


Other Comments:


7. Time Requirement: [section 8 of the proposal]
Keeping the ultimate objectives of the project in mind, evaluate the key strengths and
weaknesses of the proposed project time line and rank accordingly.
Yes/No
a. Does the timeframe of the proposed project match the proposed project
activities?

b. Is the proposed time duration justified, keeping in view the proposed
objectives and scope of the project?

c. Can the project duration be reduced?

Key Strengths:
Key Weaknesses:
Time Requirement Section
Evaluation Ranking:
Significantly
Under
Estimated
Under
Estimated
Good
Estimate
Over
Estimated
Significantly
Over
Estimated


Other Comments:


8. Proposed Resources / Budget: [section 4.B/C of the proposal & Budget File]
Keeping the proposed methodology in view, evaluate the proposed resources/ budget of the
project and rank accordingly.
(a) Manpower Requirement:
Evaluate the key strengths and weaknesses of the composition of the project team (Technical +
Support staff), taking into consideration their number and expertise and rank accordingly.
Yes/No
a. Are proper teams formed for various phases for possible parallel processing to
reduce project duration?


Page 7 of 9
b. Is the expertise of project team adequate for the proposed approach?
c. Is the number of project team members justified according to proposed
activities?

d. Are graduate and undergraduate students being trained for research and/or
development through the project?


Key Strengths:
Key Weaknesses:
Manpower Requirement
Section Evaluation Ranking:
Significantly
Under
Estimated
Under
Estimated
Good
Estimate
Over
Estimated
Significantly
Over
Estimated


Other Comments:
(b) Demanded Equipment:
Yes/No
a. Is the request for equipment justified?
b. Have the specifications for the demanded equipment been provided?
c. Does the equipment claimed according to the technical tasks involved in the
project?

d. If the project is an extension of another project, has the equipment already
purchased and used during previous project (already completed or nearing
completion) been catered for while demanding new equipment?


Key Strengths:
Key Weaknesses:
Demanded Equipment
Section Evaluation Ranking:
Significantly
Under
Estimated
Under
Estimated
Good
Estimate
Over
Estimated
Significantly
Over
Estimated



Other Comments:


9. Capability of the Principal Investigator(s): [Annexure A in the proposal]
(a) Evaluate the key strengths and weaknesses of the Principal Investigator (PI) and rank
his/her ability to conduct and manage the proposed project.
Yes/No
a. Is the PI aware of latest developments in the proposed area?
b. Has the PI been working on similar projects in the past?

Page 8 of 9
c. Does the PI have published work in the proposed area?
d. Does the PI have industrial experience in the proposed area?

Key Strengths:
Key Weaknesses:
Capability of PI Evaluation
Section Evaluation Ranking:
May be Challenging Satisfactory Very Suitable


Other Comments:

(b) Capability of Co-Principal Investigator(s): Evaluate the key strengths and weaknesses of
the Co-Principal Investigator (CPI) and rank his/her ability to conduct and manage the proposed
project.
Yes/No
a. Is the CPI aware of latest developments in the proposed area?
b. Has the CPI been working on similar projects in the past?
c. Does the CPI have published work in the proposed area?
d. Does the CPI have industrial experience in the proposed area?

Key Strengths:
Key Weaknesses:
Capability of Co-PI Evaluation
Section Evaluation Ranking:
May be Challenging Satisfactory Very Suitable


Other Comments:

(c) Capability of the Principal Investigators Organization (PIO): Evaluate the key strengths
and weaknesses of the PIO and rank accordingly.
Yes/No
a. Does the PIO have good research and/or development reputation? In case of
academic institute does the PIO have HEC or international R&D ranking? (For
information about PIO please visit PIOs website)

b. Does the PIO have any existing funded R&D projects?
c. Does the PIO have well established research and/or development
facilities/labs?


Key Strengths:
Key Weaknesses:
Capability of PIO Evaluation
Section Evaluation Ranking:
Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Above Average Well Above
Average


Other Comments:

Page 9 of 9


10. Overall Rating of the Proposal:
In summary, I rate the proposal as:
Unsatisfactory Needs Improvement Satisfactory Above Average Well Above Average


11. Overall Recommendations:
Recommended for approval in its current form.
Recommended for approval with the following revisions. Does not require any external re-
evaluation.
Suggested revisions:
Recommended for re-evaluation with the following revisions.
Suggested revisions:
Not Recommended because of the following reasons:




Date: Signature:


Please return this form, by e-mail and fax, before due date to:

Solicitation & Evaluation Department
National ICT R&D Fund
6
th
Floor, HBL Tower
Jinnah Avenue Islamabad.

Tel: (+92 51) 921 5360 - 65
Fax: (+92 51) 921 5366