Case Study: Texas Department of Transportation’s Research Proposal Scoring Protocol

This scoring protocol used by Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) considers and weighs five aspects of a research proposal:

  • Potential benefits
  • Tasks
  • Research team
  • Schedule 
  • Budget

Benefits of the proposed activity to the State of Texas (Weight: 27%)

  • Innovation: Does the work plan demonstrate a novel approach of looking at the issue or problem? Are the work tasks likely to expand the current state of knowledge on the issue or problem? 
  • Methodology: Is the research methodology adequately described? Is the methodology sufficient to generate valid results? 
  • Success: Based on the above, will the researchers be able to achieve the goals of the project? Will the project’s tasks deliver practical and implementable results? Are risk areas identified and details for overcoming them given? 

Proposed Tasks (Weight: 27%) 

  • Understanding of the Project Statement: Does the proposal clearly state the research problem, goals and objectives? Does the proposal indicate that the intent and significance of each objective in the Project Statement is understood by the research team? Are all of the Project Statement’s objectives addressed? Does the proposal specify the problem limits? 
  • Focus: Are the scientific and practical concerns that shape the research methodology clear? Do the proposed tasks effectively address all the project’s objectives? Is each task properly focused? Do the tasks appropriately restrict project scope? 
  • Clarity: Is the scope and intent of each task clear? Is the wording concise while still providing sufficient detail? 
  • Products: Do the proposed products meet the minimum requirements of the Project Statement? If a product is to be demonstrated or tested, or otherwise needs TxDOT review to be effectively finalized, will this be accomplished early enough to incorporate the results before the project terminates? Does each task have at least one corresponding deliverable? 

Research Team (Weight: 20%) 

  • Qualifications: Is the research team’s background and experience recent and relevant to the project? Is the team size appropriate for the work to be done? Does the team have on hand the facilities, equipment and materials needed for the project? If not, does the proposal clearly identify the process for acquiring the facilities, equipment and materials for the work? 
  • Effort: Is the level of effort by the primary researchers sufficient for success? 

Proposed Schedule (Weight: 16%) 

  • Task Schedule: Is the time shown appropriate for each task? (Project Deliverables Table) Is the time allocated for any task dependent on the success of a preceding task(s)? If so, does the proposal ensure the task will be completed on time? 
  • Plan: Are the critical paths identified? Are the tasks logically sequenced? Is it clear that the project will be well managed? Does the overall schedule show a clear likelihood of project success? 
  • Project Duration: Will the proposed schedule produce an answer/product soon enough to be useful to TxDOT? 

Proposed Budget (Weight: 10%)

  • Estimate: Is the estimated budget for each task reasonable? Are the project’s facility, equipment and material needs fully budgeted? If the budget relies upon specific TxDOT or other support for success, is that support reasonable and likely to be available?