NF1 Fellowship Review Form

For each criterion below, please describe strengths/weaknesses and assign a score (1-9). Then assign an overall impact score for the application. Score Descriptors: 1 = Exceptional, Exceptionally strong with essentially no weaknesses 2 = Outstanding, Extremely strong with negligible weaknesses 3 = Excellent, Very strong with only some minor weaknesses 4 = Very Good, Strong but with numerous minor weaknesses 5 = Good, Strong but with at least one moderate weakness 6 = Satisfactory, Some strengths but also some moderate weaknesses 7 = Fair, Some strengths but with at least one major weakness 8 = Marginal, A few strengths and a few major weaknesses 9 = Poor, Very few strengths and numerous major weaknesses Minor weakness: easily addressable weakness, does not substantially lessen impact Moderate weakness: lessens impact Major weakness: severely limits impact

-Good rationale, appropriate methodology, controls, analysis (including statistics if needed)? -Sufficient details (e.g. animals?) -Appropriateness of expectations, interpretation, pitfalls, alternative strategies -Do preliminary data (although not required) and/or literature support feasibility? -Do aims depend on each other, posing substantial risk? -Proposed work appropriate for 2-year fellowship?

-Academic record, experience, potential for independence and future contributions to this field -Also consider the letters of recommendation

-Mentor qualifications and expertise, training track record -Alignment with applicant interests -Support for non-salary expenses -Appropriate collaborators, resources, facilities -Is there an individualized plan to maximize this applicant's preparation for an independent research career?

Importance of problem in NF Addressing a barrier that is preventing progress toward a therapy?

Challenging an paradigms? Novel resources, methods, concepts, or experimental design?

Considering all review criteria, provide an overall impact score (based on 1-9 scale) to reflect assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert an important influence in the scientific field. Suggested relative weights for the individual scores: -Quality of approach, significance, innovation (~40% of total score) -Quality of applicant (~35% of total score) -Quality of sponsor and training plan (~25% of total score)