Framework for the Review of Research Programs of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health - Agriculture Forestry and Fishing Research at NIOSH - page 243

tramural project, the EC should ask NIOSH to provide a list of key collaborators
(other government agency, academe, industry, and/or union partners).
The ECs should evaluate each of the research activities outlined in Table 2 to
the extent that each forms an important element of the program research. In the
case of a sector research program (for example, mining, construction) in which
health-effects research is not being reviewed, the ECs should determine what re-
search inputs are being used by the program to develop its targets and then assess
the value of the inputs.

Questions to Guide the Evaluation Committee in Assessing Research Activities
1.

What are the major subprograms or groupings of activities within the
program?

2. Were the activities consistent with program goals and objectives?

3. Were the research activities relevant to the major challenges in the

research program?

a. Did they address the most serious outcomes?

b. Did they address the most common outcomes?

c. Did they address the needs of both genders, vulnerable working

populations, and small businesses?

4. Were the research activities appropriately responsive to the input of

stakeholders?

5. To what extent were partners involved in the research activities?

6. Are the resource allocations appropriate, and appropriate at this time,

for the research activities?

7. To what extent did peer reviews (internal, external, and precourse or

midcourse) affect the activities?

8. Is there adequate monitoring of quality assurance procedures to ensure

credible research data, analyses, and conclusions?

Questions to Guide the Evaluation Committee in Assessing Transfer Activities
1. Is there a coherent planned program of transfer activities?

2. Are the program's information dissemination, training, education,

technical assistance, or publications successful in reaching the work-
place or relevant stakeholders in other settings? How widespread is the
response?

3. To what extent did the program build research and education capacity

(internal or external)?