{"text_format":"1","workbook":"xlsx","n_sheets":110,"sheets":["IRRI Proposal","program_details","HIDDEN","MainMenu","template_Assessment","Introduction","1.1A","1.1B","1.1C","1.1D","1.1E","1.1F","1.1G","1.1H","1.1I","1.1J","1.1K","1.1L","1.3","1.4","1.5","1.6","1.7","1.8","1.9","1.10","1.11","1.12","1.13","1.14","1.15","2.16","2.17","2.18","2.19","2.20","2.21","2.22","3.23","3.24","3.25","3.26","3.27","3.28","3.29","3.30","3.31","3.32","3.33","3.34","3.35","3.36","3.37","3.38","3.39","3.40","3.41","3.42","3.43","3.44","3.45","3.46","3.47","3.48","3.49","3.50","3.51","4.52","4.53","4.54","4.55","4.56","4.57","4.58","4.59","4.60","5.61","5.62","6.63","6.64","6.65","6.66","6.67","6.68","6.69","7.70","7.71","7.72","7.73","7.74","7.75","7.76","7.77","7.78","7.79","8.80","8.81","8.82","8.83","8.84","9.85","9.86","9.87","9.88","9.89","9.90","9.91","9.92","9.93","template_Assessment (4)"],"not_rendered":{"charts":0,"images":0,"macros":1,"external_links":0,"defined_names":16,"comments":0,"pivot_tables":0},"unopened":[],"bounds":{"document_bytes":16777216,"sheet_cells":100000,"rows_first":2000,"rows_last":500,"rows_between":2000,"halvings":0,"cell_chars":16384,"cell_head_chars":4096},"cells_cut":0,"cells_raw":0,"read":"whole","date_system":"1900"}

{"sheet":"IRRI Proposal","index":0,"n_rows":21,"n_cols":7,"rows_kept":21,"cut":false,"hidden":true,"merged":[]}
[]
[null,null,null,1,2,3,4]
[]
[null,"Financial","A. Spending in line with agreed budgets"]
[null,null,"B. Increaesd levels of efficiency developed to enhance value"]
[]
[null,"Program","A. Number of crosses produced per year increased to meet breeder demands"]
[null,null,"B. Filial generation numbers increased in line with expenditure"]
[null,null,"C. Number of lines entering yield trials increased in line with strategic plan"]
[null,null,"D. Number of lines entering State trials increased in line with strategic plan"]
[null,null,"E. Identification of high value traits and adoption of rapid screens"]
[null,null,"F. Reduced program timeline to produce fixed lines"]
[]
[null,"Progress","A. Measurable genetic gains in yield realised"]
[null,null,"B. Enhanced agronomic and disease resistance factors introduced"]
[null,null,"C. Quality requirements for each territory identified and recognised as key breeding target(s)"]
[]
[null,"Impact","A. Increased number of lines taken forward for seed production increases"]
[null,null,"B. New techniques developed to sustain rapid market uptake"]
[null,null,"C. Agronomic/ extension support for new varieties "]
[null,null,"D. Market penetration of IRRI varieties increased"]

{"sheet":"program_details","index":1,"n_rows":21,"n_cols":10,"rows_kept":21,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[6,6,6,7],[6,8,6,9],[20,5,20,7],[20,1,20,4],[10,6,11,9],[13,6,14,9],[16,6,18,9],[7,6,8,8],[7,9,8,9]]}
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"*required information"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"enter date in dd/mm/yy format"]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,"Unique program code:",null,null,null,{"$f":"CONCATENATE(\"BPAT\",I8,VLOOKUP(G14,HIDDEN!D1:E16,2,FALSE),VLOOKUP(G17,HIDDEN!G1:H12,2,FALSE))","v":{"$error":"#N/A"}}]

{"sheet":"HIDDEN","index":2,"n_rows":251,"n_cols":14,"rows_kept":251,"cut":false,"hidden":true,"merged":[]}
[1,null,null,"Banana","BAN",null,"Bangladesh",{"$f":"VLOOKUP(G1,$J$1:$L$250,3,FALSE)","v":"BGD"},null,"COUNTRY","A2 (ISO)","A3 (UN)","NUM (UN)","DIALING CODE"]
[2,null,null,"Cassava","CSV",null,"Burkina Faso",{"$f":"VLOOKUP(G2,$J$1:$L$250,3,FALSE)","v":"BFA"},null,"Afghanistan","AF","AFG",4,93]
[3,null,null,"Chickpea","CKP",null,"Ethiopia","ETH",null,"Albania","AL","ALB",8,355]
[4,null,null,"CommonBean","CMB",null,"Ghana","GHA",null,"Algeria","DZ","DZA",12,213]
["N/A",null,null,"Cow Pea","CWP",null,"India - Uttar Pradesh","INU",null,"American Samoa","AS","ASM",16,"1-684"]
["U/A",null,null,"Ground nut","GNT",null,"India -Bihar","INB",null,"Andorra","AD","AND",20,376]
[null,null,null,"Maize","MAZ",null,"India -Orissa","INO",null,"Angola","AO","AGO",24,244]
[null,null,null,"Rice","RCE",null,"India-ICRISAT","ICR",null,"Anguilla","AI","AIA",660,"1-264"]
[null,null,null,"Sorghum","SRG",null,"Mali","MLI",null,"Antarctica","AQ","ATA",10,672]
["January",1,null,"Sweet Potato","STP",null,"Nigeria","NGA",null,"Antigua and Barbuda","AG","ATG",28,"1-268"]
["February",2,null,"Wheat -bread","BWT",null,"United Republic of Tanzania","TZA",null,"Argentina","AR","ARG",32,54]
["March",3,null,"Wheat -durum","DWT",null,"Uganda","UGA",null,"Armenia","AM","ARM",51,374]
["April",4,null,"Wheat -bread&durum","WHT",null,null,null,null,"Aruba","AW","ABW",533,297]
["May",5,null,"Yam","YAM",null,null,null,null,"Australia","AU","AUS",36,61]
["June",6,null,"Pearl millet","MIL",null,null,null,null,"Austria","AT","AUT",40,43]
["July",7,null,"Pigeon pea","PEA",null,null,null,null,"Azerbaijan","AZ","AZE",31,994]
["August",8,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Bahamas","BS","BHS",44,"1-242"]
["September",9,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Bahrain","BH","BHR",48,973]
["October",10,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Bangladesh","BD","BGD",50,880]
["November",11,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Barbados","BB","BRB",52,"1-246"]
["December",12,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Belarus","BY","BLR",112,375]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Belgium","BE","BEL",56,32]
[2016,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Belize","BZ","BLZ",84,501]
[2017,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Benin","BJ","BEN",204,229]
[2018,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Bermuda","BM","BMU",60,"1-441"]
[2019,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Bhutan","BT","BTN",64,975]
[2020,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Bolivia","BO","BOL",68,591]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Bonaire","BQ","BES",535,599]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Bosnia and Herzegovina","BA","BIH",70,387]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Botswana","BW","BWA",72,267]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Bouvet Island","BV","BVT",74,47]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Brazil","BR","BRA",76,55]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"British Indian Ocean Territory","IO","IOT",86,246]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Brunei Darussalam","BN","BRN",96,673]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Bulgaria","BG","BGR",100,359]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Burkina Faso","BF","BFA",854,226]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Burundi","BI","BDI",108,257]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Cambodia","KH","KHM",116,855]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Cameroon","CM","CMR",120,237]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Canada","CA","CAN",124,1]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Cape Verde","CV","CPV",132,238]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Cayman Islands","KY","CYM",136,"1-345"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Central African Republic","CF","CAF",140,236]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Chad","TD","TCD",148,235]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Chile","CL","CHL",152,56]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"China","CN","CHN",156,86]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Christmas Island","CX","CXR",162,61]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Cocos (Keeling) Islands","CC","CCK",166,61]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Colombia","CO","COL",170,57]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Comoros","KM","COM",174,269]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Congo","CG","COG",178,242]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Democratic Republic of the Congo","CD","COD",180,243]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Cook Islands","CK","COK",184,682]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Costa Rica","CR","CRI",188,506]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Croatia","HR","HRV",191,385]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Cuba","CU","CUB",192,53]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"CuraÃ§ao","CW","CUW",531,599]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Cyprus","CY","CYP",196,357]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Czech Republic","CZ","CZE",203,420]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"CÃ´te d'Ivoire","CI","CIV",384,225]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Denmark","DK","DNK",208,45]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Djibouti","DJ","DJI",262,253]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Dominica","DM","DMA",212,"1-767"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Dominican Republic","DO","DOM",214,"1-809,1-829,1-849"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Ecuador","EC","ECU",218,593]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Egypt","EG","EGY",818,20]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"El Salvador","SV","SLV",222,503]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Equatorial Guinea","GQ","GNQ",226,240]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Eritrea","ER","ERI",232,291]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Estonia","EE","EST",233,372]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Ethiopia","ET","ETH",231,251]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Falkland Islands (Malvinas)","FK","FLK",238,500]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Faroe Islands","FO","FRO",234,298]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Fiji","FJ","FJI",242,679]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Finland","FI","FIN",246,358]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"France","FR","FRA",250,33]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"French Guiana","GF","GUF",254,594]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"French Polynesia","PF","PYF",258,689]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"French Southern Territories","TF","ATF",260,262]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Gabon","GA","GAB",266,241]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Gambia","GM","GMB",270,220]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Georgia","GE","GEO",268,995]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Germany","DE","DEU",276,49]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Ghana","GH","GHA",288,233]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Gibraltar","GI","GIB",292,350]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Greece","GR","GRC",300,30]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Greenland","GL","GRL",304,299]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Grenada","GD","GRD",308,"1-473"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Guadeloupe","GP","GLP",312,590]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Guam","GU","GUM",316,"1-671"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Guatemala","GT","GTM",320,502]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Guernsey","GG","GGY",831,44]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Guinea","GN","GIN",324,224]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Guinea-Bissau","GW","GNB",624,245]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Guyana","GY","GUY",328,592]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Haiti","HT","HTI",332,509]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Heard Island and McDonald Mcdonald Islands","HM","HMD",334,672]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Holy See (Vatican City State)","VA","VAT",336,379]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Honduras","HN","HND",340,504]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Hong Kong","HK","HKG",344,852]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Hungary","HU","HUN",348,36]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Iceland","IS","ISL",352,354]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"India","IN","IND",356,91]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Indonesia","ID","IDN",360,62]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Iran, Islamic Republic of","IR","IRN",364,98]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Iraq","IQ","IRQ",368,964]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Ireland","IE","IRL",372,353]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Isle of Man","IM","IMN",833,44]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Israel","IL","ISR",376,972]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Italy","IT","ITA",380,39]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Jamaica","JM","JAM",388,"1-876"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Japan","JP","JPN",392,81]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Jersey","JE","JEY",832,44]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Jordan","JO","JOR",400,962]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Kazakhstan","KZ","KAZ",398,7]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Kenya","KE","KEN",404,254]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Kiribati","KI","KIR",296,686]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Korea, Democratic People's Republic of","KP","PRK",408,850]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Korea, Republic of","KR","KOR",410,82]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Kuwait","KW","KWT",414,965]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Kyrgyzstan","KG","KGZ",417,996]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Lao People's Democratic Republic","LA","LAO",418,856]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Latvia","LV","LVA",428,371]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Lebanon","LB","LBN",422,961]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Lesotho","LS","LSO",426,266]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Liberia","LR","LBR",430,231]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Libya","LY","LBY",434,218]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Liechtenstein","LI","LIE",438,423]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Lithuania","LT","LTU",440,370]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Luxembourg","LU","LUX",442,352]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Macao","MO","MAC",446,853]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Macedonia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of","MK","MKD",807,389]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Madagascar","MG","MDG",450,261]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Malawi","MW","MWI",454,265]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Malaysia","MY","MYS",458,60]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Maldives","MV","MDV",462,960]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Mali","ML","MLI",466,223]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Malta","MT","MLT",470,356]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Marshall Islands","MH","MHL",584,692]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Martinique","MQ","MTQ",474,596]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Mauritania","MR","MRT",478,222]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Mauritius","MU","MUS",480,230]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Mayotte","YT","MYT",175,262]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Mexico","MX","MEX",484,52]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Micronesia, Federated States of","FM","FSM",583,691]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Moldova, Republic of","MD","MDA",498,373]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Monaco","MC","MCO",492,377]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Mongolia","MN","MNG",496,976]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Montenegro","ME","MNE",499,382]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Montserrat","MS","MSR",500,"1-664"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Morocco","MA","MAR",504,212]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Mozambique","MZ","MOZ",508,258]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Myanmar","MM","MMR",104,95]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Namibia","NA","NAM",516,264]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Nauru","NR","NRU",520,674]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Nepal","NP","NPL",524,977]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Netherlands","NL","NLD",528,31]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"New Caledonia","NC","NCL",540,687]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"New Zealand","NZ","NZL",554,64]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Nicaragua","NI","NIC",558,505]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Niger","NE","NER",562,227]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Nigeria","NG","NGA",566,234]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Niue","NU","NIU",570,683]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Norfolk Island","NF","NFK",574,672]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Northern Mariana Islands","MP","MNP",580,"1-670"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Norway","NO","NOR",578,47]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Oman","OM","OMN",512,968]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Pakistan","PK","PAK",586,92]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Palau","PW","PLW",585,680]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Palestine, State of","PS","PSE",275,970]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Panama","PA","PAN",591,507]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Papua New Guinea","PG","PNG",598,675]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Paraguay","PY","PRY",600,595]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Peru","PE","PER",604,51]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Philippines","PH","PHL",608,63]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Pitcairn","PN","PCN",612,870]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Poland","PL","POL",616,48]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Portugal","PT","PRT",620,351]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Puerto Rico","PR","PRI",630,1]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Qatar","QA","QAT",634,974]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Romania","RO","ROU",642,40]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Russian Federation","RU","RUS",643,7]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Rwanda","RW","RWA",646,250]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Reunion","RE","REU",638,262]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Saint Barthelemy","BL","BLM",652,590]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Saint Helena","SH","SHN",654,290]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Saint Kitts and Nevis","KN","KNA",659,"1-869"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Saint Lucia","LC","LCA",662,"1-758"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Saint Martin (French part)","MF","MAF",663,590]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Saint Pierre and Miquelon","PM","SPM",666,508]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Saint Vincent and the Grenadines","VC","VCT",670,"1-784"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Samoa","WS","WSM",882,685]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"San Marino","SM","SMR",674,378]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Sao Tome and Principe","ST","STP",678,239]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Saudi Arabia","SA","SAU",682,966]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Senegal","SN","SEN",686,221]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Serbia","RS","SRB",688,381]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Seychelles","SC","SYC",690,248]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Sierra Leone","SL","SLE",694,232]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Singapore","SG","SGP",702,65]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Sint Maarten (Dutch part)","SX","SXM",534,"1-721"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Slovakia","SK","SVK",703,421]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Slovenia","SI","SVN",705,386]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Solomon Islands","SB","SLB",90,677]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Somalia","SO","SOM",706,252]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"South Africa","ZA","ZAF",710,27]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands","GS","SGS",239,500]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"South Sudan","SS","SSD",728,211]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Spain","ES","ESP",724,34]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Sri Lanka","LK","LKA",144,94]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Sudan","SD","SDN",729,249]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Suriname","SR","SUR",740,597]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Svalbard and Jan Mayen","SJ","SJM",744,47]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Swaziland","SZ","SWZ",748,268]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Sweden","SE","SWE",752,46]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Switzerland","CH","CHE",756,41]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Syrian Arab Republic","SY","SYR",760,963]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Taiwan, Province of China","TW","TWN",158,886]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Tajikistan","TJ","TJK",762,992]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"United Republic of Tanzania","TZ","TZA",834,255]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Thailand","TH","THA",764,66]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Timor-Leste","TL","TLS",626,670]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Togo","TG","TGO",768,228]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Tokelau","TK","TKL",772,690]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Tonga","TO","TON",776,676]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Trinidad and Tobago","TT","TTO",780,"1-868"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Tunisia","TN","TUN",788,216]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Turkey","TR","TUR",792,90]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Turkmenistan","TM","TKM",795,993]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Turks and Caicos Islands","TC","TCA",796,"1-649"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Tuvalu","TV","TUV",798,688]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Uganda","UG","UGA",800,256]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Ukraine","UA","UKR",804,380]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"United Arab Emirates","AE","ARE",784,971]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"United Kingdom","GB","GBR",826,44]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"United States","US","USA",840,1]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"United States Minor Outlying Islands","UM","UMI",581,1]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Uruguay","UY","URY",858,598]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Uzbekistan","UZ","UZB",860,998]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Vanuatu","VU","VUT",548,678]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Venezuela","VE","VEN",862,58]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Viet Nam","VN","VNM",704,84]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"British Virgin Islands","VG","VGB",92,"1-284"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"US Virgin Islands","VI","VIR",850,"1-340"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Wallis and Futuna","WF","WLF",876,681]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Western Sahara","EH","ESH",732,212]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Yemen","YE","YEM",887,967]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Zambia","ZM","ZMB",894,260]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Zimbabwe","ZW","ZWE",716,263]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Aland Islands","AX","ALA",248,358]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Tanzania",null,"TZA"]

{"sheet":"MainMenu","index":3,"n_rows":24,"n_cols":7,"rows_kept":24,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[11,6,12,6],[11,3,12,4],[11,1,12,1],[17,6,18,6],[17,3,18,4],[10,3,10,4],[23,3,23,4],[22,3,22,4],[16,3,16,4],[17,1,18,1]]}
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,{"$f":"IF(COUNTIF(template_Assessment!L8:L45,\">0\")+ COUNTIF(template_Assessment!L8:L45,\"N/A\")=37,\"Complete\", \"NOT Complete\")","v":"NOT Complete"},null,{"$f":"IF(COUNTIF(template_Assessment!L47:L53,\"<>0\")=7,\"Complete\", \"NOT Complete\")","v":"NOT Complete"},{"$f":"IF(COUNTIF(template_Assessment!O79:O87,\"<>0\")=9,\"Complete\", \"NOT Complete\")","v":"NOT Complete"},null,{"$f":"IF(COUNTIF(template_Assessment!L55:L83,\"<>0\")=29,\"Complete\", \"NOT Complete\")","v":"NOT Complete"}]
[null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!L46","v":"-"},null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!L54","v":"-"},null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!L84","v":"-"}]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,{"$f":"IF(COUNTIF(template_Assessment!L85:L93,\"<>0\")=9,\"Complete\", \"NOT Complete\")","v":"NOT Complete"},null,{"$f":"IF(COUNTIF(template_Assessment!L95:L96,\"<>0\")=2,\"Complete\", \"NOT Complete\")","v":"NOT Complete"},{"$f":"IF(COUNTIF(template_Assessment!J117:J125,\"<>0\")=9,\"Complete\", \"NOT Complete\")","v":"Complete"},null,{"$f":"IF(COUNTIF(template_Assessment!L98:L104,\"<>0\")=7,\"Complete\", \"NOT Complete\")","v":"NOT Complete"}]
[null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!L94","v":"-"},null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!L97","v":"-"},null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!L105","v":"-"}]
[]
[]
[]
[]
[null,{"$f":"IF(COUNTIF(template_Assessment!L106:L115,\"<>0\")=10,\"Complete\", \"NOT Complete\")","v":"NOT Complete"},null,{"$f":"IF(COUNTIF(template_Assessment!L117:L121,\"<>0\")=5,\"Complete\", \"NOT Complete\")","v":"NOT Complete"},{"$f":"IF(COUNTIF(template_Assessment!J123:J131,\"<>0\")=9,\"Complete\", \"NOT Complete\")","v":"Complete"},null,{"$f":"IF(COUNTIF(template_Assessment!L123:L131,\"<>0\")=9,\"Complete\", \"NOT Complete\")","v":"NOT Complete"}]
[null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!L116","v":"-"},null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!L122","v":"-"},null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!L132","v":"-"}]

{"sheet":"template_Assessment","index":4,"n_rows":132,"n_cols":15,"rows_kept":132,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[34,1,44,1],[50,1,51,1],[46,1,49,1],[6,0,44,0],[2,7,2,8],[6,1,30,1],[32,1,33,1],[45,1,45,10],[46,0,52,0],[97,0,103,0],[121,1,121,10],[122,0,130,0],[127,1,130,1],[122,1,124,1],[105,1,108,1],[109,1,114,1],[105,0,114,0],[116,1,120,1],[116,0,120,0],[94,0,95,0],[84,0,92,0],[66,1,73,1],[84,1,87,1],[88,1,92,1],[54,0,82,0],[54,1,65,1],[131,1,131,10],[115,1,115,10],[53,1,53,10],[83,1,83,10],[93,1,93,10],[96,1,96,10],[104,1,104,10],[124,6,124,7],[120,6,120,7],[100,1,103,1],[100,10,102,10],[98,10,99,10],[98,1,99,1],[94,1,95,1],[74,1,82,1]]}
["Plant breeding program assessment tool",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Question strictly for research & breeding institution operating both genetic analysis & cultivar development pipelines"]
["3 June 2014",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Question strictly for cultivar breeding institution (whose breeding pipeline largely deploys genetic analysis that was developed elsewhere)"]
[null,null,null,"PROGRAM CODE",null,null,null,{"$f":"program_details!F21","v":{"$error":"#N/A"}},null,null,null,{"$f":"program_details!G11","v":0},{"$f":"program_details!G14","v":0},{"$f":"program_details!G17","v":0}]
["CONFIDENTIAL - NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION"]
[]
["Component","Factor","#","Item","Item N/A to Pro-gram","Unable to Assess","(1) Not Adequate for Program Needs","(2) Meets Some Program Needs","(3) Meets Basic Program Needs","(4) Fully Meets Program Needs","Notes to Assessor","Assessor's Rating Score","Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing","Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)","Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement"]
["Breeding Organization","Plant Breeding & Scientific Personnel",1,"Breeding & Science Leads: Education",null,null,"Majority of breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in appropriate discipline; not aware of current \"best practices\" in field; no evidence of ability to understand or adopt/adapt best practices","Most breeding & science leads have some formal education in appropriate discipline; vague understanding of current best practices; most junior scientists lack advanced degrees in appropriate fields ","Most breeding & science leads have Ph.D. or equivalent experience (e.g., Master's Degree plus experience as assistant breeder in leading program) in appropriate discipline; aware of current best practices; evidence of ability to adopt/adapt best practices; most junior scientists have advanced degrees in appropriate fields","All breeding & science leads have Ph.D. in appropriate discipline; understand & utilize current \"best practices\" to extent possible within program constraints; full understanding of program requirements & proven ability to adjust methods & approaches based on specific requirements; majority of junior scientists hold Ph.D. in appropriate fields & are qualified to advance to senior scientist level","Use this rating system to assess the EDUCATION of the institution's scientific staff in disciplines identified in questions 1A to 1J. Add any disciplines appropriate for the institution under review. If a discipline is not represented & NOT CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"N/A\" box. If a discipline is not represented & CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"1\" rating. Provide clarifying comments in Assessor's Feedback columns as needed. Note that some institutions choose to outsource certain disciplines. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[null,null,"1A","What is the level of education of staff in Plant Breeding?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1A'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1A'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1A'!$E$11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1A'!$E$12","v":0}]
[null,null,"1B","What is the level of education of staff in Genetics & Molecular Biology?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1B'!E9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1B'!E10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1B'!E11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1B'!E12","v":0}]
[null,null,"1C","What is the level of education of staff in Cell Biology/Tissue Culture?",null,null,null,null,null,null,"Cell Biology/Tissue Culture includes laboratory-based capabilities related to double haploid/embryo rescue/vegetative propagation skills, etc.",{"$f":"'1.1C'!E9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1C'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1C'!$E$11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1C'!$E$12","v":0}]
[null,null,"1D","What is the level of education of staff in Agronomy?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1D'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1D'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1D'!$E$11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1D'!$E$12","v":0}]
[null,null,"1E","What is the level of education of staff in Plant Pathology?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1E'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1E'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1E'!$E$11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1E'!$E$12","v":0}]
[null,null,"1F","What is the level of education of staff in Entomology?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1F'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1F'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1F'!$E$11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1F'!$E$12","v":0}]
[null,null,"1G","What is the level of education of staff in Physiology?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1G'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1G'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1G'!$E$11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1G'!$E$12","v":0}]
[null,null,"1H","What is the level of education of staff in Quality (e.g., Grain Quality, Nutrition, etc.)?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1H'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1H'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1H'!$E$11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1H'!$E$12","v":0}]
[null,null,"1I","What is the level of education of staff in Information Systems?",null,null,null,null,null,null,"Note that in some institutions, there may be significant overlap of personnel & duties between \"Information Systems\" and \"Biometrics\". Information Systems metrics are intended to include operation & daily use of Breeder Information Management Systems (BIMS). Biometrics applies to how the data is used to drive breeding strategy.  Assessor should note degree of overlap if it exists.",{"$f":"'1.1I'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1I'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1I'!$E$11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1I'!$E$12","v":0}]
[null,null,"1J","What is the level of education of staff in Biometrics & Statistics?",null,null,"Breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in statistics & have no ability to implement biometrics analysis for breeding decision support; no specific resources focused on biometrics","Breeder or other scientists have received rudimentary education in statistics & understand simple statistics; lack expertise in experimental design or advanced data analysis; biometrics team (if team exists) & breeders are not conversant with modern experimental designs & mixed model applications for breeding decision support","Breeders or other scientists have education in statistics & have been exposed to concepts of experimental design; biometrics team (if team exists) & breeders are conversant with modern experimental design for breeding but not mixed model applications for breeding decision support","Dedicated leader with Ph.D. in biometrics & statistics with strong understanding of experimental design & statistics; can support breeders to use mixed model applications for breeding decision support","Biometrics & statistics are emphasized as a critical area of focus to support breeding selection decision making. This is viewed as an often missing capability to speed rate of genetic gain. Assessors should realize that application point during breeding process & intensity will vary by crop.",{"$f":"'1.1J'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1J'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1J'!$E$11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1J'!$E$12","v":0}]
[null,null,"1K","What is the level of education of staff in other areas (please specify)?",{"$f":"'1.1K'!E7:G7","v":"(enter discipline here)"},null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1K'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1K'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1K'!$E$11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1K'!$E$12","v":0}]
[null,null,"1L","What is the level of education of staff in other areas (please specify)?",{"$f":"'1.1L'!E7:G7","v":"(enter discipline here)"},null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1L'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1L'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1L'!$E$11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1L'!$E$12","v":0}]
[null,null,2,"Breeding & Science Leads: Training & Experience",null,null,"Scientists & breeders have received no hands-on training in current responsibilities & have no prior experience related to current responsibilities, resulting in no meaningful output from program","Scientists & breeders have received training but have accrued little experience in current responsibilities","Most scientists & breeders have received training & accumulated 5 to 9 years of experience with a documented track record of productivity in field(s) related to current responsibilities","Senior scientists & breeders have ≥ 10 years of experience in field(s) related to current responsibilities; clear evidence of ability to produce meaningful results; majority of junior scientists have ≥ 3 years of experience appropriate to current responsibilities & balance of junior staff on track with opportunity to develop meaningful experience ","Use this rating system to assess the RELEVANT TRAINING & EXPERIENCE of the institution's scientific staff in disciplines identified in questions 2A to 2J. Training could include: CG center hands-on training programs &/or on-the-job training in mechanics of running breeding program (public or private sector). Evidence of experience could include release of cultivars (particularly cultivars that had a significant uptake by the market), research outcomes that improved the institution's ability to develop new cultivars (e.g., discovery & deployment of important QTL markers), & publications in respected, peer-reviewed journals (note: publication alone is not sufficient evidence of experience). Add any disciplines appropriate for the institution under review. If a discipline is not represented & NOT CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"N/A\" box. If a discipline is not represented & CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"1\" rating. Provide clarifying comments in Assessor's Feedback columns as needed.  Note that some institutions choose to outsource certain disciplines. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[null,null,"2A","What is the level of training of staff in Plant Breeding?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1A'!G9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1A'!G10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1A'!G11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1A'!G12","v":0}]
[null,null,"2B","What is the level of training of staff in Genetics & Molecular Biology?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1B'!G9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1B'!G10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1B'!G11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1B'!G12","v":0}]
[null,null,"2C","What is the level of training of staff in Cell Biology/Tissue Culture?",null,null,null,null,null,null,"Cell Biology/Tissue Culture includes laboratory-based capabilities related to double haploid/embryo rescue/vegetative propagation skills, etc.",{"$f":"'1.1C'!G9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1C'!G10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1C'!G11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1C'!G12","v":0}]
[null,null,"2D","What is the level of training of staff in Agronomy?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1D'!G9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1D'!G10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1D'!G11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1D'!G12","v":0}]
[null,null,"2E","What is the level of training of staff in Plant Pathology?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1E'!G9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1E'!G10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1E'!G11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1E'!G12","v":0}]
[null,null,"2F","What is the level of training of staff in Entomology?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1F'!G9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1F'!G10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1F'!G11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1F'!G12","v":0}]
[null,null,"2G","What is the level of training of staff in Physiology?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1G'!G9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1G'!G10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1G'!G11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1G'!G12","v":0}]
[null,null,"2H","What is the level of training of staff in Quality (e.g., Grain Quality, Nutrition, etc.)?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1H'!G9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1H'!G10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1H'!G11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1H'!G12","v":0}]
[null,null,"2I","What is the level of training of staff in Information Systems?",null,null,null,null,null,null,"Note that in some institutions, there may be significant overlap of personnel & duties between \"Information Systems\" and \"Biometrics\". Information Systems metrics are intended to include operation & daily use of Breeder Information Management Systems (BIMS). Biometrics applies to how the data is used to drive breeding strategy.  Assessor should note degree of overlap if it exists.",{"$f":"'1.1I'!G9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1I'!G10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1I'!G11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1I'!G12","v":0}]
[null,null,"2J","What is the level of experience of staff in Biometrics & Statistics?",null,null,"Breeding & science leads have no/minimal experience in statistics & have no ability to implement biometrics analysis for breeding decision support; no specific resources focused on biometrics","Breeders or other scientists have limited experience in applying statistics in experimental design or advanced data analysis; biometrics team (if team exists) & breeders are not conversant with modern experimental designs & mixed model applications for breeding decision support","Breeders or other scientists have experience using statistics for basic experimental design; biometrics team (if team exists) & breeders are conversant with modern experimental design for breeding but not mixed model applications for breeding decision support","Dedicated leader with extensive experience in biometrics & statistics with strong understanding of experimental design; can support breeders to use mixed model applications for breeding decision support","Biometrics & statistics are emphasized as a critical area of focus to support breeding selection decision making. This is viewed as an often-missing capability to speed rate of genetic gain. Assessors should realize that application point during breeding process & intensity will vary by crop.",{"$f":"'1.1J'!G9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1J'!G10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1J'!G11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1J'!G12","v":0}]
[null,null,"2K","What is the level of training and experience of staff in other areas (please specify)?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1K'!G9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1K'!G10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1K'!G11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1K'!G12","v":0}]
[null,null,"2L","What is the level of education of staff in other areas (please specify)?",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"'1.1L'!$G$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1L'!$G$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1L'!$G$11","v":0},{"$f":"'1.1L'!$G$12","v":0}]
[null,"Support Staff",3,"Do support staff have sufficient training?",null,null,"No formal training in agronomy or related fields through an educational institution; all on-the-job training ","Some formal training in an appropriate field but no degree or certification; most training is on-the-job","Vocational training degree in relevant field; training programs offered by institution or other organization to gain additional skills","Most support staff have bachelor's degrees or equivalent; most utilize continuing education opportunities to develop additional job-related skills",null,{"$f":"'1.3'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'1.3'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.3'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.3'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,4,"Do support staff have sufficient experience?",null,null,"Support staff is labor & is not capable of unsupervised work","Support staff primarily labor; some individuals with experience capable of performing low-level activities without supervision","Experienced support staff, with proven ability to meet basic program needs without undue supervision","Experienced support staff, with successful track record in supporting breeding & testing operations; capable of supervising labor & enabling breeders to focus on high-level activities",null,{"$f":"'1.4'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'1.4'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.4'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.4'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Allied Disciplines: Resources & Outcomes",5,"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Genetics & Molecular Biology?",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort","This question is linked to Q1B and Q2B",{"$f":"'1.5'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'1.5'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.5'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.5'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,6,"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Cell Biology/Tissue Culture?",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort","Cell Biology/Tissue Culture includes laboratory-based capabilities related to double haploid/embryo rescue/vegetative propagation skills, etc. \nThis cell is linked to Q1C and Q2C",{"$f":"'1.6'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'1.6'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.6'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.6'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,7,"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Agronomy?",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort","This question is linked to Q1D and Q2D",{"$f":"'1.7'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'1.7'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.7'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.7'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,8,"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Plant Pathology?",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort","This question is linked to Q1E and Q2E",{"$f":"'1.8'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'1.8'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.8'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.8'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,9,"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Entomology?",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort","This question is linked to Q1F and Q2F",{"$f":"'1.9'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'1.9'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.9'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.9'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,10,"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Physiology?",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort","This question is linked to Q1G and Q2G",{"$f":"'1.10'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'1.10'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.10'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.10'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,11,"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Quality (e.g., Grain Quality, Nutrition, etc.)?",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort","This question is linked to Q1H and Q2H",{"$f":"'1.11'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'1.11'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.11'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.11'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,12,"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Biometrics & Statistics: Services for Decision Support?",null,null,"No biometrics service","Biometrics service provides basic & intermittent support on specific experiments but does not help optimize selection decision making & program error control","Biometrics service routinely supports experimental design & analysis; drives implementation of error control measures to reduce noise in field trials","Biometrics service routinely supports experimental design & analysis; drives implementation of error control measures to reduce noise in field trials; provides mixed model support for selection decisions","Biometrics & statistics are emphasized as a critical area of focus to support breeding selection decision making. This is viewed as an often-missing capability to speed rate of genetic gain. Assessors should realize the application point during breeding process & intensity will vary by crop.\nThis question is linked to Q1J and Q2J",{"$f":"'1.12'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'1.12'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.12'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.12'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,13,"What is the overall CAPABILITY of the Breeding Information Management Systems (BIMS)",null,null,"No capabilities","Rudimentary capabilities; relies on spreadsheets for data storage & management; no support personnel assigned ","Data storage & management system is designed to support breeding & trial activities; breeders & scientists can enter & access data in an easily queried database; support personnel available but not assigned to support plant breeding","Data management system is a centralized, integral component of operations; analytical tools & reporting capabilities facilitate data utilization; data mining & information extraction needs are supported; assigned support personnel available as needed or permanently","This question is linked to Q1I and Q2I",{"$f":"'1.13'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'1.13'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.13'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.13'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,14,"What is the overall UTILIZATION of the Breeding Information Management Systems (BIMS)",null,null,"Little to no utilization by breeders & research managers","Breeders & research managers use database on a selective basis for basic functions—primarily recording & some data retrieval","Breeders & research managers routinely use database for a restricted set of functions that add value to the program; not used as a strategic tool","Database used for planning, data analysis & advancement decisions; integral element in seed inventory & plot management activities; breeders, research managers & support staff routinely utilize full range of capabilities","This question is linked to Q1I and Q2I",{"$f":"'1.14'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'1.14'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.14'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.14'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,15,"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in other areas (please specify)?",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort","Define an \"other\" criteria if a metric considered highly relevant is not present.\nThis question is linked to criteria specified in Q1K and Q2K",{"$f":"'1.15'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'1.15'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'1.15'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'1.15'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Breeding organization\n",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"IFERROR(AVERAGEIF($L$8:$L$45,\">0\"),\"-\")","v":"-"}]
["Infrastructure","Laboratory, Glasshouse & Seed Facilities",16,"What are the short term (1 to 5 years) seed production & storage capabilities?",null,null,"No seed-drying or storage facilities; minimal seed processing & storage areas; high risk of seed degradation; program often loses germplasm & seed stocks due to inadequate storage","Some seed-drying capabilities; seed processing areas are serviceable but not ideal: some potential for seed degradation; program occasionally loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage","Adequate seed-drying capabilities; designated seed processing facilities are good; some insect/rodent damage prevention systems in place but seed still vulnerable to degradation; program rarely loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage","Excellent seed-drying & short-term storage capabilities; insect & rodent controls in place; up-to-date seed processing equipment; short-term seed storage seen as priority with consequential high-grade seed produced; program never loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage","Use this same question & modify criteria as needed for vegetatively propagated species. Note any changes made to the criteria.",{"$f":"'2.16'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'2.16'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'2.16'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'2.16'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,17,"What are the long term (> 5 years) seed storage capabilities?",null,null,"No long-term seed storage capability","Some long-term storage capability but inadequate infrastructure & power provision to sustain cold storage when needed; program occasionally loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage","Good facilities & infrastructure provide minimal requirement for long-term storage; power supplies to sustain cold storage when needed adequate in most cases but would be problematic if power outage lasted for a lengthy period; program rarely loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage","Long-term storage of high standard with very low/no risk of losses; backup power supplies in place to sustain cold storage when needed; program never loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage",null,{"$f":"'2.17'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'2.17'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'2.17'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'2.17'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,18,"What greenhouse (glasshouse)  facilities are available?",null,null,"Nonexistent to minimal facilities & poorly maintained","Available facilities lack basic needs & poorly maintained","Basic facilities in place & adequately maintained","Well-designed, purpose-built facilities contribute to quality & efficiency of work",null,{"$f":"'2.18'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'2.18'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'2.18'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'2.18'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,19,"What laboratory facilities are available?",null,null,"Nonexistent to minimal facilities & poorly maintained","Available facilities lack basic needs & poorly maintained","Basic facilities in place & adequately maintained","Well-designed, purpose-built facilities contribute to quality & efficiency of work","If there are multiple laboratories with differing ratings, then individual scores should be noted for each facility. Insert additional lines within 19 to reflect this, i.e., 19a, 19b, etc. Refer back to the questionnaire answers for listings of relevant laboratories.",{"$f":"'2.19'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'2.19'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'2.19'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'2.19'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Mechanization",20,"What level of MECHANIZATION is utilized?",null,null,"Absence of available mechanization is negatively impacting program's rate of genetic gain","Some operations mechanized, with limited impact on breeding program","Mechanization used across breeding program but not optimized to impact scale & genetic gain of breeding program","Appropriate methods of mechanization used across entire breeding program with leading technology to achieve scale necessary to increase genetic gain (e.g., planting & harvesting; routine data collection automated)","\"Appropriate\" will depend on methods available for given crop & ability to achieve desired results with vs. without mechanization. If crop has no potential for mechanization, score as N/A (likely quite rare).",{"$f":"'2.20'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'2.20'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'2.20'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'2.20'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,21,"What level of MECHANIZATION & ENGINEERING SUPPORT exists?",null,null,"No engineering or repair capacity to support mechanization","Basic engineering & repair capacity to support mechanization; replacement parts often unavailable","Engineering & repair staff available to support mechanization; procuring replacement parts can be an occasional issue","Mechanization efforts supported with well-trained engineering & repair staff & needed equipment; replacement parts available in feasible time frame",null,{"$f":"'2.21'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'2.21'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'2.21'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'2.21'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Support Infrastructure",22,"What level of INFRASTRUCTURE maintenance, repair & operability exist?",null,null,"Facilities lack routine maintenance; equipment not serviced or maintained; power supply unreliable; many safety & security issues","Facilities maintained to low standards; repairs carried out only after equipment failure; some power supply shortfalls; some safety & security issues","Facilities maintained to a good standard with support for scheduled equipment maintenance; reliable power supply; few safety & security issues","Excellent facility support with proactive equipment maintenance schedules; continuous power supply; no safety & security issues",null,{"$f":"'2.22'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'2.22'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'2.22'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'2.22'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Infrastructure",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"IFERROR(AVERAGEIF($L$47:$L$53,\">0\"),\"-\")","v":"-"}]
["Breeding Methodology","Field & Farming Operations",23,"What crossing/hybridization success is achieved?",null,null,"Regularly fails to deliver > 50% of crosses AND/OR 50% of seed per cross required by breeder","Routinely delivers 50% to 80% of crosses AND 50% to 80% of seed per cross required by breeder","Routinely delivers 80% to 95% of crosses AND 80% to 90% of seed per cross required by breeder","Routinely delivers > 95% of crosses AND > 90% of seed per cross required by breeder",null,{"$f":"'3.23'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.23'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.23'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.23'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,24,"What level of F1 > F2 seed production is achieved?",null,null,"Regularly fails to produce > 50% of F2 seed required by breeder","Routinely delivers 50% to 80% of F2 seed required by breeder","Routinely delivers 80% to 95% of F2 seed required by breeder","Routinely delivers > 95% of F2 seed required by breeder",null,{"$f":"'3.24'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.24'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.24'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.24'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,25,"How successful are selection & advancement nurseries?",null,null,"≥ 50% of selection nurseries & activities fail OR produce highly variable data (check entries fail to express desired trait); facilities do not control environment to ensure expression of target phenotype; inadequate agronomic skill levels & infrastructure to ensure crop establishment & prevent losses due to weed/pest infestations","50% to 80% of selection nurseries & activities produce meaningful results (check entries express desired trait); poor agronomy, evidenced by establishment &/or weed/pest problems; minimal controlled-environment facilities (e.g., glasshouse) ","80% to 95% of selection nurseries & activities produce meaningful results (check entries express desired trait); glasshouse & other controlled-environment facilities available & generally useful; farming operations & agronomy adequate to meet basic program needs","> 95% of selection nurseries & activities produce meaningful results (check entries express desired trait); glasshouse & other controlled-environment facilities well maintained & operated to provide meaningful phenotypic results; farming operation consistently good, with very few failures due to poor crop establishment or weed/pest infestations","If there are distinct selection nursery activities (e.g., disease, phenotyping, flowering biology, etc.) with differing capabilities, then these should be listed separately with individual scores.",{"$f":"'3.25'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.25'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.25'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.25'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,26,"How extensive is the yield trial program?",null,null,"Single location; inappropriate experimental designs; highly variable data; frequent trial failures; > 20% missing data in completed trials ","Staged trial system, with at least 2 locations representative of target environments prior to national trials or release decision; experimental design not necessarily the most appropriate; 50% to 80% of trials harvested; ≥ 20% missing data in completed trials ","Staged trial system, with multiple locations representing important agro-ecological zones in target market(s); 80% to 95% of trials harvested; ≤ 10% missing data in completed trials","Staged trial system, with multiple locations representing important agro-ecological zones in target market(s); > 95% of trials harvested; < 10% missing data in completed trials","Assessor should note whether any deficiency in quality of trial data is a reflection of internal or external (contractors) issues. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities.",{"$f":"'3.26'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.26'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.26'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.26'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,27,"What statistical analyses are performed on trial data?",null,null,"Quality of trials is not monitored using statistical analysis; CV & trial repeatability (heritability) not monitored","Quality of trials assessed using CV values primarily; single trial heritability (H) not monitored or averages less than 0.3 for yield","Quality of trials assessed using primarily CV & H; 10% to 20% of trials rejected due to poor quality (H < 0.15)","Breeders use highly sophisticated statistical design & analysis (in addition to CV & H); ≤ 10% of trials rejected due to poor quality (H < 0.15 or known errors)","This metric is about whether the quality of trials is actually measured. If so, heritability (H) values are estimated & will likely need to be further refined as BPAT is applied to additional crops & situations. The purpose is to emphasize importance of stringent statistical analysis guiding decision making. Assessor's interpretation of this metric will likely need explicit explanation in the commentary & memo write-up.",{"$f":"'3.27'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.27'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.27'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.27'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,28,"What is the use of repeatability (broad-sense H, heritability) estimates to monitor effectiveness of testing & screening & to allocate testing resources?",null,null,"Breeders & managers unfamiliar with concept of repeatability or its use as a planning tool & weighting factor in selection decisions; no data management systems to allow variance component, BLUP (Best Linear Unbiased Prediction) or heritability (H) estimation; selection decisions made without statistical analysis ","Breeders understand repeatability & have access to database & biometrics support to provide estimates but are not routinely estimating H, using it as a weighting factor in selection decisions or using it to support resource allocation decisions in testing programs; selection decisions made on basis of limited statistical analysis; program has the capacity to generate repeatability estimates for each major testing stage & screening system but has not done so ","Breeders & managers have access to variance component & H estimates for resource allocation modeling but do not use BLUP or use H routinely as a weighting factor in selection decisions; well-maintained database allows routine combined analysis of trials over locations & years; repeatability estimates for each major testing stage & screening system can be presented on request","Breeders receive variance component, H & BLUP estimates from each analysis, routinely using the information in trait weighting & testing resource allocation",null,{"$f":"'3.28'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.28'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.28'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.28'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,29,"What is the program size: number of crosses &/or line, family or clone development?",null,null,"Number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones in development is inadequate to deliver genetic gain increase; program size is severely constrained by resources (budget, human or infrastructure) &/or breeders do not understand need for larger program & are not considering ways to increase program scale","Number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones in development is only marginally adequate to deliver genetic gain increase; breeders may be somewhat aware of the problem but resource constraints (budget, human or infrastructure) prevent increasing scale","Number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones in development is adequate to deliver some genetic gain increase but breeders recognize the program size may be constraining significant improvement in rate of genetic gain; breeders have optimized scale of program within limits allowed by resource constraints (budget, human or infrastructure)","Number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones in development provides sufficient opportunity to realize genetic gain & rate of genetic gain; breeders have an established pipeline of genetic material & have optimized scale of program to achieve gain on primary traits of interest; program resources (budget, human or infrastructure) are in place to maintain program scale for foreseeable future","While there is no absolute number of crosses or lines needed for each situation, assessor should evaluate impact of program scale on genetic gain outcome. If program is demonstrating genetic gain, will rate of gain likely be increased with larger program? If program is not demonstrating genetic gain, is number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones the limiting factor? Assessor should note in commentary the current scale & any suggested benchmarks/goals.",{"$f":"'3.29'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.29'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.29'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.29'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,30,"How effective is the program size: yield trials?",null,null,"Scale of yield trial programs is inadequate to deliver genetic gain increase; program size is severely constrained by resources (budget, human, or infrastructure) &/or breeders do not understand need for larger program & are not considering ways to increase program scale","Scale of yield trial program is only marginally adequate to deliver genetic gain increase; breeders may be somewhat aware of the problem but resource constraints (budget, human or infrastructure) prevent increasing scale","Scale of yield trial program is adequate to deliver some genetic gain increase but breeders recognize that the program size may be constraining significant improvement in rate of genetic gain; breeders have optimized scale of program within limits allowed by resource constraints (budget, human or infrastructure)","Scale of yield trial program provides sufficient opportunity to realize genetic gain & rate of genetic gain; breeder(s) have an established testing program that is optimized for collection of yield data; program resources (budget, human, or infrastructure) are in place to maintain program scale for foreseeable future","While there is no absolute number of yield trials needed for each situation, assessor should evaluate impact of trial scale on genetic gain outcome. If program is demonstrating genetic gain, will rate of gain likely be increased with larger trial program? If program is not demonstrating genetic gain, is trial scale the limiting factor? Assessor should note in commentary the current scale & any suggested benchmarks/goals.",{"$f":"'3.30'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.30'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.30'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.30'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,31,"How extensive is the on-farm trial program?",null,null,"No on-farm trial program","Limited number of on-farm trial locations under farmer management with inconsistent return of data on advanced selections","High number of on-farm trials under farmer management but locations not optimized in terms of target location environments; inconsistent return of data on advanced selections","Comprehensive on-farm trial locations under farmer management which represent target agroenvironments; data returned on advanced selections to breeders","Note whether these trials are run by extensions services or are part of the breeder trial network.",{"$f":"'3.31'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.31'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.31'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.31'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,32,"What is the level of farmer participatory varietal selection?",null,null,"Only agronomic data collected from on-farm trials; no farmer preference data collected","Farmer preference data collected from on-farm trials but not used in selection decisions & not gender-disaggregated","Farmer preference data collected from on-farm trials used in selection decisions but not gender-disaggregated","Farmer preference data collected from on-farm trials used in selection decisions, gender-disaggregated","Assessor should note the level of importance for the specific crop under assessment.",{"$f":"'3.32'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.32'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.32'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.32'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,33,"What is the level of breeder &/or foundation seed production?",null,null,"Land issues; lack of isolation; inadequate seed processing, storage & handling; regular failures to produce quantity & quality of seed required ","Generally adequate but lack required attention to agronomic detail; occasional failures to produce the quantity & quality of seed required","Meets required standards in all years but only adequate; few major failures but little consistency or attention to \"best-practice\" details","Land & farming operations adequate & high-quality; production of breeder & foundation seed are integral activities; QA/QC methods incorporated into process",null,{"$f":"'3.33'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.33'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.33'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.33'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,34,"What is the level of second-season operations?",null,null,"No second-season operations","Second-season activities suffer from variable input & outputs; frequent & consequential failures; fails to deliver high value","Second-season locations are available & provide appropriate selection environments (if used for selection) & support good quality seed production; produces valuable results in most years","Second-season location(s) well suited for selection (if relevant) & high-quality seed production; facilities & farming operations well equipped & maintained; permanent staff experienced in plant breeding operations; routinely produces high-value results",null,{"$f":"'3.34'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.34'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.34'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.34'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Breeding Pipeline ",35,"How adequate are the program's breeding objectives?",null,null,"Breeding objectives do not reflect grower/market or commercial needs; no systematic review or modification takes place; objectives frequently reflect funding opportunities rather than crop strategic value","Breeding objectives chosen with some understanding of grower/commercial/market needs; objectives overly influenced by short term funding opportunities rather than strategic needs","Breeding objectives chosen with a good understanding of grower/commercial/market need; system in place for formal review of objectives but not optimized; objectives based on short term funding generally fit both with crop strategy & capabilities","Breeding objectives chosen with clear understanding of grower, commercial needs & product attributes required to gain market acceptance; objectives systematically reviewed & modified to reflect changing market needs & new opportunities; project-based objectives well integrated with crop strategy & program capabilities"," In this metric commercial seed is defined as \"meeting the needs of the commercial marketing team\" (this can be public or private), e.g., recognition of seed purity, seed health, multiplication rate capacity.",{"$f":"'3.35'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.35'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.35'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.35'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,36,"How relevant are the project-based objectives?",null,null,"Project submissions are not strategically relevant; no internal grading of projects prior to submission to sponsors","Project submissions are not strategically relevant; submissions usually driven by scientific interest rather than strategic impact","Project submissions are strategically relevant; peer review system in place & able to rank projects in terms of strategic relevance & quality of science; little or no reference to strategic partners working on the same crop","Project submissions are strategically relevant & meet exacting standards (in terms of science); independently assessed & compared with competing projects (both internal & external) to prioritize those with highest potential for impact","Assessor should note if a low score is due to policy decisions by funders or due to institution's lack of strategic prioritization.",{"$f":"'3.36'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.36'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.36'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.36'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,37,"How often are crop team meetings held?",null,null,"No crop group meetings","Crop group meets irregularly & on an informal basis with little reference to crop strategy; meetings cover day-to-day activities rather than strategic &/or staff needs; allied disciplines that support the crop may or may not participate & are not considered accountable to the process; no designated leader responsible & accountable for objectives related to plan","Regular crop group meetings but mainly administrative in nature; address some strategic issues but lack detail & neglect engagement with remote staff; allied disciplines usually involved but only marginally committed to the process; designated leader somewhat responsible & accountable for objectives related to plan","Crop group meets regularly (at least once per month) using technology when required (e.g., video conferencing); minutes taken & action plans reviewed at each meeting; allied disciplines actively participate & are considered accountable to the group; designated leader responsible & accountable for objectives related to plan ","For institutions focused on only one crop, the \"crop team meeting\" likely includes all the respective breeding programs (e.g., institution could be organized by geography or trait). For assessment visits where team is assessing specific crops within a broader institution, the \"crop team meeting\" would be for each individual crop being assessed.",{"$f":"'3.37'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.37'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.37'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.37'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,38,"How adequate is the delineation of target population of environments (TPE)?",null,null,"TPE is determined by political boundaries; no effort made to detect, manage or exploit GxE within the TPE; no zonation of the TPE","TPE is determined by political boundaries; no effort is made to monitor GxE; TPE is divided into zones based on agro ecological factors but validity of the zonation in terms of managing GxE has not been tested; trial results are reported by zones","TPE is based on agro ecological knowledge confirmed by GxE & genetic correlation analysis; test results are reported by zones; GxE within & among zones is monitored; no effort is made to generate BLUPs appropriately weighting information across regions","TPE is based on agro ecological knowledge confirmed by GxE & genetic correlation analysis; test results are reported by zones; GxE within & among zones is monitored; BLUPs appropriately weighting information across regions are generated",null,{"$f":"'3.38'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.38'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.38'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.38'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,39,"How adequate is the program design?",null,null,"Breeding approach not suitable for stated breeding objectives; cannot articulate rationale for program design & lacks competence to alter program","Breeding approach based on methods in general use in crop; cannot articulate rationale for program design but can implement design changes provided by a third party","Breeding approach reflects common practices in crop; can articulate rationale for program design but has limited ability to improve on program design without significant outside input","Breeding approach optimized to meet stated breeding objectives; fully understands & can explain rationale for program design; engages in knowledgeable discussion on program design features with breeders & geneticists; can & will modify program design & processes to overcome barriers, utilize new technology & achieve revised objectives ",null,{"$f":"'3.39'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.39'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.39'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.39'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,40,"How adequate are the systems for rapid generation turnover?",null,null,"No consideration or use of methods or approaches designed to achieve rapid generation advancement (e.g., Double Haploids, SSD, other)","Attempts to use methods favorable to rapid generation advancement","Has designed system for rapid generation advancement; used inconsistently & with less impact than it could be","Well-designed & executed system(s) for rapid generation advancement; used routinely & to great success; continuous improvement is integral to processes",null,{"$f":"'3.40'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.40'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.40'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.40'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,41,"What importance do breeders give to breeding cycle time?",null,null,"Breeders are unaware of the importance of minimizing breeding cycle time; yield testing delayed beyond justifiable limits; new lines tested for > 4 years before they are recycled as parents","Breeders are aware of the importance of minimizing breeding cycle time but no early generation yield testing is carried out; new lines are tested for > 3 years before they are recycled as parents; total breeding cycle is 6 to 8 years","Breeders are aware of the importance of minimizing breeding cycle time; early generation testing is used but new lines are tested for > 2 years before they are recycled as parents; total breeding cycle is 5 to 6 years","Breeders are aware of the importance of minimizing breeding cycle time; early generation testing employed & new lines are tested for no more than 2 years before they are recycled as parents; total breeding cycle is < 5 years","Breeding cycle is defined as length of time from cross to utilization as parental line.",{"$f":"'3.41'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.41'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.41'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.41'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,42,"What levels of documentation & continuity are in place?",null,null,"No documentation of protocols & SOPs","Occasional documentation of protocols & SOPs but not complete or well executed","Semi-consistent documentation of protocols & SOPs; helpful but not complete enough to ensure continuity of program or adequate training","Annual or ongoing documentation of internal protocols & SOPs to ensure continuity of program & training of new staff",null,{"$f":"'3.42'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.42'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.42'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.42'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Trait Pipeline",43,"What level of germplasm characterization details are recorded?",null,null,"No characterization of germplasm resources","Some varietal characteristics recorded but at a basic level; germplasm records not easily accessible to breeders","Basic information about variety characteristics recorded & available for access","Sophisticated information (genotypic & phenotypic) available about stored material in a format that breeders can access ",null,{"$f":"'3.43'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.43'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.43'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.43'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,44,"What is the level of utilization of genetic resources from germplasm collections?",null,null,"No utilization; do not recognize any value in accessing germplasm collections","Ad hoc use of germplasm; tends to be more speculative in nature & not focused on key traits","Recognize value of germplasm but often lack precise information regarding trait identification & associated markers/QTLs; some use within the breeding program but lacks precision","Breeders target traits from available germplasm collections to address breeding objectives; well-structured strategies for incorporation into adapted germplasm using a range of new technologies including Marker Assisted Selection (MAS)",null,{"$f":"'3.44'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.44'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.44'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.44'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,45,"What is the level of access to third-party germplasm?",null,null,"No access to third-party germplasm; operate in a \"genetic vacuum\"","Limited access to third-party germplasm; not fully engaged with providers & tend to obtain germplasm irregularly; not fully aware of regulatory, plant health or legal implications","Good access to third-party germplasm but some limitations to full exploitation from regulatory, plant health or legal challenges","Well connected with third-party genetic providers; all aspects of germplasm access covered, i.e., regulatory, plant health & legal conditions; robust documentation & paper trails in place","Note the reasons for the scores, i.e., lack of awareness/interest/organizational needs, etc.",{"$f":"'3.45'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.45'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.45'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.45'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,46,"How adequate is the trait prioritization strategy in the breeding program?",null,null,"No assessment mechanism ","Some informal, in-house assessment processes; individual programs make their own assessments rather than collaboratively","In-house strategic planning in place, with defined priorities identified & implemented","Sophisticated prioritization system based upon robust data & science reviews; independently assessed & verified by third parties","This question is intended to evaluate an organization actively operating a trait discovery program. In many cases, this will not apply to a national program, & hence, it is shaded. However, some institutions may not cleanly fit this distinction. Use judgment in evaluating programs attempting to operate trait discovery programs to assess how effective/likely to be effective they are in the context of the institution's overall capability. There may be a need for recommendations about whether an institution is or is not well suited to trait discovery.",{"$f":"'3.46'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.46'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.46'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.46'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,47,"What are the level of trait mapping (quantitative trait loci discovery) capabilities?",null,null,"No capability","Limited capacity (infrastructure, intellectual capacity or both) for meaningful outcomes; primarily driven by individual interests or funding sources","Capabilities to map traits extant but not utilized strategically; could become a valuable contributor to breeding programs with appropriate guidance","Intellectual, technical & infrastructure resources present & utilized for trait discovery; institution & scientists demonstrate ability to conduct trait discovery activities","Assessor should note source of molecular markers & confirm application is for breeding rather than purely research & development purposes.",{"$f":"'3.47'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.47'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.47'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.47'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,48,"How adequate is the pre-breeder activity deployment & coordination in the breeding program?",null,null,"No pre-breeding activity for traits","Lack of strategic coordination between breeding & trait mapping teams; no consideration of marker/QTL impact in design of marker-assisted breeding activities; no overall trait team lead","Trait & breeding teams coordinated on paper but not in practice; lack of coordination reduces utilization of markers in breeding programs; trait leads are clearly identified but do not have a fully articulated trait prioritization, advancement & delivery plan","Well-coordinated trait & breeding teams have effective working relationships; factors affecting use of markers (e.g., cost or technical limitations) well understood & incorporated into breeding process; routine interaction & evaluation of results leads to effective use of markers in breeding program; trait team leads are responsible & accountable for progress; trait team has a clearly articulated trait prioritization, advancement & delivery plan",null,{"$f":"'3.48'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.48'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.48'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.48'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,49,"How adequate is the validation of expression of introgressed QTLs & efficacy relative to traditional approaches in the breeding program?",null,null,"No validation systems in place","Some ad hoc validation takes place but not formalized & not applicable to all traits","Good validation systems in place but not formalized; some traits not fully verified","Effective follow-up & feedback mechanisms in place; sophisticated analysis & verification processes are standard ",null,{"$f":"'3.49'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.49'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.49'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.49'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,50,"How effective is the QTL deployment within mainstream breeding programs?",null,null,"Markers not used","Some use of markers, primarily for Marker-Assisted Backcross (MAB); limited by budget &/or expertise","Markers primarily used for MAB; minimal use for forward selection (MAS); institution sees value in technology but may not be considering opportunities to further enhance program outcomes","Mix of MAB & MAS that complement the balance of breeding activities; institution clearly sees value & is working to increase impact of technology","Assess how EFFECTIVELY QTLs are being deployed. For institutions developing own QTLs, consider Items 46 to 49 when evaluating effectiveness of program & highlight areas for improvement if deployment results are lacking. The question also applies to institutions deploying QTLs developed by third parties.",{"$f":"'3.50'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.50'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.50'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.50'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,51,"How effective is GM trait deployment in the program?",null,null,"Does not exist","Minimal, poorly targeted effort; not integrated into product pipeline; no stewardship program ","Program targets generally valuable; poor integration into product pipeline; inadequate stewardship program ","Well designed & executed in all phases; targeted to high-impact traits; well integrated with product development pipeline; excellent stewardship program in place & functioning","Assessor should use N/A rating if GM trait deployment is not available or allowed for given situation. Describe whether constraint is regulatory, technical or FTO. \"1\" rating indicates GM trait deployment should be considered but is not currently.",{"$f":"'3.51'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'3.51'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'3.51'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'3.51'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Breeding methodology",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"IFERROR(AVERAGEIF($L$55:$L$83,\">0\"),\"-\")","v":"-"}]
["Cultivar Development, Release & Production","Cultivar Development & Commercial Release",52,"How effective are product advancement decisions (up to & including commercial release)?",null,null,"Advancement criteria ill-defined or based upon poor or limited datasets; no competitive cultivars included in trials; no system to ensure rapid progress through testing program; no grower participatory trials considered or used","Varieties advanced upon a system encompassing a range of datasets but not comprehensive; competitive cultivars included don't provide meaningful comparisons; minimal consideration of approaches to speed product advancement; grower participatory trials seldom considered or implemented","Varieties advanced based upon a strong dataset & verifiable systems, but year-to-year variation limits decision quality; best competitive cultivars included; advancement program not optimized for rapid progress; grower participatory trials may be used inconsistently","Excellent advancement system with well-defined targets & verification of datasets in place; best competitive cultivars provide meaningful comparisons in target environment & are integral component of product advancement; testing system & strategy optimized to move cultivars from first yield trial through variety release; grower participatory trials included as appropriate","Decision to release products for commercial use may be under control of a national program rather than the institution. If that is the case, disregard the commercial aspect. Judgment is needed in determining applicability of participatory trial use in advancement decisions; Participatory trials are highly desired, but they must produce meaningful & objective data.",{"$f":"'4.52'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'4.52'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'4.52'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'4.52'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,53,"What level of engagement exists with external bodies to support release strategies?",null,null,"No engagement","No institutionally defined processes for engagement with external bodies (e.g., regulatory bodies, testing authorities, growers, end users, agronomic advisers, etc.); breeders & other research staff seek input on ad hoc basis","Institution acknowledges need for engaging external parties (e.g., regulatory bodies, testing authorities, growers, end users, agronomic advisers, etc.) in release decisions but has no formal system in place; breeders seek input from external bodies but process is ad hoc & inconsistent","Formal release process in place which requires participation by external bodies (e.g., regulatory bodies, testing authorities, growers, end users, agronomic advisers, etc.); external stakeholders actively engaged in process; release decision reflects input from external stakeholders",null,{"$f":"'4.53'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'4.53'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'4.53'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'4.53'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,54,"How effective is the transition from research (breeding) pipeline to commercial development?",null,null,"No interface systems ","Limited interactions between breeders & individuals or entities responsible for commercialization; not a priority for breeding institution; often seen as separate disciplines","Institution acknowledges need for connecting breeding pipeline to commercial development but has no formal system in place; breeders &/or commercial teams proactively communicate to enhance uptake but process is ad hoc & inconsistent","Institution committed to moving products from breeding pipeline to commercial development; interactions between breeding staff & commercialization team are defined & occur on regular basis; breeding staff proactively engages with & is available to commercialization team to provide support ","Commercialization team may or may not be within target institution. Assessor should consider interaction with external commercial bodies also, as appropriate & realistic for the market situation. The intent is that the transition should be proactively managed regardless of who/where it occurs.",{"$f":"'4.54'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'4.54'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'4.54'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'4.54'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,55,"What is the system for assessing post-release product performance?",null,null,"No system in place to monitor performance of released products in commercial production","Ad hoc monitoring of released products in commercial production; information not obviously incorporated into breeding plans or activities","System in place to monitor product performance; inconsistent data collection &/or inconsistent use of performance data to inform breeding strategy or actions","System in place to monitor product performance; data collected & utilized to inform breeding strategies & actions regularly & consistently",null,{"$f":"'4.55'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'4.55'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'4.55'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'4.55'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Breeders' Seed Production",56,"How well is breeder seed production coordinated with commercial seed producers?",null,null,"No understanding or alignment with commercial seed producer needs","Inconsistent alignment with commercial seed producer needs; no process for determining breeder seed requirements","Some alignment between breeder seed production & commercial seed producer needs; process for determining breeder seed requirements exists but is not formalized","Breeder seed production fully aligned with commercial seed producer needs; a formal process exists for generating breeder seed requirements",null,{"$f":"'4.56'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'4.56'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'4.56'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'4.56'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,57,"How effective are breeder seed production & processing mechanics?",null,null,"Low priority or little understanding of genetic purity &/or high-quality seed production, resulting in poor purity record","Understand the need for genetic purity & attempt to produce high-quality breeder seed; results not always acceptable","Understand the need for genetic purity & have ability to produce high-quality breeder seed but do not always achieve intended results","Field operations are organized & conducted to ensure genetic purity & high-quality breeder seed; output regularly meets purity & quality criteria",null,{"$f":"'4.57'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'4.57'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'4.57'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'4.57'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,58,"How adequate are the systems to enhance multiplication rates & accelerate distribution?",null,null,"No systems in place","Limited capability & recognition of opportunities; some specific increases taken up","Some advanced systems in place but not standardized for all new varieties","Aware of opportunities & advanced systems in place enhancing speed of variety development (e.g., low seed rate, high multiplication systems, mechanization opportunities, seed processing machinery)",null,{"$f":"'4.58'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'4.58'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'4.58'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'4.58'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,59,"What levels of quality assurance & quality control procedures exist?",null,null,"Limited QA/QC abilities & not recognized as a problem","Some QA/QC systems in place but generally of low quality; little to no effort to confirm seed purity","Recognized as key activity with some processes in place but not formalized; no formal feedback system in place (e.g., grow-out or molecular fingerprinting) to ensure breeders routinely confirm genetic purity","Due diligence exemplary with good results & rapid multiplication normalized; sophisticated feedback system in place (e.g., grow-out or molecular fingerprinting) to ensure breeders routinely confirm genetic purity","Note that quality could include viability, genetic purity, physical purity, weed-free, & disease-free. Assessor should note importance of these to crop being examined & relevance to seed exchange/shipments to third parties.",{"$f":"'4.59'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'4.59'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'4.59'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'4.59'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,60,"What systems are in place for GM product stewardship requirements?",null,null,"No systems in place","Aware of stewardship requirements but low level of activity","Good understanding of requirements but systems not fully optimized & vulnerable to errors","Good, well-defined systems in place with excellent due diligence ","Only relevant if GM crops are being commercialized.",{"$f":"'4.60'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'4.60'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'4.60'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'4.60'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Cultivar development, release & production",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"IFERROR(AVERAGEIF($L$85:$L$93,\">0\"),\"-\")","v":"-"}]
["Product Support","Product Support",61,"What level of validation & documentation exist in agronomic practices for optimum product performance ?",null,null,"No extension service engagement","Some development work but limited benefits to growers","Basic agronomy & support systems but generic in nature","Excellent link between genetics & extension support; recognizes value of this activity & that it enhances new variety uptake",null,{"$f":"'5.61'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'5.61'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'5.61'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'5.61'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,62,"How well is the field agronomist familiar with product, prior to commercial availability?",null,null,"No knowledge of varieties until release","Some limited awareness but tends to be of a general nature","Recognizes some traits & characters of new varieties & enhances variety uptake but lacks consistency","Good understanding of variety strengths & weaknesses & provides good solutions; agronomic support enhances variety uptake",null,{"$f":"'5.62'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'5.62'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'5.62'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'5.62'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Product  support",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"IFERROR(AVERAGEIF($L$95:$L$96,\">0\"),\"-\")","v":"-"}]
["Program Impact","Process to Measure Impact",63,"What processes are in place to measure impact on genetic gain?",null,null,"No process to measure impact on genetic gain or variety uptake in market","Very limited process to measure impact on genetic gain &/or market success; not effective enough to contribute to breeding objectives or strategic planning ","Ad hoc measurement of impact on genetic gain &/or market success; utilizes some data sources but could be improved; information not necessarily integrated to impact future breeding objectives & strategic planning","Intentional, regular & informative process in place to measure impact on genetic gain & market success; utilizes effective combination of internal & external data sources (e.g., government statistics, internal tracking, specific studies); information used to contribute to breeding objectives & strategic planning","This metric is intended to capture whether the institution devotes resources & attention to intentionally tracking impact. An institution may score high on having systems in place to measure but low on following metrics of actual impact.",{"$f":"'6.63'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'6.63'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'6.63'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'6.63'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Gain from Selection Impact",64,"What is the level of performance for hybrids and advanced lines?",null,null,"< 10% of advanced lines/hybrids significantly outperform best competitive cultivars","10% to 25% of advanced lines/hybrids significantly outperform best competitive cultivars","25% to 50% of advanced lines/hybrids significantly outperform best competitive cultivars","> 50% of advanced lines/hybrids significantly outperform best competitive cultivars","Attention should be given to obtaining the data required to assess these factors in order to improve benchmark values over time.",{"$f":"'6.64'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'6.64'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'6.64'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'6.64'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,65,"What level of performance does the best candidate cultivar have in the program?",null,null,"Best candidate no different than best competitive cultivar for any trait","Best candidate 2% to 3% better than best competitive cultivar for highest value traits; may be significantly worse than best competitive cultivars for some secondary traits ","Best candidate 3% to 5% better than best competitive cultivar for highest value traits; no significant weaknesses in secondary traits","Best candidate > 5% better than best competitive cultivar for highest value traits; ≥ to best competitive cultivar for secondary traits",null,{"$f":"'6.65'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'6.65'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'6.65'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'6.65'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Program Impact in Market",66,"What evidence do the best candidates show of marketability?",null,null,"Best candidates routinely demonstrate flaws that would be unacceptable in the market; no feedback is obtained by the program from growers & end users","Best candidates usually have one or more flaws affecting marketability; institution shows no evidence of addressing flaws in a systematic way; feedback from growers & end users, including women, is obtained informally","Best candidates meet or exceed market specifications for MOST attributes affecting marketability; may have a small number of flaws impacting marketability; formal quality & marketability assessment systems involving end users are in place, but are not disaggregated by gender or wealth status","Best candidates meet or exceed market specifications for all attributes affecting marketability; formal quality & marketability assessment systems involving end users are in place, generating data that are disaggregated by gender or wealth status","Market share & variety lifespan are good indicators of program effectiveness. However, the effectiveness of the seed value chain can have a major impact on these measures. Although the assessment focuses on breeding programs, explore the value chain question if market share &/or variety lifespan ratings are very low.",{"$f":"'6.66'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'6.66'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'6.66'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'6.66'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,67,"What is the current market share of program varieties released in last 10 years?",null,null,"Never planted on more than 2% of hectarage","Planted on 2% to 10% of hectarage","Planted on 10% to 25% of hectarage ","Planted on > 25% of hectarage",null,{"$f":"'6.67'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'6.67'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'6.67'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'6.67'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,68,"What percentage of released varieties originate from own breeding program?",null,null,"< 10%","10% to 60%","60% to 80%","> 80%",null,{"$f":"'6.68'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'6.68'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'6.68'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'6.68'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,69,"What is the current market share of varieties & germplasm from own program in other territories released in last 10 years (specify)?",null,null,"< 10%","10% to 25%","25% to 50%","> 50%","This is not expected to be a factor for most national programs, but is likely to be very important for CGIAR centers.",{"$f":"'6.69'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'6.69'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'6.69'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'6.69'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Program impact",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"IFERROR(AVERAGEIF($L$98:$L$104,\">0\"),\"-\")","v":"-"}]
["Strategic Planning & Management","Strategic Planning",70,"What is the organization's strategic vision?",null,null,"Organization lacks direction & does not have clear 3- to 5-year priorities","Organization has wide program focus which limits ability to identify priorities & prioritize resources","Organization has clearly articulated strategic vision spanning 3 to 5 years","In addition to (3), organization has a vision for how its strategy will evolve in the long term (> 10 years)",null,{"$f":"'7.70'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'7.70'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'7.70'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'7.70'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,71,"What is the level of coordination for product profile strategy?",null,null,"No integrated planning process in place; breeders independently prioritize opportunities","Internal strategic discussions occur beyond breeding team but often without market research or quantitative methodology","Strategic plan in place & refreshed at least every 3 to 5 years through a collaborative process with breeders & market researchers; lacks product profile strategies ","All of (3), plus strategic plan establishes product profile strategies with vision of how products will be optimized & disseminated downstream",null,{"$f":"'7.71'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'7.71'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'7.71'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'7.71'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,72,"What is the level of focus on market research?",null,null,"Organization lacks market research function","Organization has market research focus, but focus limited to 1 or 2 elements of market research (e.g., end consumer or competitive landscape)","Organization has comprehensive market research focus on the end consumer, competitive landscape & value chain; focus is short-term (3 to 5 years); no gender-disaggregated data collected","All of (3), plus the team identifies needs & opportunities in the long term (10+ years) as well as the short-term; gender-disaggregated data collected ",null,{"$f":"'7.72'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'7.72'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'7.72'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'7.72'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,73,"How effective is the program's \"Go to Market\" (GTM) Strategy?",null,null,"Little focus on downstream/GTM strategy & uptake; varieties simply released freely on the open market","Institution has informal mechanisms (e.g., conversations throughout downstream value chain) to encourage uptake post-variety release","Institution has active, formal mechanism to include interactions with downstream value chain both pre- & post-variety release; access plan for women farmers not explicitly developed","Institution has clear GTM strategies for each product (e.g., key interaction points with market, strategy to proactively influence value chain & farmer adoption, view of value chain partners, whether & how to create IP, etc.); access plan for women farmers explicitly developed","GTM strategy certainly includes feedback from farmers but could also include downstream value chain participants such as seed sellers, buyers & consumers.",{"$f":"'7.73'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'7.73'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'7.73'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'7.73'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Strategic Management & Alignment",74,"What is the level of strategic vision & management alignment?",null,null,"Little shared understanding through organization of overall strategy","Breeders broadly aligned on organization strategic vision but ambiguous about how day-to-day roles fit into strategy ","Breeders & supporting scientists broadly aligned on organization strategic vision & have a sense of how day-to-day roles fit into strategy ","All of (3), plus breeders & supporting scientists have an understanding of how their roles will evolve in the short- & medium-term (3 to 5 years), given the current strategy",null,{"$f":"'7.74'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'7.74'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'7.74'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'7.74'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,75,"What is the attitude towards change?",null,null,"Conservative approach, unwilling to accept change at any level","Willing to look at changes in strategy, logistics & technology but unlikely to want rapid deployment; general reluctance to change","Changes in strategy, logistics & technology welcomed but lack resource or strategic awareness to implement at all levels","Dynamic approach with change in strategies, logistics & novel technologies readily discussed & implemented when appropriate; positive outlook on future prospects",null,{"$f":"'7.75'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'7.75'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'7.75'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'7.75'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,76,"What levels of collaboration exist with international breeding institutions?",null,null,"Organization is indirectly linked with international partners & there is limited collaboration","Organization loosely linked with international partners & breeders have relationships simply on an ad hoc basis","Organization linked with international partners & breeders unevenly have direct ties (e.g., through trainings, regular conversations) with respective programs","Organization closely linked with international partners & all breeders have direct ties (e.g., through trainings, regular conversations) with respective programs",null,{"$f":"'7.76'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'7.76'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'7.76'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'7.76'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,77,"What levels of collaboration exist with national breeding partners?",null,null,"Organization is indirectly linked with national partners; there is limited collaboration","Organization loosely linked with national partners; breeders have relationships on ad hoc basis","Organization linked with national partners; breeders unevenly have direct ties with respective programs (e.g., through trainings, regular conversations, etc.) ","Organization closely linked with national partners; all breeders have direct ties with respective programs (e.g., through trainings, regular conversations, etc.) ",null,{"$f":"'7.77'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'7.77'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'7.77'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'7.77'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,78,"How effective is the collaboration across programs & divisions?",null,null,"Very little collaboration across divisions or between programs (e.g., pathology & breeding)","Organization does not have formal mechanism to encourage collaboration across programs or divisions; collaboration occurs on an ad hoc basis; there are no service agreements or charge-back mechanisms for services","Organization has varying levels of formal mechanisms to encourage collaboration across programs or divisions (e.g., process between breeders & labs to define materials needed & by when); has some service level agreement or charge-back mechanisms","Service level agreements or defined milestones encourage collaboration across divisions or between programs (e.g., included as part of review process, milestones) ",null,{"$f":"'7.78'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'7.78'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'7.78'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'7.78'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,79,"What processes of succession planning are in place?",null,null,"Breeding programs have no succession plan strategy","Succession plans are made on an ad hoc basis & when needs arise","Succession planning is recognized as an important aspect of successful breeding programs, but no formal strategies are in place","Succession planning is part of the institution's strategic plan; detailed strategies are in place for the next 5 years, with clear career milestones for key staff ",null,{"$f":"'7.79'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'7.79'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'7.79'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'7.79'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Strategic planning & management",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"IFERROR(AVERAGEIF($L$106:$L$115,\">0\"),\"-\")","v":"-"}]
["Budget & Finance","Budget & Finance",80,"What level of involvement do project leaders have in budget management?",null,null,"Project leaders have no or very limited input into budget development &  control over expenditure","Project leaders nominally responsible for budget development & management but are routinely overridden","Project leaders nominally responsible for budget development & management but are sometimes overridden","Project leaders have major impact on budget development & are responsible for budget management",null,{"$f":"'8.80'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'8.80'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'8.80'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'8.80'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,81,"How effective is the capital equipment replacement strategy?",null,null,"No capital equipment replacement policy","Some capital finance plans made (& funds requested) but replacement on an ad hoc basis","Funding & mechanism to maintain equipment in place but not aligned with crop strategies or essential needs","Robust capital equipment replacement policy based upon crop strategic needs; recognizes new technology opportunities & initiates plans to engage with these",null,{"$f":"'8.81'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'8.81'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'8.81'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'8.81'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,82,"What tracking processes exist for activity-based breeding costs?",null,null,"No visibility to cost of breeding program components","Cost components tracked on ad hoc basis","Most component costs regularly tracked but not driving decisions","Clear visibility to cost of breeding program components & regularly considers how to optimize (e.g., insource vs. outsource)",null,{"$f":"'8.82'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'8.82'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'8.82'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'8.82'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,83,"At what level are cost metrics used to drive efficiencies?",null,null,"Little use of financial metrics across organization; no benchmarking","Financial metrics utilized on an ad hoc basis or inefficiently across the organization; no regular benchmarking ","Financial metrics utilized across the organization but not systematically; benchmarking occurs but not against most relevant examples","Financial metrics tracked on an organizational level; active efforts in continuous improvement through benchmarking",null,{"$f":"'8.83'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'8.83'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'8.83'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'8.83'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,84,"What levels of understanding of financial planning exist?",null,null,"Breeders & other project leaders receive no financial training",null,"Breeders & other project leaders are included in formal budgeting &/or accounting financial training","All of (3), plus ongoing resources if breeders & project leaders have budgeting &/or finance questions",null,{"$f":"'8.84'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'8.84'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'8.84'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'8.84'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Budget & finance",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"IFERROR(AVERAGEIF($L$117:$L$121,\">0\"),\"-\")","v":"-"}]
["Performance Management","Performance Evaluation",85,"What performance evaluation processes are in place?",null,null,"Performance evaluations vary across the organization; mainly used to decide job promotion","Annual performance evaluation process carried out consistently in the breeding division customized to role (e.g., breeder vs. post-doc); outlines personal development plan; no explicit evaluation of contribution to program goals","All of (2), plus process parallels the same one used as basis for job promotion; differentiates staff into distinct rating groups that provide scientists with understanding of how they track against short- & long-term expectations; contribution to program goals is taken into account in individual evaluation","All of (3), plus process actively seeks collaborative feedback from others in the organization beyond to supervisor; evaluation process is fully & explicitly aligned with program goals",null,{"$f":"'9.85'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'9.85'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'9.85'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'9.85'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,86,"How are individual & team metrics incorporated into evaluation process?",null,null,"Few, if any, best practice metrics utilized in evaluation process","Use of metrics applied unevenly across organization & focus largely on traditional academic contribution criteria (e.g., published papers); little to no emphasis on allied disciplines' participation in breeding team's outcomes & process","Clearly defined metrics for breeders covering academic contribution, research practices/outcomes & administration; less clear metrics for allied disciplines to contribute to breeding team's outcomes & process","All of (3), plus clear metrics for supporting scientists linked to their support of breeding process (e.g., for marker lab, tracking of delivery time to return material, number of complaints); explicit expectations for allied disciplines to contribute to breeding team's outcomes & process","Assessor should particularly note inclusion of allied disciplines. Are they held accountable for participation in crop group planning, as well as meeting service level requirements? Are they motivated to consider themselves part of crop team rather than separate entity?",{"$f":"'9.86'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'9.86'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'9.86'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'9.86'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,87,"Do targets correspond to performance metrics?",null,null,"Limited targets associated with metrics in the performance evaluation process",null,"Targets correspond to metrics used in individual performance reviews (e.g., number of publications in given period)","All of (3), plus clear team targets (e.g., reduced lab delivery time to x) displayed prominently in office ",null,{"$f":"'9.87'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'9.87'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'9.87'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'9.87'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Incentives",88,"What performance incentives are in place?",null,null,"Few incentives beyond promotions; no clear linkage to performance ratings","Various incentives (e.g., financial, recognition such as plaques, mentions in publications) beyond promotion","Incentives are clearly linked to performance ratings & are transparently conveyed (e.g., clearly defined career trajectory based on performance level)","All of (3), plus team incentives for meeting published team goals, including explicit inclusion of allied disciplines that support given breeding team",null,{"$f":"'9.88'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'9.88'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'9.88'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'9.88'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Training",89,"What levels of training are in place?",null,null,"Very few formal trainings across the organization","Various levels of ongoing technical training (e.g., spending weeks/months at another institution learning a new topic)","All of (2), plus formal onboarding program for new hires to familiarize them with organization structure, strategy & logistical support","All of (3), plus ongoing soft-skill trainings, such as project management, budgeting & accounting ",null,{"$f":"'9.89'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'9.89'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'9.89'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'9.89'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Recruiting",90,"How are metrics used in the recruiting process?",null,null,"No metrics identified","Metrics defined, but not regularly used by staff","Metrics defined & tracked as part of annual review process for recruiting","All of (3), plus metrics referred to throughout year (e.g., quarterly)",null,{"$f":"'9.90'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'9.90'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'9.90'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'9.90'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,91,"What are the sourcing processes in recruiting?",null,null,"Organization targets specific talent sources primarily based on volume & individual biases (e.g., alumni relationships)","Organization targets sources with a high number of candidates who meet externally validated or generic selection criteria (e.g., papers published, course lists)","Organization tiers & prioritizes sources known to have high-quality recruits (based on data analysis on internal performance of recruits)","All of (3), plus organization pinpoints sources that help meet organization’s identified diversity & other community needs",null,{"$f":"'9.91'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'9.91'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'9.91'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'9.91'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,92,"What is the selection process in recruiting?",null,null,"Criteria not well defined or consistent; selection over-reliant on interviewer/ manager judgment","Criteria provide consistent guidance to interviewers to ensure new hires have skills required for the job","Criteria screen for job-specific skills, attitudes & behaviors most desirable in employees; criteria are customized for pivotal roles","All of (3), plus innovative interviewing techniques to surface the attitudes & behaviors of candidates (e.g., full-day technical sessions with scientists)",null,{"$f":"'9.92'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'9.92'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'9.92'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'9.92'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,null,93,"What is the candidate experience during recruiting?",null,null,"Communications with candidates are inconsistent, infrequent & impersonal","Recruiting process is HR-led, but research program leads make the final hiring decisions","Research programs are involved in every aspect of the process (e.g., sourcing, recruiting & interviewing); candidates are cultivated during all aspects of recruiting","All of (3), plus the entire organization is involved & aligned on the importance of recruiting; performance evaluations recognize recruiting participation",null,{"$f":"'9.93'!$E$8","v":0},{"$f":"'9.93'!$E$9","v":0},{"$f":"'9.93'!$E$10","v":0},{"$f":"'9.93'!$E$11","v":0}]
[null,"Performance management",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"IFERROR(AVERAGEIF($L$123:$L$131,\">0\"),\"-\")","v":"-"}]

{"sheet":"Introduction","index":5,"n_rows":10,"n_cols":1,"rows_kept":10,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[]}
["Plant Breeding Program Assessment Tool "]
[]
[]
["About version 2.0 of the Plant Breeding Program Assessment Tool"]
["The Plant Breeding Program Assessment Tool has been commissioned as a test concept by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and its objective is to support organizations who are committed to continually improving the rate of genetic gain of their newly released varieties. The tool  is based on the key elements that drive a public sector breeding program's potential to achieve higher rates of genetic gain, including:"]
[]
["      -Breeding-specific execution and quantitative & qualitative impact factors"]
["      -Enabler support factors or strategic planning, budgeting, and performance management"]
[]
["A participating institution is assigned a 1-4 score per question based on an intesive multi-day visit, led by an experienced, 3rd party senior breeder. The tool is anchored by a perspective on best practices in public and private sector breeding programs. Therefore a score of a \"4\" is typically indicative of practices similar to that of bets practices identified in other breeding organizations."]

{"sheet":"1.1A","index":6,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,8,0,10],[2,8,2,10],[4,8,4,10],[4,2,6,6],[7,10,8,10]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Use this rating system to assess the EDUCATION of the institution's scientific staff in disciplines identified in questions 1A to 1J. Add any disciplines appropriate for the institution under review. If a discipline is not represented & NOT CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"N/A\" box. If a discipline is not represented & CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"1\" rating. Provide clarifying comments in Assessor's Feedback columns as needed. Note that some institutions choose to outsource certain disciplines. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[]
[null,null,"What is the level of education and training of staff in \nPLANT BREEDING?",null,null,null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,null,null,"Q1: EDUCATION",null,"Q2: TRAINING",null,null,null,"Majority of breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in appropriate discipline; not aware of current \"best practices\" in field; no evidence of ability to understand or adopt/adapt best practices"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have some formal education in appropriate discipline; vague understanding of current best practices; most junior scientists lack advanced degrees in appropriate fields "]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have Ph.D. or equivalent experience (e.g., Master's Degree plus experience as assistant breeder in leading program) in appropriate discipline; aware of current best practices; evidence of ability to adopt/adapt best practices; most junior scientists have advanced degrees in appropriate fields"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs","All breeding & science leads have Ph.D. in appropriate discipline; understand & utilize current \"best practices\" to extent possible within program constraints; full understanding of program requirements & proven ability to adjust methods & approaches based on specific requirements; majority of junior scientists hold Ph.D. in appropriate fields & are qualified to advance to senior scientist level"]

{"sheet":"1.1B","index":7,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,8,0,10],[2,8,2,10],[4,2,6,6],[4,8,4,10],[7,10,8,10]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Use this rating system to assess the EDUCATION of the institution's scientific staff in disciplines identified in questions 1A to 1J. Add any disciplines appropriate for the institution under review. If a discipline is not represented & NOT CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"N/A\" box. If a discipline is not represented & CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"1\" rating. Provide clarifying comments in Assessor's Feedback columns as needed. Note that some institutions choose to outsource certain disciplines. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[]
[null,null,"What is the level of education and training of staff in \nGENETICS AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY?",null,null,null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,null,null,"Q1: EDUCATION",null,"Q2: TRAINING",null,null,null,"Majority of breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in appropriate discipline; not aware of current \"best practices\" in field; no evidence of ability to understand or adopt/adapt best practices"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have some formal education in appropriate discipline; vague understanding of current best practices; most junior scientists lack advanced degrees in appropriate fields "]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have Ph.D. or equivalent experience (e.g., Master's Degree plus experience as assistant breeder in leading program) in appropriate discipline; aware of current best practices; evidence of ability to adopt/adapt best practices; most junior scientists have advanced degrees in appropriate fields"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs","All breeding & science leads have Ph.D. in appropriate discipline; understand & utilize current \"best practices\" to extent possible within program constraints; full understanding of program requirements & proven ability to adjust methods & approaches based on specific requirements; majority of junior scientists hold Ph.D. in appropriate fields & are qualified to advance to senior scientist level"]

{"sheet":"1.1C","index":8,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,8,0,10],[2,8,2,10],[4,2,6,6],[4,8,4,10],[7,10,8,10]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K10","v":"Cell Biology/Tissue Culture includes laboratory-based capabilities related to double haploid/embryo rescue/vegetative propagation skills, etc."}]
[]
[null,null,"What is the level of education and training of staff in \nCELL BIOLOGY / TISSUE CULTURE?",null,null,null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,null,null,"Q1: EDUCATION",null,"Q2: TRAINING",null,null,null,"Majority of breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in appropriate discipline; not aware of current \"best practices\" in field; no evidence of ability to understand or adopt/adapt best practices"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have some formal education in appropriate discipline; vague understanding of current best practices; most junior scientists lack advanced degrees in appropriate fields "]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have Ph.D. or equivalent experience (e.g., Master's Degree plus experience as assistant breeder in leading program) in appropriate discipline; aware of current best practices; evidence of ability to adopt/adapt best practices; most junior scientists have advanced degrees in appropriate fields"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs","All breeding & science leads have Ph.D. in appropriate discipline; understand & utilize current \"best practices\" to extent possible within program constraints; full understanding of program requirements & proven ability to adjust methods & approaches based on specific requirements; majority of junior scientists hold Ph.D. in appropriate fields & are qualified to advance to senior scientist level"]

{"sheet":"1.1D","index":9,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,8,0,10],[2,8,2,10],[4,2,6,6],[4,8,4,10],[7,10,8,10]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Use this rating system to assess the EDUCATION of the institution's scientific staff in disciplines identified in questions 1A to 1J. Add any disciplines appropriate for the institution under review. If a discipline is not represented & NOT CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"N/A\" box. If a discipline is not represented & CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"1\" rating. Provide clarifying comments in Assessor's Feedback columns as needed. Note that some institutions choose to outsource certain disciplines. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[]
[null,null,"What is the level of education and training of staff in \nAGRONOMY?",null,null,null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,null,null,"Q1: EDUCATION",null,"Q2: TRAINING",null,null,null,"Majority of breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in appropriate discipline; not aware of current \"best practices\" in field; no evidence of ability to understand or adopt/adapt best practices"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have some formal education in appropriate discipline; vague understanding of current best practices; most junior scientists lack advanced degrees in appropriate fields "]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have Ph.D. or equivalent experience (e.g., Master's Degree plus experience as assistant breeder in leading program) in appropriate discipline; aware of current best practices; evidence of ability to adopt/adapt best practices; most junior scientists have advanced degrees in appropriate fields"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs","All breeding & science leads have Ph.D. in appropriate discipline; understand & utilize current \"best practices\" to extent possible within program constraints; full understanding of program requirements & proven ability to adjust methods & approaches based on specific requirements; majority of junior scientists hold Ph.D. in appropriate fields & are qualified to advance to senior scientist level"]

{"sheet":"1.1E","index":10,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,8,0,10],[2,8,2,10],[4,2,6,6],[4,8,4,10],[7,10,8,10]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Use this rating system to assess the EDUCATION of the institution's scientific staff in disciplines identified in questions 1A to 1J. Add any disciplines appropriate for the institution under review. If a discipline is not represented & NOT CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"N/A\" box. If a discipline is not represented & CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"1\" rating. Provide clarifying comments in Assessor's Feedback columns as needed. Note that some institutions choose to outsource certain disciplines. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[]
[null,null,"What is the level of education and training of staff in \nPLANT PATHOLOGY?",null,null,null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,null,null,"Q1: EDUCATION",null,"Q2: TRAINING",null,null,null,"Majority of breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in appropriate discipline; not aware of current \"best practices\" in field; no evidence of ability to understand or adopt/adapt best practices"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have some formal education in appropriate discipline; vague understanding of current best practices; most junior scientists lack advanced degrees in appropriate fields "]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have Ph.D. or equivalent experience (e.g., Master's Degree plus experience as assistant breeder in leading program) in appropriate discipline; aware of current best practices; evidence of ability to adopt/adapt best practices; most junior scientists have advanced degrees in appropriate fields"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs","All breeding & science leads have Ph.D. in appropriate discipline; understand & utilize current \"best practices\" to extent possible within program constraints; full understanding of program requirements & proven ability to adjust methods & approaches based on specific requirements; majority of junior scientists hold Ph.D. in appropriate fields & are qualified to advance to senior scientist level"]

{"sheet":"1.1F","index":11,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,8,0,10],[2,8,2,10],[4,2,6,6],[4,8,4,10],[7,10,8,10]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Use this rating system to assess the EDUCATION of the institution's scientific staff in disciplines identified in questions 1A to 1J. Add any disciplines appropriate for the institution under review. If a discipline is not represented & NOT CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"N/A\" box. If a discipline is not represented & CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"1\" rating. Provide clarifying comments in Assessor's Feedback columns as needed. Note that some institutions choose to outsource certain disciplines. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[]
[null,null,"What is the level of education and training of staff in \nENTOMOLOGY?",null,null,null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,null,null,"Q1: EDUCATION",null,"Q2: TRAINING",null,null,null,"Majority of breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in appropriate discipline; not aware of current \"best practices\" in field; no evidence of ability to understand or adopt/adapt best practices"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have some formal education in appropriate discipline; vague understanding of current best practices; most junior scientists lack advanced degrees in appropriate fields "]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have Ph.D. or equivalent experience (e.g., Master's Degree plus experience as assistant breeder in leading program) in appropriate discipline; aware of current best practices; evidence of ability to adopt/adapt best practices; most junior scientists have advanced degrees in appropriate fields"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs","All breeding & science leads have Ph.D. in appropriate discipline; understand & utilize current \"best practices\" to extent possible within program constraints; full understanding of program requirements & proven ability to adjust methods & approaches based on specific requirements; majority of junior scientists hold Ph.D. in appropriate fields & are qualified to advance to senior scientist level"]

{"sheet":"1.1G","index":12,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,8,0,10],[2,8,2,10],[4,2,6,6],[4,8,4,10],[7,10,8,10]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Use this rating system to assess the EDUCATION of the institution's scientific staff in disciplines identified in questions 1A to 1J. Add any disciplines appropriate for the institution under review. If a discipline is not represented & NOT CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"N/A\" box. If a discipline is not represented & CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"1\" rating. Provide clarifying comments in Assessor's Feedback columns as needed. Note that some institutions choose to outsource certain disciplines. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[]
[null,null,"What is the level of education and training of staff in \nPHYSIOLOGY?",null,null,null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,null,null,"Q1: EDUCATION",null,"Q2: TRAINING",null,null,null,"Majority of breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in appropriate discipline; not aware of current \"best practices\" in field; no evidence of ability to understand or adopt/adapt best practices"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have some formal education in appropriate discipline; vague understanding of current best practices; most junior scientists lack advanced degrees in appropriate fields "]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have Ph.D. or equivalent experience (e.g., Master's Degree plus experience as assistant breeder in leading program) in appropriate discipline; aware of current best practices; evidence of ability to adopt/adapt best practices; most junior scientists have advanced degrees in appropriate fields"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs","All breeding & science leads have Ph.D. in appropriate discipline; understand & utilize current \"best practices\" to extent possible within program constraints; full understanding of program requirements & proven ability to adjust methods & approaches based on specific requirements; majority of junior scientists hold Ph.D. in appropriate fields & are qualified to advance to senior scientist level"]

{"sheet":"1.1H","index":13,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,8,0,10],[2,8,2,10],[4,2,6,6],[4,8,4,10],[7,10,8,10]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Use this rating system to assess the EDUCATION of the institution's scientific staff in disciplines identified in questions 1A to 1J. Add any disciplines appropriate for the institution under review. If a discipline is not represented & NOT CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"N/A\" box. If a discipline is not represented & CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"1\" rating. Provide clarifying comments in Assessor's Feedback columns as needed. Note that some institutions choose to outsource certain disciplines. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[]
[null,null,"What is the level of education and training of staff in \nQUALITY (e.g., Grain Quality, Nutrition, etc.)?",null,null,null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,null,null,"Q1: EDUCATION",null,"Q2: TRAINING",null,null,null,"Majority of breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in appropriate discipline; not aware of current \"best practices\" in field; no evidence of ability to understand or adopt/adapt best practices"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have some formal education in appropriate discipline; vague understanding of current best practices; most junior scientists lack advanced degrees in appropriate fields "]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have Ph.D. or equivalent experience (e.g., Master's Degree plus experience as assistant breeder in leading program) in appropriate discipline; aware of current best practices; evidence of ability to adopt/adapt best practices; most junior scientists have advanced degrees in appropriate fields"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs","All breeding & science leads have Ph.D. in appropriate discipline; understand & utilize current \"best practices\" to extent possible within program constraints; full understanding of program requirements & proven ability to adjust methods & approaches based on specific requirements; majority of junior scientists hold Ph.D. in appropriate fields & are qualified to advance to senior scientist level"]

{"sheet":"1.1I","index":14,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,8,0,10],[2,8,2,10],[4,2,6,6],[4,8,4,10],[7,10,8,10]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K16","v":"Note that in some institutions, there may be significant overlap of personnel & duties between \"Information Systems\" and \"Biometrics\". Information Systems metrics are intended to include operation & daily use of Breeder Information Management Systems (BIMS). Biometrics applies to how the data is used to drive breeding strategy.  Assessor should note degree of overlap if it exists."}]
[]
[null,null,"What is the level of education and training of staff in \nINFORMATION SYSTEMS?",null,null,null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,null,null,"Q1: EDUCATION",null,"Q2: TRAINING",null,null,null,"Majority of breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in appropriate discipline; not aware of current \"best practices\" in field; no evidence of ability to understand or adopt/adapt best practices"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have some formal education in appropriate discipline; vague understanding of current best practices; most junior scientists lack advanced degrees in appropriate fields "]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have Ph.D. or equivalent experience (e.g., Master's Degree plus experience as assistant breeder in leading program) in appropriate discipline; aware of current best practices; evidence of ability to adopt/adapt best practices; most junior scientists have advanced degrees in appropriate fields"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs","All breeding & science leads have Ph.D. in appropriate discipline; understand & utilize current \"best practices\" to extent possible within program constraints; full understanding of program requirements & proven ability to adjust methods & approaches based on specific requirements; majority of junior scientists hold Ph.D. in appropriate fields & are qualified to advance to senior scientist level"]

{"sheet":"1.1J","index":15,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,8,0,10],[2,8,2,10],[4,2,6,6],[4,8,4,10],[7,10,8,10]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Biometrics & statistics are emphasized as a critical area of focus to support breeding selection decision making. This is viewed as an often missing capability to speed rate of genetic gain. Assessors should realize that application point during breeding process & intensity will vary by crop."]
[]
[null,null,"What is the level of education and training of staff in \nBIOMETRICS AND STATISTICS?",null,null,null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,null,null,"Q1: EDUCATION",null,"Q2: TRAINING",null,null,null,"Breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in statistics & have no ability to implement biometrics analysis for breeding decision support; no specific resources focused on biometrics"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs","Breeder or other scientists have received rudimentary education in statistics & understand simple statistics; lack expertise in experimental design or advanced data analysis; biometrics team (if team exists) & breeders are not conversant with modern experimental designs & mixed model applications for breeding decision support"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs","Breeders or other scientists have education in statistics & have been exposed to concepts of experimental design; biometrics team (if team exists) & breeders are conversant with modern experimental design for breeding but not mixed model applications for breeding decision support"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs","Dedicated leader with Ph.D. in biometrics & statistics with strong understanding of experimental design & statistics; can support breeders to use mixed model applications for breeding decision support"]

{"sheet":"1.1K","index":16,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,8,0,10],[2,8,2,10],[4,8,4,10],[7,10,8,10],[4,2,5,6],[6,4,6,6]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Use this rating system to assess the EDUCATION of the institution's scientific staff in disciplines identified in questions 1A to 1J. Add any disciplines appropriate for the institution under review. If a discipline is not represented & NOT CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"N/A\" box. If a discipline is not represented & CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"1\" rating. Provide clarifying comments in Assessor's Feedback columns as needed. Note that some institutions choose to outsource certain disciplines. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[]
[null,null,"What is the level of education and training of staff in other areas? ",null,null,null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,"(enter discipline here)",null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,null,null,"Q1: EDUCATION",null,"Q2: TRAINING",null,null,null,"Majority of breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in appropriate discipline; not aware of current \"best practices\" in field; no evidence of ability to understand or adopt/adapt best practices"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have some formal education in appropriate discipline; vague understanding of current best practices; most junior scientists lack advanced degrees in appropriate fields "]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have Ph.D. or equivalent experience (e.g., Master's Degree plus experience as assistant breeder in leading program) in appropriate discipline; aware of current best practices; evidence of ability to adopt/adapt best practices; most junior scientists have advanced degrees in appropriate fields"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs","All breeding & science leads have Ph.D. in appropriate discipline; understand & utilize current \"best practices\" to extent possible within program constraints; full understanding of program requirements & proven ability to adjust methods & approaches based on specific requirements; majority of junior scientists hold Ph.D. in appropriate fields & are qualified to advance to senior scientist level"]

{"sheet":"1.1L","index":17,"n_rows":12,"n_cols":11,"rows_kept":12,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[7,10,8,10],[0,8,0,10],[2,8,2,10],[4,2,5,6],[4,8,4,10],[6,4,6,6]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Use this rating system to assess the EDUCATION of the institution's scientific staff in disciplines identified in questions 1A to 1J. Add any disciplines appropriate for the institution under review. If a discipline is not represented & NOT CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"N/A\" box. If a discipline is not represented & CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"1\" rating. Provide clarifying comments in Assessor's Feedback columns as needed. Note that some institutions choose to outsource certain disciplines. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[]
[null,null,"What is the level of education and training of staff in other areas? ",null,null,null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,"(enter discipline here)",null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,null,null,"Q1: EDUCATION",null,"Q2: TRAINING",null,null,null,"Majority of breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in appropriate discipline; not aware of current \"best practices\" in field; no evidence of ability to understand or adopt/adapt best practices"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have some formal education in appropriate discipline; vague understanding of current best practices; most junior scientists lack advanced degrees in appropriate fields "]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs","Most breeding & science leads have Ph.D. or equivalent experience (e.g., Master's Degree plus experience as assistant breeder in leading program) in appropriate discipline; aware of current best practices; evidence of ability to adopt/adapt best practices; most junior scientists have advanced degrees in appropriate fields"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs","All breeding & science leads have Ph.D. in appropriate discipline; understand & utilize current \"best practices\" to extent possible within program constraints; full understanding of program requirements & proven ability to adjust methods & approaches based on specific requirements; majority of junior scientists hold Ph.D. in appropriate fields & are qualified to advance to senior scientist level"]

{"sheet":"1.3","index":18,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K33","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D33","v":"Do support staff have sufficient training?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G33","v":"No formal training in agronomy or related fields through an educational institution; all on-the-job training "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H33","v":"Some formal training in an appropriate field but no degree or certification; most training is on-the-job"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I33","v":"Vocational training degree in relevant field; training programs offered by institution or other organization to gain additional skills"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J33","v":"Most support staff have bachelor's degrees or equivalent; most utilize continuing education opportunities to develop additional job-related skills"}]

{"sheet":"1.4","index":19,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K34","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D34","v":"Do support staff have sufficient experience?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G34","v":"Support staff is labor & is not capable of unsupervised work"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H34","v":"Support staff primarily labor; some individuals with experience capable of performing low-level activities without supervision"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I34","v":"Experienced support staff, with proven ability to meet basic program needs without undue supervision"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J34","v":"Experienced support staff, with successful track record in supporting breeding & testing operations; capable of supervising labor & enabling breeders to focus on high-level activities"}]

{"sheet":"1.5","index":20,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8],[2,6,2,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K35","v":"This question is linked to Q1B and Q2B"}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D35","v":"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Genetics & Molecular Biology?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G35","v":"No capabilities"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H35","v":"Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I35","v":"Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J35","v":"Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"}]

{"sheet":"1.6","index":21,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K36","v":"Cell Biology/Tissue Culture includes laboratory-based capabilities related to double haploid/embryo rescue/vegetative propagation skills, etc. \nThis cell is linked to Q1C and Q2C"}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D36","v":"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Cell Biology/Tissue Culture?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G36","v":"No capabilities"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H36","v":"Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I36","v":"Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J36","v":"Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"}]

{"sheet":"1.7","index":22,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K37","v":"This question is linked to Q1D and Q2D"}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D37","v":"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Agronomy?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G37","v":"No capabilities"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H37","v":"Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I37","v":"Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J37","v":"Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"}]

{"sheet":"1.8","index":23,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K38","v":"This question is linked to Q1E and Q2E"}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D38","v":"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Plant Pathology?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G38","v":"No capabilities"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H38","v":"Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I38","v":"Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J38","v":"Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"}]

{"sheet":"1.9","index":24,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K39","v":"This question is linked to Q1F and Q2F"}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D39","v":"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Entomology?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G39","v":"No capabilities"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H39","v":"Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I39","v":"Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J39","v":"Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"}]

{"sheet":"1.10","index":25,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K40","v":"This question is linked to Q1G and Q2G"}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D40","v":"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Physiology?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G40","v":"No capabilities"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H40","v":"Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I40","v":"Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J40","v":"Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"}]

{"sheet":"1.11","index":26,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K41","v":"This question is linked to Q1H and Q2H"}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D41","v":"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Quality (e.g., Grain Quality, Nutrition, etc.)?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G41","v":"No capabilities"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H41","v":"Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I41","v":"Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J41","v":"Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"}]

{"sheet":"1.12","index":27,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K42","v":"Biometrics & statistics are emphasized as a critical area of focus to support breeding selection decision making. This is viewed as an often-missing capability to speed rate of genetic gain. Assessors should realize the application point during breeding process & intensity will vary by crop.\nThis question is linked to Q1J and Q2J"}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D42","v":"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in Biometrics & Statistics: Services for Decision Support?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G42","v":"No biometrics service"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H42","v":"Biometrics service provides basic & intermittent support on specific experiments but does not help optimize selection decision making & program error control"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I42","v":"Biometrics service routinely supports experimental design & analysis; drives implementation of error control measures to reduce noise in field trials"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J42","v":"Biometrics service routinely supports experimental design & analysis; drives implementation of error control measures to reduce noise in field trials; provides mixed model support for selection decisions"}]

{"sheet":"1.13","index":28,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K43","v":"This question is linked to Q1I and Q2I"}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D43","v":"What is the overall CAPABILITY of the Breeding Information Management Systems (BIMS)"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G43","v":"No capabilities"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H43","v":"Rudimentary capabilities; relies on spreadsheets for data storage & management; no support personnel assigned "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I43","v":"Data storage & management system is designed to support breeding & trial activities; breeders & scientists can enter & access data in an easily queried database; support personnel available but not assigned to support plant breeding"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J43","v":"Data management system is a centralized, integral component of operations; analytical tools & reporting capabilities facilitate data utilization; data mining & information extraction needs are supported; assigned support personnel available as needed or permanently"}]

{"sheet":"1.14","index":29,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K44","v":"This question is linked to Q1I and Q2I"}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D44","v":"What is the overall UTILIZATION of the Breeding Information Management Systems (BIMS)"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G44","v":"Little to no utilization by breeders & research managers"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H44","v":"Breeders & research managers use database on a selective basis for basic functions—primarily recording & some data retrieval"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I44","v":"Breeders & research managers routinely use database for a restricted set of functions that add value to the program; not used as a strategic tool"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J44","v":"Database used for planning, data analysis & advancement decisions; integral element in seed inventory & plot management activities; breeders, research managers & support staff routinely utilize full range of capabilities"}]

{"sheet":"1.15","index":30,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,6,4,8],[4,2,5,4]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K45","v":"Define an \"other\" criteria if a metric considered highly relevant is not present.\nThis question is linked to criteria specified in Q1K and Q2K"}]
[]
[null,null,"What is the overall capability of the Breeding Program in other areas?",null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,"please specify here",null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G45","v":"No capabilities"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H45","v":"Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I45","v":"Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J45","v":"Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"}]

{"sheet":"2.16","index":31,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K47","v":"Use this same question & modify criteria as needed for vegetatively propagated species. Note any changes made to the criteria."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D47","v":"What are the short term (1 to 5 years) seed production & storage capabilities?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G47","v":"No seed-drying or storage facilities; minimal seed processing & storage areas; high risk of seed degradation; program often loses germplasm & seed stocks due to inadequate storage"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H47","v":"Some seed-drying capabilities; seed processing areas are serviceable but not ideal: some potential for seed degradation; program occasionally loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I47","v":"Adequate seed-drying capabilities; designated seed processing facilities are good; some insect/rodent damage prevention systems in place but seed still vulnerable to degradation; program rarely loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J47","v":"Excellent seed-drying & short-term storage capabilities; insect & rodent controls in place; up-to-date seed processing equipment; short-term seed storage seen as priority with consequential high-grade seed produced; program never loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage"}]

{"sheet":"2.17","index":32,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K48","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D48","v":"What are the long term (> 5 years) seed storage capabilities?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G48","v":"No long-term seed storage capability"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H48","v":"Some long-term storage capability but inadequate infrastructure & power provision to sustain cold storage when needed; program occasionally loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I48","v":"Good facilities & infrastructure provide minimal requirement for long-term storage; power supplies to sustain cold storage when needed adequate in most cases but would be problematic if power outage lasted for a lengthy period; program rarely loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J48","v":"Long-term storage of high standard with very low/no risk of losses; backup power supplies in place to sustain cold storage when needed; program never loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage"}]

{"sheet":"2.18","index":33,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K49","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D49","v":"What greenhouse (glasshouse)  facilities are available?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G49","v":"Nonexistent to minimal facilities & poorly maintained"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H49","v":"Available facilities lack basic needs & poorly maintained"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I49","v":"Basic facilities in place & adequately maintained"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J49","v":"Well-designed, purpose-built facilities contribute to quality & efficiency of work"}]

{"sheet":"2.19","index":34,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K50","v":"If there are multiple laboratories with differing ratings, then individual scores should be noted for each facility. Insert additional lines within 19 to reflect this, i.e., 19a, 19b, etc. Refer back to the questionnaire answers for listings of relevant laboratories."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D50","v":"What laboratory facilities are available?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G50","v":"Nonexistent to minimal facilities & poorly maintained"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H50","v":"Available facilities lack basic needs & poorly maintained"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I50","v":"Basic facilities in place & adequately maintained"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J50","v":"Well-designed, purpose-built facilities contribute to quality & efficiency of work"}]

{"sheet":"2.20","index":35,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K51","v":"\"Appropriate\" will depend on methods available for given crop & ability to achieve desired results with vs. without mechanization. If crop has no potential for mechanization, score as N/A (likely quite rare)."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D51","v":"What level of MECHANIZATION is utilized?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G51","v":"Absence of available mechanization is negatively impacting program's rate of genetic gain"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H51","v":"Some operations mechanized, with limited impact on breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I51","v":"Mechanization used across breeding program but not optimized to impact scale & genetic gain of breeding program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J51","v":"Appropriate methods of mechanization used across entire breeding program with leading technology to achieve scale necessary to increase genetic gain (e.g., planting & harvesting; routine data collection automated)"}]

{"sheet":"2.21","index":36,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K52","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D52","v":"What level of MECHANIZATION & ENGINEERING SUPPORT exists?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G52","v":"No engineering or repair capacity to support mechanization"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H52","v":"Basic engineering & repair capacity to support mechanization; replacement parts often unavailable"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I52","v":"Engineering & repair staff available to support mechanization; procuring replacement parts can be an occasional issue"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J52","v":"Mechanization efforts supported with well-trained engineering & repair staff & needed equipment; replacement parts available in feasible time frame"}]

{"sheet":"2.22","index":37,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K53","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D53","v":"What level of INFRASTRUCTURE maintenance, repair & operability exist?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G53","v":"Facilities lack routine maintenance; equipment not serviced or maintained; power supply unreliable; many safety & security issues"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H53","v":"Facilities maintained to low standards; repairs carried out only after equipment failure; some power supply shortfalls; some safety & security issues"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I53","v":"Facilities maintained to a good standard with support for scheduled equipment maintenance; reliable power supply; few safety & security issues"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J53","v":"Excellent facility support with proactive equipment maintenance schedules; continuous power supply; no safety & security issues"}]

{"sheet":"3.23","index":38,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K55","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D55","v":"What crossing/hybridization success is achieved?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G55","v":"Regularly fails to deliver > 50% of crosses AND/OR 50% of seed per cross required by breeder"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H55","v":"Routinely delivers 50% to 80% of crosses AND 50% to 80% of seed per cross required by breeder"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I55","v":"Routinely delivers 80% to 95% of crosses AND 80% to 90% of seed per cross required by breeder"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J55","v":"Routinely delivers > 95% of crosses AND > 90% of seed per cross required by breeder"}]

{"sheet":"3.24","index":39,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K56","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D56","v":"What level of F1 > F2 seed production is achieved?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G56","v":"Regularly fails to produce > 50% of F2 seed required by breeder"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H56","v":"Routinely delivers 50% to 80% of F2 seed required by breeder"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I56","v":"Routinely delivers 80% to 95% of F2 seed required by breeder"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J56","v":"Routinely delivers > 95% of F2 seed required by breeder"}]

{"sheet":"3.25","index":40,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K57","v":"If there are distinct selection nursery activities (e.g., disease, phenotyping, flowering biology, etc.) with differing capabilities, then these should be listed separately with individual scores."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D57","v":"How successful are selection & advancement nurseries?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G57","v":"≥ 50% of selection nurseries & activities fail OR produce highly variable data (check entries fail to express desired trait); facilities do not control environment to ensure expression of target phenotype; inadequate agronomic skill levels & infrastructure to ensure crop establishment & prevent losses due to weed/pest infestations"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H57","v":"50% to 80% of selection nurseries & activities produce meaningful results (check entries express desired trait); poor agronomy, evidenced by establishment &/or weed/pest problems; minimal controlled-environment facilities (e.g., glasshouse) "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I57","v":"80% to 95% of selection nurseries & activities produce meaningful results (check entries express desired trait); glasshouse & other controlled-environment facilities available & generally useful; farming operations & agronomy adequate to meet basic program needs"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J57","v":"> 95% of selection nurseries & activities produce meaningful results (check entries express desired trait); glasshouse & other controlled-environment facilities well maintained & operated to provide meaningful phenotypic results; farming operation consistently good, with very few failures due to poor crop establishment or weed/pest infestations"}]

{"sheet":"3.26","index":41,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K58","v":"Assessor should note whether any deficiency in quality of trial data is a reflection of internal or external (contractors) issues. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D58","v":"How extensive is the yield trial program?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G58","v":"Single location; inappropriate experimental designs; highly variable data; frequent trial failures; > 20% missing data in completed trials "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H58","v":"Staged trial system, with at least 2 locations representative of target environments prior to national trials or release decision; experimental design not necessarily the most appropriate; 50% to 80% of trials harvested; ≥ 20% missing data in completed trials "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I58","v":"Staged trial system, with multiple locations representing important agro-ecological zones in target market(s); 80% to 95% of trials harvested; ≤ 10% missing data in completed trials"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J58","v":"Staged trial system, with multiple locations representing important agro-ecological zones in target market(s); > 95% of trials harvested; < 10% missing data in completed trials"}]

{"sheet":"3.27","index":42,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K59","v":"This metric is about whether the quality of trials is actually measured. If so, heritability (H) values are estimated & will likely need to be further refined as BPAT is applied to additional crops & situations. The purpose is to emphasize importance of stringent statistical analysis guiding decision making. Assessor's interpretation of this metric will likely need explicit explanation in the commentary & memo write-up."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D59","v":"What statistical analyses are performed on trial data?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G59","v":"Quality of trials is not monitored using statistical analysis; CV & trial repeatability (heritability) not monitored"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H59","v":"Quality of trials assessed using CV values primarily; single trial heritability (H) not monitored or averages less than 0.3 for yield"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I59","v":"Quality of trials assessed using primarily CV & H; 10% to 20% of trials rejected due to poor quality (H < 0.15)"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J59","v":"Breeders use highly sophisticated statistical design & analysis (in addition to CV & H); ≤ 10% of trials rejected due to poor quality (H < 0.15 or known errors)"}]

{"sheet":"3.28","index":43,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K60","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D60","v":"What is the use of repeatability (broad-sense H, heritability) estimates to monitor effectiveness of testing & screening & to allocate testing resources?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G60","v":"Breeders & managers unfamiliar with concept of repeatability or its use as a planning tool & weighting factor in selection decisions; no data management systems to allow variance component, BLUP (Best Linear Unbiased Prediction) or heritability (H) estimation; selection decisions made without statistical analysis "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H60","v":"Breeders understand repeatability & have access to database & biometrics support to provide estimates but are not routinely estimating H, using it as a weighting factor in selection decisions or using it to support resource allocation decisions in testing programs; selection decisions made on basis of limited statistical analysis; program has the capacity to generate repeatability estimates for each major testing stage & screening system but has not done so "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I60","v":"Breeders & managers have access to variance component & H estimates for resource allocation modeling but do not use BLUP or use H routinely as a weighting factor in selection decisions; well-maintained database allows routine combined analysis of trials over locations & years; repeatability estimates for each major testing stage & screening system can be presented on request"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J60","v":"Breeders receive variance component, H & BLUP estimates from each analysis, routinely using the information in trait weighting & testing resource allocation"}]

{"sheet":"3.29","index":44,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K61","v":"While there is no absolute number of crosses or lines needed for each situation, assessor should evaluate impact of program scale on genetic gain outcome. If program is demonstrating genetic gain, will rate of gain likely be increased with larger program? If program is not demonstrating genetic gain, is number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones the limiting factor? Assessor should note in commentary the current scale & any suggested benchmarks/goals."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D61","v":"What is the program size: number of crosses &/or line, family or clone development?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G61","v":"Number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones in development is inadequate to deliver genetic gain increase; program size is severely constrained by resources (budget, human or infrastructure) &/or breeders do not understand need for larger program & are not considering ways to increase program scale"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H61","v":"Number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones in development is only marginally adequate to deliver genetic gain increase; breeders may be somewhat aware of the problem but resource constraints (budget, human or infrastructure) prevent increasing scale"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I61","v":"Number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones in development is adequate to deliver some genetic gain increase but breeders recognize the program size may be constraining significant improvement in rate of genetic gain; breeders have optimized scale of program within limits allowed by resource constraints (budget, human or infrastructure)"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J61","v":"Number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones in development provides sufficient opportunity to realize genetic gain & rate of genetic gain; breeders have an established pipeline of genetic material & have optimized scale of program to achieve gain on primary traits of interest; program resources (budget, human or infrastructure) are in place to maintain program scale for foreseeable future"}]

{"sheet":"3.30","index":45,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K62","v":"While there is no absolute number of yield trials needed for each situation, assessor should evaluate impact of trial scale on genetic gain outcome. If program is demonstrating genetic gain, will rate of gain likely be increased with larger trial program? If program is not demonstrating genetic gain, is trial scale the limiting factor? Assessor should note in commentary the current scale & any suggested benchmarks/goals."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D62","v":"How effective is the program size: yield trials?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G62","v":"Scale of yield trial programs is inadequate to deliver genetic gain increase; program size is severely constrained by resources (budget, human, or infrastructure) &/or breeders do not understand need for larger program & are not considering ways to increase program scale"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H62","v":"Scale of yield trial program is only marginally adequate to deliver genetic gain increase; breeders may be somewhat aware of the problem but resource constraints (budget, human or infrastructure) prevent increasing scale"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I62","v":"Scale of yield trial program is adequate to deliver some genetic gain increase but breeders recognize that the program size may be constraining significant improvement in rate of genetic gain; breeders have optimized scale of program within limits allowed by resource constraints (budget, human or infrastructure)"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J62","v":"Scale of yield trial program provides sufficient opportunity to realize genetic gain & rate of genetic gain; breeder(s) have an established testing program that is optimized for collection of yield data; program resources (budget, human, or infrastructure) are in place to maintain program scale for foreseeable future"}]

{"sheet":"3.31","index":46,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K63","v":"Note whether these trials are run by extensions services or are part of the breeder trial network."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D63","v":"How extensive is the on-farm trial program?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G63","v":"No on-farm trial program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H63","v":"Limited number of on-farm trial locations under farmer management with inconsistent return of data on advanced selections"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I63","v":"High number of on-farm trials under farmer management but locations not optimized in terms of target location environments; inconsistent return of data on advanced selections"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J63","v":"Comprehensive on-farm trial locations under farmer management which represent target agroenvironments; data returned on advanced selections to breeders"}]

{"sheet":"3.32","index":47,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K64","v":"Assessor should note the level of importance for the specific crop under assessment."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D64","v":"What is the level of farmer participatory varietal selection?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G64","v":"Only agronomic data collected from on-farm trials; no farmer preference data collected"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H64","v":"Farmer preference data collected from on-farm trials but not used in selection decisions & not gender-disaggregated"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I64","v":"Farmer preference data collected from on-farm trials used in selection decisions but not gender-disaggregated"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J64","v":"Farmer preference data collected from on-farm trials used in selection decisions, gender-disaggregated"}]

{"sheet":"3.33","index":48,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K65","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D65","v":"What is the level of breeder &/or foundation seed production?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G65","v":"Land issues; lack of isolation; inadequate seed processing, storage & handling; regular failures to produce quantity & quality of seed required "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H65","v":"Generally adequate but lack required attention to agronomic detail; occasional failures to produce the quantity & quality of seed required"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I65","v":"Meets required standards in all years but only adequate; few major failures but little consistency or attention to \"best-practice\" details"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J65","v":"Land & farming operations adequate & high-quality; production of breeder & foundation seed are integral activities; QA/QC methods incorporated into process"}]

{"sheet":"3.34","index":49,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K66","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D66","v":"What is the level of second-season operations?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G66","v":"No second-season operations"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H66","v":"Second-season activities suffer from variable input & outputs; frequent & consequential failures; fails to deliver high value"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I66","v":"Second-season locations are available & provide appropriate selection environments (if used for selection) & support good quality seed production; produces valuable results in most years"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J66","v":"Second-season location(s) well suited for selection (if relevant) & high-quality seed production; facilities & farming operations well equipped & maintained; permanent staff experienced in plant breeding operations; routinely produces high-value results"}]

{"sheet":"3.35","index":50,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K67","v":" In this metric commercial seed is defined as \"meeting the needs of the commercial marketing team\" (this can be public or private), e.g., recognition of seed purity, seed health, multiplication rate capacity."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D67","v":"How adequate are the program's breeding objectives?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G67","v":"Breeding objectives do not reflect grower/market or commercial needs; no systematic review or modification takes place; objectives frequently reflect funding opportunities rather than crop strategic value"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H67","v":"Breeding objectives chosen with some understanding of grower/commercial/market needs; objectives overly influenced by short term funding opportunities rather than strategic needs"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I67","v":"Breeding objectives chosen with a good understanding of grower/commercial/market need; system in place for formal review of objectives but not optimized; objectives based on short term funding generally fit both with crop strategy & capabilities"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J67","v":"Breeding objectives chosen with clear understanding of grower, commercial needs & product attributes required to gain market acceptance; objectives systematically reviewed & modified to reflect changing market needs & new opportunities; project-based objectives well integrated with crop strategy & program capabilities"}]

{"sheet":"3.36","index":51,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K68","v":"Assessor should note if a low score is due to policy decisions by funders or due to institution's lack of strategic prioritization."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D68","v":"How relevant are the project-based objectives?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G68","v":"Project submissions are not strategically relevant; no internal grading of projects prior to submission to sponsors"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H68","v":"Project submissions are not strategically relevant; submissions usually driven by scientific interest rather than strategic impact"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I68","v":"Project submissions are strategically relevant; peer review system in place & able to rank projects in terms of strategic relevance & quality of science; little or no reference to strategic partners working on the same crop"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J68","v":"Project submissions are strategically relevant & meet exacting standards (in terms of science); independently assessed & compared with competing projects (both internal & external) to prioritize those with highest potential for impact"}]

{"sheet":"3.37","index":52,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K69","v":"For institutions focused on only one crop, the \"crop team meeting\" likely includes all the respective breeding programs (e.g., institution could be organized by geography or trait). For assessment visits where team is assessing specific crops within a broader institution, the \"crop team meeting\" would be for each individual crop being assessed."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D69","v":"How often are crop team meetings held?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G69","v":"No crop group meetings"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H69","v":"Crop group meets irregularly & on an informal basis with little reference to crop strategy; meetings cover day-to-day activities rather than strategic &/or staff needs; allied disciplines that support the crop may or may not participate & are not considered accountable to the process; no designated leader responsible & accountable for objectives related to plan"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I69","v":"Regular crop group meetings but mainly administrative in nature; address some strategic issues but lack detail & neglect engagement with remote staff; allied disciplines usually involved but only marginally committed to the process; designated leader somewhat responsible & accountable for objectives related to plan"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J69","v":"Crop group meets regularly (at least once per month) using technology when required (e.g., video conferencing); minutes taken & action plans reviewed at each meeting; allied disciplines actively participate & are considered accountable to the group; designated leader responsible & accountable for objectives related to plan "}]

{"sheet":"3.38","index":53,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K70","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D70","v":"How adequate is the delineation of target population of environments (TPE)?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G70","v":"TPE is determined by political boundaries; no effort made to detect, manage or exploit GxE within the TPE; no zonation of the TPE"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H70","v":"TPE is determined by political boundaries; no effort is made to monitor GxE; TPE is divided into zones based on agro ecological factors but validity of the zonation in terms of managing GxE has not been tested; trial results are reported by zones"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I70","v":"TPE is based on agro ecological knowledge confirmed by GxE & genetic correlation analysis; test results are reported by zones; GxE within & among zones is monitored; no effort is made to generate BLUPs appropriately weighting information across regions"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J70","v":"TPE is based on agro ecological knowledge confirmed by GxE & genetic correlation analysis; test results are reported by zones; GxE within & among zones is monitored; BLUPs appropriately weighting information across regions are generated"}]

{"sheet":"3.39","index":54,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K71","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D71","v":"How adequate is the program design?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G71","v":"Breeding approach not suitable for stated breeding objectives; cannot articulate rationale for program design & lacks competence to alter program"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H71","v":"Breeding approach based on methods in general use in crop; cannot articulate rationale for program design but can implement design changes provided by a third party"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I71","v":"Breeding approach reflects common practices in crop; can articulate rationale for program design but has limited ability to improve on program design without significant outside input"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J71","v":"Breeding approach optimized to meet stated breeding objectives; fully understands & can explain rationale for program design; engages in knowledgeable discussion on program design features with breeders & geneticists; can & will modify program design & processes to overcome barriers, utilize new technology & achieve revised objectives "}]

{"sheet":"3.40","index":55,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K72","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D72","v":"How adequate are the systems for rapid generation turnover?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G72","v":"No consideration or use of methods or approaches designed to achieve rapid generation advancement (e.g., Double Haploids, SSD, other)"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H72","v":"Attempts to use methods favorable to rapid generation advancement"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I72","v":"Has designed system for rapid generation advancement; used inconsistently & with less impact than it could be"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J72","v":"Well-designed & executed system(s) for rapid generation advancement; used routinely & to great success; continuous improvement is integral to processes"}]

{"sheet":"3.41","index":56,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K73","v":"Breeding cycle is defined as length of time from cross to utilization as parental line."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D73","v":"What importance do breeders give to breeding cycle time?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G73","v":"Breeders are unaware of the importance of minimizing breeding cycle time; yield testing delayed beyond justifiable limits; new lines tested for > 4 years before they are recycled as parents"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H73","v":"Breeders are aware of the importance of minimizing breeding cycle time but no early generation yield testing is carried out; new lines are tested for > 3 years before they are recycled as parents; total breeding cycle is 6 to 8 years"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I73","v":"Breeders are aware of the importance of minimizing breeding cycle time; early generation testing is used but new lines are tested for > 2 years before they are recycled as parents; total breeding cycle is 5 to 6 years"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J73","v":"Breeders are aware of the importance of minimizing breeding cycle time; early generation testing employed & new lines are tested for no more than 2 years before they are recycled as parents; total breeding cycle is < 5 years"}]

{"sheet":"3.42","index":57,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K74","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D74","v":"What levels of documentation & continuity are in place?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G74","v":"No documentation of protocols & SOPs"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H74","v":"Occasional documentation of protocols & SOPs but not complete or well executed"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I74","v":"Semi-consistent documentation of protocols & SOPs; helpful but not complete enough to ensure continuity of program or adequate training"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J74","v":"Annual or ongoing documentation of internal protocols & SOPs to ensure continuity of program & training of new staff"}]

{"sheet":"3.43","index":58,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K75","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D75","v":"What level of germplasm characterization details are recorded?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G75","v":"No characterization of germplasm resources"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H75","v":"Some varietal characteristics recorded but at a basic level; germplasm records not easily accessible to breeders"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I75","v":"Basic information about variety characteristics recorded & available for access"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J75","v":"Sophisticated information (genotypic & phenotypic) available about stored material in a format that breeders can access "}]

{"sheet":"3.44","index":59,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K76","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D76","v":"What is the level of utilization of genetic resources from germplasm collections?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G76","v":"No utilization; do not recognize any value in accessing germplasm collections"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H76","v":"Ad hoc use of germplasm; tends to be more speculative in nature & not focused on key traits"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I76","v":"Recognize value of germplasm but often lack precise information regarding trait identification & associated markers/QTLs; some use within the breeding program but lacks precision"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J76","v":"Breeders target traits from available germplasm collections to address breeding objectives; well-structured strategies for incorporation into adapted germplasm using a range of new technologies including Marker Assisted Selection (MAS)"}]

{"sheet":"3.45","index":60,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K77","v":"Note the reasons for the scores, i.e., lack of awareness/interest/organizational needs, etc."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D77","v":"What is the level of access to third-party germplasm?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G77","v":"No access to third-party germplasm; operate in a \"genetic vacuum\""}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H77","v":"Limited access to third-party germplasm; not fully engaged with providers & tend to obtain germplasm irregularly; not fully aware of regulatory, plant health or legal implications"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I77","v":"Good access to third-party germplasm but some limitations to full exploitation from regulatory, plant health or legal challenges"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J77","v":"Well connected with third-party genetic providers; all aspects of germplasm access covered, i.e., regulatory, plant health & legal conditions; robust documentation & paper trails in place"}]

{"sheet":"3.46","index":61,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K78","v":"This question is intended to evaluate an organization actively operating a trait discovery program. In many cases, this will not apply to a national program, & hence, it is shaded. However, some institutions may not cleanly fit this distinction. Use judgment in evaluating programs attempting to operate trait discovery programs to assess how effective/likely to be effective they are in the context of the institution's overall capability. There may be a need for recommendations about whether an institution is or is not well suited to trait discovery."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D78","v":"How adequate is the trait prioritization strategy in the breeding program?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G78","v":"No assessment mechanism "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H78","v":"Some informal, in-house assessment processes; individual programs make their own assessments rather than collaboratively"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I78","v":"In-house strategic planning in place, with defined priorities identified & implemented"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J78","v":"Sophisticated prioritization system based upon robust data & science reviews; independently assessed & verified by third parties"}]

{"sheet":"3.47","index":62,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K79","v":"Assessor should note source of molecular markers & confirm application is for breeding rather than purely research & development purposes."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D79","v":"What are the level of trait mapping (quantitative trait loci discovery) capabilities?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G79","v":"No capability"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H79","v":"Limited capacity (infrastructure, intellectual capacity or both) for meaningful outcomes; primarily driven by individual interests or funding sources"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I79","v":"Capabilities to map traits extant but not utilized strategically; could become a valuable contributor to breeding programs with appropriate guidance"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J79","v":"Intellectual, technical & infrastructure resources present & utilized for trait discovery; institution & scientists demonstrate ability to conduct trait discovery activities"}]

{"sheet":"3.48","index":63,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K80","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D80","v":"How adequate is the pre-breeder activity deployment & coordination in the breeding program?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G80","v":"No pre-breeding activity for traits"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H80","v":"Lack of strategic coordination between breeding & trait mapping teams; no consideration of marker/QTL impact in design of marker-assisted breeding activities; no overall trait team lead"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I80","v":"Trait & breeding teams coordinated on paper but not in practice; lack of coordination reduces utilization of markers in breeding programs; trait leads are clearly identified but do not have a fully articulated trait prioritization, advancement & delivery plan"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J80","v":"Well-coordinated trait & breeding teams have effective working relationships; factors affecting use of markers (e.g., cost or technical limitations) well understood & incorporated into breeding process; routine interaction & evaluation of results leads to effective use of markers in breeding program; trait team leads are responsible & accountable for progress; trait team has a clearly articulated trait prioritization, advancement & delivery plan"}]

{"sheet":"3.49","index":64,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K81","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D81","v":"How adequate is the validation of expression of introgressed QTLs & efficacy relative to traditional approaches in the breeding program?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G81","v":"No validation systems in place"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H81","v":"Some ad hoc validation takes place but not formalized & not applicable to all traits"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I81","v":"Good validation systems in place but not formalized; some traits not fully verified"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J81","v":"Effective follow-up & feedback mechanisms in place; sophisticated analysis & verification processes are standard "}]

{"sheet":"3.50","index":65,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K82","v":"Assess how EFFECTIVELY QTLs are being deployed. For institutions developing own QTLs, consider Items 46 to 49 when evaluating effectiveness of program & highlight areas for improvement if deployment results are lacking. The question also applies to institutions deploying QTLs developed by third parties."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D82","v":"How effective is the QTL deployment within mainstream breeding programs?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G82","v":"Markers not used"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H82","v":"Some use of markers, primarily for Marker-Assisted Backcross (MAB); limited by budget &/or expertise"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I82","v":"Markers primarily used for MAB; minimal use for forward selection (MAS); institution sees value in technology but may not be considering opportunities to further enhance program outcomes"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J82","v":"Mix of MAB & MAS that complement the balance of breeding activities; institution clearly sees value & is working to increase impact of technology"}]

{"sheet":"3.51","index":66,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K83","v":"Assessor should use N/A rating if GM trait deployment is not available or allowed for given situation. Describe whether constraint is regulatory, technical or FTO. \"1\" rating indicates GM trait deployment should be considered but is not currently."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D83","v":"How effective is GM trait deployment in the program?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G83","v":"Does not exist"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H83","v":"Minimal, poorly targeted effort; not integrated into product pipeline; no stewardship program "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I83","v":"Program targets generally valuable; poor integration into product pipeline; inadequate stewardship program "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J83","v":"Well designed & executed in all phases; targeted to high-impact traits; well integrated with product development pipeline; excellent stewardship program in place & functioning"}]

{"sheet":"4.52","index":67,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K85","v":"Decision to release products for commercial use may be under control of a national program rather than the institution. If that is the case, disregard the commercial aspect. Judgment is needed in determining applicability of participatory trial use in advancement decisions; Participatory trials are highly desired, but they must produce meaningful & objective data."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D85","v":"How effective are product advancement decisions (up to & including commercial release)?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G85","v":"Advancement criteria ill-defined or based upon poor or limited datasets; no competitive cultivars included in trials; no system to ensure rapid progress through testing program; no grower participatory trials considered or used"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H85","v":"Varieties advanced upon a system encompassing a range of datasets but not comprehensive; competitive cultivars included don't provide meaningful comparisons; minimal consideration of approaches to speed product advancement; grower participatory trials seldom considered or implemented"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I85","v":"Varieties advanced based upon a strong dataset & verifiable systems, but year-to-year variation limits decision quality; best competitive cultivars included; advancement program not optimized for rapid progress; grower participatory trials may be used inconsistently"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J85","v":"Excellent advancement system with well-defined targets & verification of datasets in place; best competitive cultivars provide meaningful comparisons in target environment & are integral component of product advancement; testing system & strategy optimized to move cultivars from first yield trial through variety release; grower participatory trials included as appropriate"}]

{"sheet":"4.53","index":68,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K86","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D86","v":"What level of engagement exists with external bodies to support release strategies?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G86","v":"No engagement"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H86","v":"No institutionally defined processes for engagement with external bodies (e.g., regulatory bodies, testing authorities, growers, end users, agronomic advisers, etc.); breeders & other research staff seek input on ad hoc basis"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I86","v":"Institution acknowledges need for engaging external parties (e.g., regulatory bodies, testing authorities, growers, end users, agronomic advisers, etc.) in release decisions but has no formal system in place; breeders seek input from external bodies but process is ad hoc & inconsistent"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J86","v":"Formal release process in place which requires participation by external bodies (e.g., regulatory bodies, testing authorities, growers, end users, agronomic advisers, etc.); external stakeholders actively engaged in process; release decision reflects input from external stakeholders"}]

{"sheet":"4.54","index":69,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K87","v":"Commercialization team may or may not be within target institution. Assessor should consider interaction with external commercial bodies also, as appropriate & realistic for the market situation. The intent is that the transition should be proactively managed regardless of who/where it occurs."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D87","v":"How effective is the transition from research (breeding) pipeline to commercial development?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G87","v":"No interface systems "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H87","v":"Limited interactions between breeders & individuals or entities responsible for commercialization; not a priority for breeding institution; often seen as separate disciplines"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I87","v":"Institution acknowledges need for connecting breeding pipeline to commercial development but has no formal system in place; breeders &/or commercial teams proactively communicate to enhance uptake but process is ad hoc & inconsistent"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J87","v":"Institution committed to moving products from breeding pipeline to commercial development; interactions between breeding staff & commercialization team are defined & occur on regular basis; breeding staff proactively engages with & is available to commercialization team to provide support "}]

{"sheet":"4.55","index":70,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K88","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D88","v":"What is the system for assessing post-release product performance?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G88","v":"No system in place to monitor performance of released products in commercial production"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H88","v":"Ad hoc monitoring of released products in commercial production; information not obviously incorporated into breeding plans or activities"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I88","v":"System in place to monitor product performance; inconsistent data collection &/or inconsistent use of performance data to inform breeding strategy or actions"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J88","v":"System in place to monitor product performance; data collected & utilized to inform breeding strategies & actions regularly & consistently"}]

{"sheet":"4.56","index":71,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K89","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D89","v":"How well is breeder seed production coordinated with commercial seed producers?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G89","v":"No understanding or alignment with commercial seed producer needs"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H89","v":"Inconsistent alignment with commercial seed producer needs; no process for determining breeder seed requirements"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I89","v":"Some alignment between breeder seed production & commercial seed producer needs; process for determining breeder seed requirements exists but is not formalized"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J89","v":"Breeder seed production fully aligned with commercial seed producer needs; a formal process exists for generating breeder seed requirements"}]

{"sheet":"4.57","index":72,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K90","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D90","v":"How effective are breeder seed production & processing mechanics?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G90","v":"Low priority or little understanding of genetic purity &/or high-quality seed production, resulting in poor purity record"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H90","v":"Understand the need for genetic purity & attempt to produce high-quality breeder seed; results not always acceptable"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I90","v":"Understand the need for genetic purity & have ability to produce high-quality breeder seed but do not always achieve intended results"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J90","v":"Field operations are organized & conducted to ensure genetic purity & high-quality breeder seed; output regularly meets purity & quality criteria"}]

{"sheet":"4.58","index":73,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K91","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D91","v":"How adequate are the systems to enhance multiplication rates & accelerate distribution?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G91","v":"No systems in place"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H91","v":"Limited capability & recognition of opportunities; some specific increases taken up"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I91","v":"Some advanced systems in place but not standardized for all new varieties"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J91","v":"Aware of opportunities & advanced systems in place enhancing speed of variety development (e.g., low seed rate, high multiplication systems, mechanization opportunities, seed processing machinery)"}]

{"sheet":"4.59","index":74,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K92","v":"Note that quality could include viability, genetic purity, physical purity, weed-free, & disease-free. Assessor should note importance of these to crop being examined & relevance to seed exchange/shipments to third parties."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D92","v":"What levels of quality assurance & quality control procedures exist?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G92","v":"Limited QA/QC abilities & not recognized as a problem"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H92","v":"Some QA/QC systems in place but generally of low quality; little to no effort to confirm seed purity"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I92","v":"Recognized as key activity with some processes in place but not formalized; no formal feedback system in place (e.g., grow-out or molecular fingerprinting) to ensure breeders routinely confirm genetic purity"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J92","v":"Due diligence exemplary with good results & rapid multiplication normalized; sophisticated feedback system in place (e.g., grow-out or molecular fingerprinting) to ensure breeders routinely confirm genetic purity"}]

{"sheet":"4.60","index":75,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K93","v":"Only relevant if GM crops are being commercialized."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D93","v":"What systems are in place for GM product stewardship requirements?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G93","v":"No systems in place"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H93","v":"Aware of stewardship requirements but low level of activity"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I93","v":"Good understanding of requirements but systems not fully optimized & vulnerable to errors"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J93","v":"Good, well-defined systems in place with excellent due diligence "}]

{"sheet":"5.61","index":76,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K95","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D95","v":"What level of validation & documentation exist in agronomic practices for optimum product performance ?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G95","v":"No extension service engagement"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H95","v":"Some development work but limited benefits to growers"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I95","v":"Basic agronomy & support systems but generic in nature"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J95","v":"Excellent link between genetics & extension support; recognizes value of this activity & that it enhances new variety uptake"}]

{"sheet":"5.62","index":77,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K96","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D96","v":"How well is the field agronomist familiar with product, prior to commercial availability?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G96","v":"No knowledge of varieties until release"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H96","v":"Some limited awareness but tends to be of a general nature"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I96","v":"Recognizes some traits & characters of new varieties & enhances variety uptake but lacks consistency"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J96","v":"Good understanding of variety strengths & weaknesses & provides good solutions; agronomic support enhances variety uptake"}]

{"sheet":"6.63","index":78,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K98","v":"This metric is intended to capture whether the institution devotes resources & attention to intentionally tracking impact. An institution may score high on having systems in place to measure but low on following metrics of actual impact."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D98","v":"What processes are in place to measure impact on genetic gain?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G98","v":"No process to measure impact on genetic gain or variety uptake in market"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H98","v":"Very limited process to measure impact on genetic gain &/or market success; not effective enough to contribute to breeding objectives or strategic planning "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I98","v":"Ad hoc measurement of impact on genetic gain &/or market success; utilizes some data sources but could be improved; information not necessarily integrated to impact future breeding objectives & strategic planning"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J98","v":"Intentional, regular & informative process in place to measure impact on genetic gain & market success; utilizes effective combination of internal & external data sources (e.g., government statistics, internal tracking, specific studies); information used to contribute to breeding objectives & strategic planning"}]

{"sheet":"6.64","index":79,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K99","v":"Attention should be given to obtaining the data required to assess these factors in order to improve benchmark values over time."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D99","v":"What is the level of performance for hybrids and advanced lines?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G99","v":"< 10% of advanced lines/hybrids significantly outperform best competitive cultivars"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H99","v":"10% to 25% of advanced lines/hybrids significantly outperform best competitive cultivars"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I99","v":"25% to 50% of advanced lines/hybrids significantly outperform best competitive cultivars"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J99","v":"> 50% of advanced lines/hybrids significantly outperform best competitive cultivars"}]

{"sheet":"6.65","index":80,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K100","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D100","v":"What level of performance does the best candidate cultivar have in the program?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G100","v":"Best candidate no different than best competitive cultivar for any trait"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H100","v":"Best candidate 2% to 3% better than best competitive cultivar for highest value traits; may be significantly worse than best competitive cultivars for some secondary traits "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I100","v":"Best candidate 3% to 5% better than best competitive cultivar for highest value traits; no significant weaknesses in secondary traits"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J100","v":"Best candidate > 5% better than best competitive cultivar for highest value traits; ≥ to best competitive cultivar for secondary traits"}]

{"sheet":"6.66","index":81,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K101","v":"Market share & variety lifespan are good indicators of program effectiveness. However, the effectiveness of the seed value chain can have a major impact on these measures. Although the assessment focuses on breeding programs, explore the value chain question if market share &/or variety lifespan ratings are very low."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D101","v":"What evidence do the best candidates show of marketability?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G101","v":"Best candidates routinely demonstrate flaws that would be unacceptable in the market; no feedback is obtained by the program from growers & end users"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H101","v":"Best candidates usually have one or more flaws affecting marketability; institution shows no evidence of addressing flaws in a systematic way; feedback from growers & end users, including women, is obtained informally"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I101","v":"Best candidates meet or exceed market specifications for MOST attributes affecting marketability; may have a small number of flaws impacting marketability; formal quality & marketability assessment systems involving end users are in place, but are not disaggregated by gender or wealth status"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J101","v":"Best candidates meet or exceed market specifications for all attributes affecting marketability; formal quality & marketability assessment systems involving end users are in place, generating data that are disaggregated by gender or wealth status"}]

{"sheet":"6.67","index":82,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K102","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D102","v":"What is the current market share of program varieties released in last 10 years?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G102","v":"Never planted on more than 2% of hectarage"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H102","v":"Planted on 2% to 10% of hectarage"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I102","v":"Planted on 10% to 25% of hectarage "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J102","v":"Planted on > 25% of hectarage"}]

{"sheet":"6.68","index":83,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K103","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D103","v":"What percentage of released varieties originate from own breeding program?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G103","v":"< 10%"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H103","v":"10% to 60%"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I103","v":"60% to 80%"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J103","v":"> 80%"}]

{"sheet":"6.69","index":84,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K104","v":"This is not expected to be a factor for most national programs, but is likely to be very important for CGIAR centers."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D104","v":"What is the current market share of varieties & germplasm from own program in other territories released in last 10 years (specify)?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G104","v":"< 10%"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H104","v":"10% to 25%"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I104","v":"25% to 50%"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J104","v":"> 50%"}]

{"sheet":"7.70","index":85,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K106","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D106","v":"What is the organization's strategic vision?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G106","v":"Organization lacks direction & does not have clear 3- to 5-year priorities"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H106","v":"Organization has wide program focus which limits ability to identify priorities & prioritize resources"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I106","v":"Organization has clearly articulated strategic vision spanning 3 to 5 years"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J106","v":"In addition to (3), organization has a vision for how its strategy will evolve in the long term (> 10 years)"}]

{"sheet":"7.71","index":86,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K107","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D107","v":"What is the level of coordination for product profile strategy?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G107","v":"No integrated planning process in place; breeders independently prioritize opportunities"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H107","v":"Internal strategic discussions occur beyond breeding team but often without market research or quantitative methodology"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I107","v":"Strategic plan in place & refreshed at least every 3 to 5 years through a collaborative process with breeders & market researchers; lacks product profile strategies "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J107","v":"All of (3), plus strategic plan establishes product profile strategies with vision of how products will be optimized & disseminated downstream"}]

{"sheet":"7.72","index":87,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K108","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D108","v":"What is the level of focus on market research?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G108","v":"Organization lacks market research function"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H108","v":"Organization has market research focus, but focus limited to 1 or 2 elements of market research (e.g., end consumer or competitive landscape)"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I108","v":"Organization has comprehensive market research focus on the end consumer, competitive landscape & value chain; focus is short-term (3 to 5 years); no gender-disaggregated data collected"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J108","v":"All of (3), plus the team identifies needs & opportunities in the long term (10+ years) as well as the short-term; gender-disaggregated data collected "}]

{"sheet":"7.73","index":88,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K109","v":"GTM strategy certainly includes feedback from farmers but could also include downstream value chain participants such as seed sellers, buyers & consumers."}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D109","v":"How effective is the program's \"Go to Market\" (GTM) Strategy?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G109","v":"Little focus on downstream/GTM strategy & uptake; varieties simply released freely on the open market"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H109","v":"Institution has informal mechanisms (e.g., conversations throughout downstream value chain) to encourage uptake post-variety release"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I109","v":"Institution has active, formal mechanism to include interactions with downstream value chain both pre- & post-variety release; access plan for women farmers not explicitly developed"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J109","v":"Institution has clear GTM strategies for each product (e.g., key interaction points with market, strategy to proactively influence value chain & farmer adoption, view of value chain partners, whether & how to create IP, etc.); access plan for women farmers explicitly developed"}]

{"sheet":"7.74","index":89,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K110","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D110","v":"What is the level of strategic vision & management alignment?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G110","v":"Little shared understanding through organization of overall strategy"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H110","v":"Breeders broadly aligned on organization strategic vision but ambiguous about how day-to-day roles fit into strategy "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I110","v":"Breeders & supporting scientists broadly aligned on organization strategic vision & have a sense of how day-to-day roles fit into strategy "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J110","v":"All of (3), plus breeders & supporting scientists have an understanding of how their roles will evolve in the short- & medium-term (3 to 5 years), given the current strategy"}]

{"sheet":"7.75","index":90,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K111","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D111","v":"What is the attitude towards change?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G111","v":"Conservative approach, unwilling to accept change at any level"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H111","v":"Willing to look at changes in strategy, logistics & technology but unlikely to want rapid deployment; general reluctance to change"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I111","v":"Changes in strategy, logistics & technology welcomed but lack resource or strategic awareness to implement at all levels"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J111","v":"Dynamic approach with change in strategies, logistics & novel technologies readily discussed & implemented when appropriate; positive outlook on future prospects"}]

{"sheet":"7.76","index":91,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K112","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D112","v":"What levels of collaboration exist with international breeding institutions?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G112","v":"Organization is indirectly linked with international partners & there is limited collaboration"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H112","v":"Organization loosely linked with international partners & breeders have relationships simply on an ad hoc basis"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I112","v":"Organization linked with international partners & breeders unevenly have direct ties (e.g., through trainings, regular conversations) with respective programs"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J112","v":"Organization closely linked with international partners & all breeders have direct ties (e.g., through trainings, regular conversations) with respective programs"}]

{"sheet":"7.77","index":92,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K113","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D113","v":"What levels of collaboration exist with national breeding partners?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G113","v":"Organization is indirectly linked with national partners; there is limited collaboration"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H113","v":"Organization loosely linked with national partners; breeders have relationships on ad hoc basis"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I113","v":"Organization linked with national partners; breeders unevenly have direct ties with respective programs (e.g., through trainings, regular conversations, etc.) "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J113","v":"Organization closely linked with national partners; all breeders have direct ties with respective programs (e.g., through trainings, regular conversations, etc.) "}]

{"sheet":"7.78","index":93,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K114","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D114","v":"How effective is the collaboration across programs & divisions?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G114","v":"Very little collaboration across divisions or between programs (e.g., pathology & breeding)"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H114","v":"Organization does not have formal mechanism to encourage collaboration across programs or divisions; collaboration occurs on an ad hoc basis; there are no service agreements or charge-back mechanisms for services"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I114","v":"Organization has varying levels of formal mechanisms to encourage collaboration across programs or divisions (e.g., process between breeders & labs to define materials needed & by when); has some service level agreement or charge-back mechanisms"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J114","v":"Service level agreements or defined milestones encourage collaboration across divisions or between programs (e.g., included as part of review process, milestones) "}]

{"sheet":"7.79","index":94,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K115","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D115","v":"What processes of succession planning are in place?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G115","v":"Breeding programs have no succession plan strategy"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H115","v":"Succession plans are made on an ad hoc basis & when needs arise"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I115","v":"Succession planning is recognized as an important aspect of successful breeding programs, but no formal strategies are in place"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J115","v":"Succession planning is part of the institution's strategic plan; detailed strategies are in place for the next 5 years, with clear career milestones for key staff "}]

{"sheet":"8.80","index":95,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K117","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D117","v":"What level of involvement do project leaders have in budget management?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G117","v":"Project leaders have no or very limited input into budget development &  control over expenditure"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H117","v":"Project leaders nominally responsible for budget development & management but are routinely overridden"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I117","v":"Project leaders nominally responsible for budget development & management but are sometimes overridden"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J117","v":"Project leaders have major impact on budget development & are responsible for budget management"}]

{"sheet":"8.81","index":96,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K118","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D118","v":"How effective is the capital equipment replacement strategy?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G118","v":"No capital equipment replacement policy"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H118","v":"Some capital finance plans made (& funds requested) but replacement on an ad hoc basis"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I118","v":"Funding & mechanism to maintain equipment in place but not aligned with crop strategies or essential needs"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J118","v":"Robust capital equipment replacement policy based upon crop strategic needs; recognizes new technology opportunities & initiates plans to engage with these"}]

{"sheet":"8.82","index":97,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K119","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D119","v":"What tracking processes exist for activity-based breeding costs?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G119","v":"No visibility to cost of breeding program components"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H119","v":"Cost components tracked on ad hoc basis"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I119","v":"Most component costs regularly tracked but not driving decisions"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J119","v":"Clear visibility to cost of breeding program components & regularly considers how to optimize (e.g., insource vs. outsource)"}]

{"sheet":"8.83","index":98,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K120","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D120","v":"At what level are cost metrics used to drive efficiencies?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G120","v":"Little use of financial metrics across organization; no benchmarking"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H120","v":"Financial metrics utilized on an ad hoc basis or inefficiently across the organization; no regular benchmarking "}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I120","v":"Financial metrics utilized across the organization but not systematically; benchmarking occurs but not against most relevant examples"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J120","v":"Financial metrics tracked on an organizational level; active efforts in continuous improvement through benchmarking"}]

{"sheet":"8.84","index":99,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K121","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D121","v":"What levels of understanding of financial planning exist?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G121","v":"Breeders & other project leaders receive no financial training"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H121","v":0}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I121","v":"Breeders & other project leaders are included in formal budgeting &/or accounting financial training"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J121","v":"All of (3), plus ongoing resources if breeders & project leaders have budgeting &/or finance questions"}]

{"sheet":"9.85","index":100,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K123","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D123","v":"What performance evaluation processes are in place?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G123","v":"Performance evaluations vary across the organization; mainly used to decide job promotion"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H123","v":"Annual performance evaluation process carried out consistently in the breeding division customized to role (e.g., breeder vs. post-doc); outlines personal development plan; no explicit evaluation of contribution to program goals"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I123","v":"All of (2), plus process parallels the same one used as basis for job promotion; differentiates staff into distinct rating groups that provide scientists with understanding of how they track against short- & long-term expectations; contribution to program goals is taken into account in individual evaluation"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J123","v":"All of (3), plus process actively seeks collaborative feedback from others in the organization beyond to supervisor; evaluation process is fully & explicitly aligned with program goals"}]

{"sheet":"9.86","index":101,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K124","v":"Assessor should particularly note inclusion of allied disciplines. Are they held accountable for participation in crop group planning, as well as meeting service level requirements? Are they motivated to consider themselves part of crop team rather than separate entity?"}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D124","v":"How are individual & team metrics incorporated into evaluation process?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G124","v":"Few, if any, best practice metrics utilized in evaluation process"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H124","v":"Use of metrics applied unevenly across organization & focus largely on traditional academic contribution criteria (e.g., published papers); little to no emphasis on allied disciplines' participation in breeding team's outcomes & process"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I124","v":"Clearly defined metrics for breeders covering academic contribution, research practices/outcomes & administration; less clear metrics for allied disciplines to contribute to breeding team's outcomes & process"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J124","v":"All of (3), plus clear metrics for supporting scientists linked to their support of breeding process (e.g., for marker lab, tracking of delivery time to return material, number of complaints); explicit expectations for allied disciplines to contribute to breeding team's outcomes & process"}]

{"sheet":"9.87","index":102,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K125","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D125","v":"Do targets correspond to performance metrics?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G125","v":"Limited targets associated with metrics in the performance evaluation process"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H125","v":0}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I125","v":"Targets correspond to metrics used in individual performance reviews (e.g., number of publications in given period)"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J125","v":"All of (3), plus clear team targets (e.g., reduced lab delivery time to x) displayed prominently in office "}]

{"sheet":"9.88","index":103,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K126","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D126","v":"What performance incentives are in place?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G126","v":"Few incentives beyond promotions; no clear linkage to performance ratings"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H126","v":"Various incentives (e.g., financial, recognition such as plaques, mentions in publications) beyond promotion"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I126","v":"Incentives are clearly linked to performance ratings & are transparently conveyed (e.g., clearly defined career trajectory based on performance level)"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J126","v":"All of (3), plus team incentives for meeting published team goals, including explicit inclusion of allied disciplines that support given breeding team"}]

{"sheet":"9.89","index":104,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K127","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D127","v":"What levels of training are in place?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G127","v":"Very few formal trainings across the organization"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H127","v":"Various levels of ongoing technical training (e.g., spending weeks/months at another institution learning a new topic)"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I127","v":"All of (2), plus formal onboarding program for new hires to familiarize them with organization structure, strategy & logistical support"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J127","v":"All of (3), plus ongoing soft-skill trainings, such as project management, budgeting & accounting "}]

{"sheet":"9.90","index":105,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K128","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D128","v":"How are metrics used in the recruiting process?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G128","v":"No metrics identified"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H128","v":"Metrics defined, but not regularly used by staff"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I128","v":"Metrics defined & tracked as part of annual review process for recruiting"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J128","v":"All of (3), plus metrics referred to throughout year (e.g., quarterly)"}]

{"sheet":"9.91","index":106,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K129","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D129","v":"What are the sourcing processes in recruiting?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G129","v":"Organization targets specific talent sources primarily based on volume & individual biases (e.g., alumni relationships)"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H129","v":"Organization targets sources with a high number of candidates who meet externally validated or generic selection criteria (e.g., papers published, course lists)"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I129","v":"Organization tiers & prioritizes sources known to have high-quality recruits (based on data analysis on internal performance of recruits)"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J129","v":"All of (3), plus organization pinpoints sources that help meet organization’s identified diversity & other community needs"}]

{"sheet":"9.92","index":107,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K130","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D130","v":"What is the selection process in recruiting?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G130","v":"Criteria not well defined or consistent; selection over-reliant on interviewer/ manager judgment"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H130","v":"Criteria provide consistent guidance to interviewers to ensure new hires have skills required for the job"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I130","v":"Criteria screen for job-specific skills, attitudes & behaviors most desirable in employees; criteria are customized for pivotal roles"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J130","v":"All of (3), plus innovative interviewing techniques to surface the attitudes & behaviors of candidates (e.g., full-day technical sessions with scientists)"}]

{"sheet":"9.93","index":108,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":11,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,6,0,8],[2,6,2,8],[4,2,6,4],[4,6,4,8]]}
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"NOTES TO ASSESSOR"]
[]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!K131","v":0}]
[]
[null,null,{"$f":"template_Assessment!D131","v":"What is the candidate experience during recruiting?"},null,null,null,"SCORING CRITERIA"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"N/A","NOT Applicable"]
[null,null,null,null,null,null,"U/A","UNABLE to ASSESS"]
[null,null,"Assessor's Rating Score  select score from drop down box *",null,null,null,1,"Not Adequate for Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!G131","v":"Communications with candidates are inconsistent, infrequent & impersonal"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing",null,null,null,2,"Meets Some Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!H131","v":"Recruiting process is HR-led, but research program leads make the final hiring decisions"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)",null,null,null,3,"Meets Basic Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!I131","v":"Research programs are involved in every aspect of the process (e.g., sourcing, recruiting & interviewing); candidates are cultivated during all aspects of recruiting"}]
[null,null,"Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement",null,null,null,4,"Fully Meets Program Needs",{"$f":"template_Assessment!J131","v":"All of (3), plus the entire organization is involved & aligned on the importance of recruiting; performance evaluations recognize recruiting participation"}]

{"sheet":"template_Assessment (4)","index":109,"n_rows":130,"n_cols":15,"rows_kept":130,"cut":false,"hidden":true,"merged":[[81,1,81,10],[6,0,42,0],[6,1,29,1],[30,1,31,1],[32,1,42,1],[43,1,43,10],[44,0,50,0],[44,1,47,1],[48,1,49,1],[51,1,51,10],[52,0,80,0],[52,1,63,1],[64,1,71,1],[72,1,80,1],[82,0,90,0],[82,1,85,1],[86,1,90,1],[91,1,91,10],[92,0,93,0],[92,1,93,1],[94,1,94,10],[95,0,101,0],[96,1,97,1],[96,10,97,10],[98,1,101,1],[98,10,100,10],[129,1,129,10],[102,1,102,10],[103,0,112,0],[103,1,106,1],[107,1,112,1],[113,1,113,10],[114,0,118,0],[114,1,118,1],[118,6,118,7],[119,1,119,10],[120,0,128,0],[120,1,122,1],[122,6,122,7],[125,1,128,1]]}
["Plant breeding program assessment tool",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Question strictly for research & breeding institution operating both genetic analysis & cultivar development pipelines"]
["3 June 2014",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,"Question strictly for cultivar breeding institution (whose breeding pipeline largely deploys genetic analysis that was developed elsewhere)"]
[]
[]
[]
["Component","Factor","#","Item","Item N/A to Pro-gram","Unable to Assess","(1) Not Adequate for Program Needs","(2) Meets Some Program Needs","(3) Meets Basic Program Needs","(4) Fully Meets Program Needs","Notes to Assessor","Assessor's Rating Score","Assessor's Feedback: Organization's Current Standing","Assessor's Feedback:  Organization's Ongoing Initiatives (if applicable)","Assessor's Feedback: Organization Opportunities for Improvement"]
["Breeding Organization","Plant Breeding & Scientific Personnel",1,"Breeding & Science Leads: Education",null,null,"Majority of breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in appropriate discipline; not aware of current \"best practices\" in field; no evidence of ability to understand or adopt/adapt best practices","Most breeding & science leads have some formal education in appropriate discipline; vague understanding of current best practices; most junior scientists lack advanced degrees in appropriate fields ","Most breeding & science leads have Ph.D. or equivalent experience (e.g., Master's Degree plus experience as assistant breeder in leading program) in appropriate discipline; aware of current best practices; evidence of ability to adopt/adapt best practices; most junior scientists have advanced degrees in appropriate fields","All breeding & science leads have Ph.D. in appropriate discipline; understand & utilize current \"best practices\" to extent possible within program constraints; full understanding of program requirements & proven ability to adjust methods & approaches based on specific requirements; majority of junior scientists hold Ph.D. in appropriate fields & are qualified to advance to senior scientist level","Use this rating system to assess the EDUCATION of the institution's scientific staff in disciplines identified in rows 1A to 1J. Add any disciplines appropriate for the institution under review. If a discipline is not represented & NOT CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"N/A\" box. If a discipline is not represented & CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"1\" rating. Provide clarifying comments in Assessor's Feedback columns as needed. Note that some institutions choose to outsource certain disciplines. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[null,null,"1A","Plant Breeders"]
[null,null,"1B","Genetics & Molecular Biology"]
[null,null,"1C","Cell Biology/Tissue Culture",null,null,null,null,null,null,"Cell Biology/Tissue Culture includes laboratory-based capabilities related to double haploid/embryo rescue/vegetative propagation skills, etc."]
[null,null,"1D","Agronomy"]
[null,null,"1E","Plant Pathology"]
[null,null,"1F","Entomology"]
[null,null,"1G","Physiology"]
[null,null,"1H","Quality (e.g., Grain Quality, Nutrition, etc.)"]
[null,null,"1I","Information Systems",null,null,null,null,null,null,"Note that in some institutions, there may be significant overlap of personnel & duties between \"Information Systems\" and \"Biometrics\". Information Systems metrics are intended to include operation & daily use of Breeder Information Management Systems (BIMS). Biometrics applies to how the data is used to drive breeding strategy.  Assessor should note degree of overlap if it exists."]
[null,null,"1J","Other (please specify)"]
[null,null,"1K","Biometrics & Statistics: Education",null,null,"Breeding & science leads have no/minimal education in statistics & have no ability to implement biometrics analysis for breeding decision support; no specific resources focused on biometrics","Breeder or other scientists have received rudimentary education in statistics & understand simple statistics; lack expertise in experimental design or advanced data analysis; biometrics team (if team exists) & breeders are not conversant with modern experimental designs & mixed model applications for breeding decision support","Breeders or other scientists have education in statistics & have been exposed to concepts of experimental design; biometrics team (if team exists) & breeders are conversant with modern experimental design for breeding but not mixed model applications for breeding decision support","Dedicated leader with Ph.D. in biometrics & statistics with strong understanding of experimental design & statistics; can support breeders to use mixed model applications for breeding decision support","Biometrics & statistics are emphasized as a critical area of focus to support breeding selection decision making. This is viewed as an often missing capability to speed rate of genetic gain. Assessors should realize that application point during breeding process & intensity will vary by crop."]
[null,null,2,"Breeding & Science Leads: Training & Experience",null,null,"Scientists & breeders have received no hands-on training in current responsibilities & have no prior experience related to current responsibilities, resulting in no meaningful output from program","Scientists & breeders have received training but have accrued little experience in current responsibilities","Most scientists & breeders have received training & accumulated 5 to 9 years of experience with a documented track record of productivity in field(s) related to current responsibilities","Senior scientists & breeders have ≥ 10 years of experience in field(s) related to current responsibilities; clear evidence of ability to produce meaningful results; majority of junior scientists have ≥ 3 years of experience appropriate to current responsibilities & balance of junior staff on track with opportunity to develop meaningful experience ","Use this rating system to assess the RELEVANT TRAINING & EXPERIENCE of the institution's scientific staff in disciplines identified in rows 2A to 2J. Training could include: CG center hands-on training programs &/or on-the-job training in mechanics of running breeding program (public or private sector). Evidence of experience could include release of cultivars (particularly cultivars that had a significant uptake by the market), research outcomes that improved the institution's ability to develop new cultivars (e.g., discovery & deployment of important QTL markers), & publications in respected, peer-reviewed journals (note: publication alone is not sufficient evidence of experience). Add any disciplines appropriate for the institution under review. If a discipline is not represented & NOT CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"N/A\" box. If a discipline is not represented & CRITICAL to the institution's mission, select the \"1\" rating. Provide clarifying comments in Assessor's Feedback columns as needed.  Note that some institutions choose to outsource certain disciplines. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[null,null,"2A","Plant Breeders"]
[null,null,"2B","Genetics & Molecular Biology"]
[null,null,"2C","Cell Biology/Tissue Culture",null,null,null,null,null,null,"Cell Biology/Tissue Culture includes laboratory-based capabilities related to double haploid/embryo rescue/vegetative propagation skills, etc."]
[null,null,"2D","Agronomy"]
[null,null,"2E","Plant Pathology"]
[null,null,"2F","Entomology"]
[null,null,"2G","Physiology"]
[null,null,"2H","Quality (e.g., Grain Quality, Nutrition, etc.)"]
[null,null,"2I","Information Systems",null,null,null,null,null,null,"Note that in some institutions, there may be significant overlap of personnel & duties between \"Information Systems\" and \"Biometrics\". Information Systems metrics are intended to include operation & daily use of Breeder Information Management Systems (BIMS). Biometrics applies to how the data is used to drive breeding strategy.  Assessor should note degree of overlap if it exists."]
[null,null,"2J","Other (please specify)"]
[null,null,"2K","Biometrics & Statistics: Experience",null,null,"Breeding & science leads have no/minimal experience in statistics & have no ability to implement biometrics analysis for breeding decision support; no specific resources focused on biometrics","Breeders or other scientists have limited experience in applying statistics in experimental design or advanced data analysis; biometrics team (if team exists) & breeders are not conversant with modern experimental designs & mixed model applications for breeding decision support","Breeders or other scientists have experience using statistics for basic experimental design; biometrics team (if team exists) & breeders are conversant with modern experimental design for breeding but not mixed model applications for breeding decision support","Dedicated leader with extensive experience in biometrics & statistics with strong understanding of experimental design; can support breeders to use mixed model applications for breeding decision support","Biometrics & statistics are emphasized as a critical area of focus to support breeding selection decision making. This is viewed as an often-missing capability to speed rate of genetic gain. Assessors should realize that application point during breeding process & intensity will vary by crop."]
[null,"Support Staff",3,"Support Staff: Training",null,null,"No formal training in agronomy or related fields through an educational institution; all on-the-job training ","Some formal training in an appropriate field but no degree or certification; most training is on-the-job","Vocational training degree in relevant field; training programs offered by institution or other organization to gain additional skills","Most support staff have bachelor's degrees or equivalent; most utilize continuing education opportunities to develop additional job-related skills"]
[null,null,4,"Support Staff: Experience",null,null,"Support staff is labor & is not capable of unsupervised work","Support staff primarily labor; some individuals with experience capable of performing low-level activities without supervision","Experienced support staff, with proven ability to meet basic program needs without undue supervision","Experienced support staff, with successful track record in supporting breeding & testing operations; capable of supervising labor & enabling breeders to focus on high-level activities"]
[null,"Allied Disciplines: Resources & Outcomes",5,"Genetics & Molecular Biology",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"]
[null,null,6,"Cell Biology/Tissue Culture",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort","Cell Biology/Tissue Culture includes laboratory-based capabilities related to double haploid/embryo rescue/vegetative propagation skills, etc."]
[null,null,7,"Agronomy",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"]
[null,null,8,"Plant Pathology",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"]
[null,null,9,"Entomology",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"]
[null,null,10,"Physiology",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"]
[null,null,11,"Quality (e.g., Grain Quality, Nutrition, etc.)",null,null,"No capabilities","Basic capabilities; may or may not be relevant to breeding program & has low impact on success of breeding program","Useful data collected; some collaboration with breeding program but limited impact on success of breeding program","Produces high-quality & valuable data with direct impact on success of breeding program; well integrated into overall breeding effort"]
[null,null,12,"Biometrics & Statistics: Services for Decision Support",null,null,"No biometrics service","Biometrics service provides basic & intermittent support on specific experiments but does not help optimize selection decision making & program error control","Biometrics service routinely supports experimental design & analysis; drives implementation of error control measures to reduce noise in field trials","Biometrics service routinely supports experimental design & analysis; drives implementation of error control measures to reduce noise in field trials; provides mixed model support for selection decisions","Biometrics & statistics are emphasized as a critical area of focus to support breeding selection decision making. This is viewed as an often-missing capability to speed rate of genetic gain. Assessors should realize the application point during breeding process & intensity will vary by crop."]
[null,null,13,"Breeding Information Management Systems (BIMS): Capability",null,null,"No capabilities","Rudimentary capabilities; relies on spreadsheets for data storage & management; no support personnel assigned ","Data storage & management system is designed to support breeding & trial activities; breeders & scientists can enter & access data in an easily queried database; support personnel available but not assigned to support plant breeding","Data management system is a centralized, integral component of operations; analytical tools & reporting capabilities facilitate data utilization; data mining & information extraction needs are supported; assigned support personnel available as needed or permanently"]
[null,null,14,"Breeding Information Management Systems (BIMS): Utilization",null,null,"Little to no utilization by breeders & research managers","Breeders & research managers use database on a selective basis for basic functions—primarily recording & some data retrieval","Breeders & research managers routinely use database for a restricted set of functions that add value to the program; not used as a strategic tool","Database used for planning, data analysis & advancement decisions; integral element in seed inventory & plot management activities; breeders, research managers & support staff routinely utilize full range of capabilities"]
[null,null,15,"Other (please specify)",null,null,null,null,null,null,"Define an \"other\" criteria if a metric considered highly relevant is not present."]
[null,"Breeding organization\n",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"AVERAGE($L$8:$L$18,$L$20:$L$43)","v":{"$error":"#DIV/0!"}}]
["Infrastructure","Laboratory, Glasshouse & Seed Facilities",16,"Short term (1 to 5 years) seed production & storage",null,null,"No seed-drying or storage facilities; minimal seed processing & storage areas; high risk of seed degradation; program often loses germplasm & seed stocks due to inadequate storage","Some seed-drying capabilities; seed processing areas are serviceable but not ideal: some potential for seed degradation; program occasionally loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage","Adequate seed-drying capabilities; designated seed processing facilities are good; some insect/rodent damage prevention systems in place but seed still vulnerable to degradation; program rarely loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage","Excellent seed-drying & short-term storage capabilities; insect & rodent controls in place; up-to-date seed processing equipment; short-term seed storage seen as priority with consequential high-grade seed produced; program never loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage","Use this same question & modify criteria as needed for vegetatively propagated species. Note any changes made to the criteria."]
[null,null,17,"Long term (> 5 years) seed storage",null,null,"No long-term seed storage capability","Some long-term storage capability but inadequate infrastructure & power provision to sustain cold storage when needed; program occasionally loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage","Good facilities & infrastructure provide minimal requirement for long-term storage; power supplies to sustain cold storage when needed adequate in most cases but would be problematic if power outage lasted for a lengthy period; program rarely loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage","Long-term storage of high standard with very low/no risk of losses; backup power supplies in place to sustain cold storage when needed; program never loses seed stocks due to inadequate storage"]
[null,null,18,"Greenhouse (Glasshouse) ",null,null,"Nonexistent to minimal facilities & poorly maintained","Available facilities lack basic needs & poorly maintained","Basic facilities in place & adequately maintained","Well-designed, purpose-built facilities contribute to quality & efficiency of work"]
[null,null,19,"Laboratory Facilities",null,null,"Nonexistent to minimal facilities & poorly maintained","Available facilities lack basic needs & poorly maintained","Basic facilities in place & adequately maintained","Well-designed, purpose-built facilities contribute to quality & efficiency of work","If there are multiple laboratories with differing ratings, then individual scores should be noted for each facility. Insert additional lines within 19 to reflect this, i.e., 19a, 19b, etc. Refer back to the questionnaire answers for listings of relevant laboratories."]
[null,"Mechanization",20,"Mechanization Utilization",null,null,"Absence of available mechanization is negatively impacting program's rate of genetic gain","Some operations mechanized, with limited impact on breeding program","Mechanization used across breeding program but not optimized to impact scale & genetic gain of breeding program","Appropriate methods of mechanization used across entire breeding program with leading technology to achieve scale necessary to increase genetic gain (e.g., planting & harvesting; routine data collection automated)","\"Appropriate\" will depend on methods available for given crop & ability to achieve desired results with vs. without mechanization. If crop has no potential for mechanization, score as N/A (likely quite rare)."]
[null,null,21,"Mechanization & Engineering Support Function",null,null,"No engineering or repair capacity to support mechanization","Basic engineering & repair capacity to support mechanization; replacement parts often unavailable","Engineering & repair staff available to support mechanization; procuring replacement parts can be an occasional issue","Mechanization efforts supported with well-trained engineering & repair staff & needed equipment; replacement parts available in feasible time frame"]
[null,"Support Infrastructure",22,"Infrastructure Maintenance, Repair & Operability",null,null,"Facilities lack routine maintenance; equipment not serviced or maintained; power supply unreliable; many safety & security issues","Facilities maintained to low standards; repairs carried out only after equipment failure; some power supply shortfalls; some safety & security issues","Facilities maintained to a good standard with support for scheduled equipment maintenance; reliable power supply; few safety & security issues","Excellent facility support with proactive equipment maintenance schedules; continuous power supply; no safety & security issues"]
[null,"Infrastructure",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"AVERAGE($L$45:$L$51)","v":{"$error":"#DIV/0!"}}]
["Breeding Methodology","Field & Farming Operations",23,"Crossing/Hybridization",null,null,"Regularly fails to deliver > 50% of crosses AND/OR 50% of seed per cross required by breeder","Routinely delivers 50% to 80% of crosses AND 50% to 80% of seed per cross required by breeder","Routinely delivers 80% to 95% of crosses AND 80% to 90% of seed per cross required by breeder","Routinely delivers > 95% of crosses AND > 90% of seed per cross required by breeder"]
[null,null,24,"F1 > F2 Seed Production",null,null,"Regularly fails to produce > 50% of F2 seed required by breeder","Routinely delivers 50% to 80% of F2 seed required by breeder","Routinely delivers 80% to 95% of F2 seed required by breeder","Routinely delivers > 95% of F2 seed required by breeder"]
[null,null,25,"Selection & Advancement Nurseries",null,null,"≥ 50% of selection nurseries & activities fail OR produce highly variable data (check entries fail to express desired trait); facilities do not control environment to ensure expression of target phenotype; inadequate agronomic skill levels & infrastructure to ensure crop establishment & prevent losses due to weed/pest infestations","50% to 80% of selection nurseries & activities produce meaningful results (check entries express desired trait); poor agronomy, evidenced by establishment &/or weed/pest problems; minimal controlled-environment facilities (e.g., glasshouse) ","80% to 95% of selection nurseries & activities produce meaningful results (check entries express desired trait); glasshouse & other controlled-environment facilities available & generally useful; farming operations & agronomy adequate to meet basic program needs","> 95% of selection nurseries & activities produce meaningful results (check entries express desired trait); glasshouse & other controlled-environment facilities well maintained & operated to provide meaningful phenotypic results; farming operation consistently good, with very few failures due to poor crop establishment or weed/pest infestations","If there are distinct selection nursery activities (e.g., disease, phenotyping, flowering biology, etc.) with differing capabilities, then these should be listed separately with individual scores."]
[null,null,26,"Yield Trial Program: Management",null,null,"Single location; inappropriate experimental designs; highly variable data; frequent trial failures; > 20% missing data in completed trials ","Staged trial system, with at least 2 locations representative of target environments prior to national trials or release decision; experimental design not necessarily the most appropriate; 50% to 80% of trials harvested; ≥ 20% missing data in completed trials ","Staged trial system, with multiple locations representing important agro-ecological zones in target market(s); 80% to 95% of trials harvested; ≤ 10% missing data in completed trials","Staged trial system, with multiple locations representing important agro-ecological zones in target market(s); > 95% of trials harvested; < 10% missing data in completed trials","Assessor should note whether any deficiency in quality of trial data is a reflection of internal or external (contractors) issues. Outsourcing can be a viable strategy but should be rated for effectiveness as would internal capabilities."]
[null,null,27,"Yield Trial Program: Statistical Analysis of Results",null,null,"Quality of trials is not monitored using statistical analysis; CV & trial repeatability (heritability) not monitored","Quality of trials assessed using CV values primarily; single trial heritability (H) not monitored or averages less than 0.3 for yield","Quality of trials assessed using primarily CV & H; 10% to 20% of trials rejected due to poor quality (H < 0.15)","Breeders use highly sophisticated statistical design & analysis (in addition to CV & H); ≤ 10% of trials rejected due to poor quality (H < 0.15 or known errors)","This metric is about whether the quality of trials is actually measured. If so, heritability (H) values are estimated & will likely need to be further refined as BPAT is applied to additional crops & situations. The purpose is to emphasize importance of stringent statistical analysis guiding decision making. Assessor's interpretation of this metric will likely need explicit explanation in the commentary & memo write-up."]
[null,null,28,"Use of Repeatability (Broad-Sense H, Heritability) Estimates to Monitor Effectiveness of Testing & Screening & to Allocate Testing Resources",null,null,"Breeders & managers unfamiliar with concept of repeatability or its use as a planning tool & weighting factor in selection decisions; no data management systems to allow variance component, BLUP (Best Linear Unbiased Prediction) or heritability (H) estimation; selection decisions made without statistical analysis ","Breeders understand repeatability & have access to database & biometrics support to provide estimates but are not routinely estimating H, using it as a weighting factor in selection decisions or using it to support resource allocation decisions in testing programs; selection decisions made on basis of limited statistical analysis; program has the capacity to generate repeatability estimates for each major testing stage & screening system but has not done so ","Breeders & managers have access to variance component & H estimates for resource allocation modeling but do not use BLUP or use H routinely as a weighting factor in selection decisions; well-maintained database allows routine combined analysis of trials over locations & years; repeatability estimates for each major testing stage & screening system can be presented on request","Breeders receive variance component, H & BLUP estimates from each analysis, routinely using the information in trait weighting & testing resource allocation"]
[null,null,29,"Program Size: Number of Crosses &/or Line, Family or Clone Development",null,null,"Number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones in development is inadequate to deliver genetic gain increase; program size is severely constrained by resources (budget, human or infrastructure) &/or breeders do not understand need for larger program & are not considering ways to increase program scale","Number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones in development is only marginally adequate to deliver genetic gain increase; breeders may be somewhat aware of the problem but resource constraints (budget, human or infrastructure) prevent increasing scale","Number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones in development is adequate to deliver some genetic gain increase but breeders recognize the program size may be constraining significant improvement in rate of genetic gain; breeders have optimized scale of program within limits allowed by resource constraints (budget, human or infrastructure)","Number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones in development provides sufficient opportunity to realize genetic gain & rate of genetic gain; breeders have an established pipeline of genetic material & have optimized scale of program to achieve gain on primary traits of interest; program resources (budget, human or infrastructure) are in place to maintain program scale for foreseeable future","While there is no absolute number of crosses or lines needed for each situation, assessor should evaluate impact of program scale on genetic gain outcome. If program is demonstrating genetic gain, will rate of gain likely be increased with larger program? If program is not demonstrating genetic gain, is number of crosses &/or lines, families or clones the limiting factor? Assessor should note in commentary the current scale & any suggested benchmarks/goals."]
[null,null,30,"Program Size: Yield Trials",null,null,"Scale of yield trial programs is inadequate to deliver genetic gain increase; program size is severely constrained by resources (budget, human, or infrastructure) &/or breeders do not understand need for larger program & are not considering ways to increase program scale","Scale of yield trial program is only marginally adequate to deliver genetic gain increase; breeders may be somewhat aware of the problem but resource constraints (budget, human or infrastructure) prevent increasing scale","Scale of yield trial program is adequate to deliver some genetic gain increase but breeders recognize that the program size may be constraining significant improvement in rate of genetic gain; breeders have optimized scale of program within limits allowed by resource constraints (budget, human or infrastructure)","Scale of yield trial program provides sufficient opportunity to realize genetic gain & rate of genetic gain; breeder(s) have an established testing program that is optimized for collection of yield data; program resources (budget, human, or infrastructure) are in place to maintain program scale for foreseeable future","While there is no absolute number of yield trials needed for each situation, assessor should evaluate impact of trial scale on genetic gain outcome. If program is demonstrating genetic gain, will rate of gain likely be increased with larger trial program? If program is not demonstrating genetic gain, is trial scale the limiting factor? Assessor should note in commentary the current scale & any suggested benchmarks/goals."]
[null,null,31,"On-farm Trial Program",null,null,"No on-farm trial program","Limited number of on-farm trial locations under farmer management with inconsistent return of data on advanced selections","High number of on-farm trials under farmer management but locations not optimized in terms of target location environments; inconsistent return of data on advanced selections","Comprehensive on-farm trial locations under farmer management which represent target agroenvironments; data returned on advanced selections to breeders","Note whether these trials are run by extensions services or are part of the breeder trial network."]
[null,null,32,"Participatory Varietal Selection",null,null,"Only agronomic data collected from on-farm trials; no farmer preference data collected","Farmer preference data collected from on-farm trials but not used in selection decisions & not gender-disaggregated","Farmer preference data collected from on-farm trials used in selection decisions but not gender-disaggregated","Farmer preference data collected from on-farm trials used in selection decisions, gender-disaggregated","Assessor should note the level of importance for the specific crop under assessment."]
[null,null,33,"Breeder &/or Foundation Seed Production",null,null,"Land issues; lack of isolation; inadequate seed processing, storage & handling; regular failures to produce quantity & quality of seed required ","Generally adequate but lack required attention to agronomic detail; occasional failures to produce the quantity & quality of seed required","Meets required standards in all years but only adequate; few major failures but little consistency or attention to \"best-practice\" details","Land & farming operations adequate & high-quality; production of breeder & foundation seed are integral activities; QA/QC methods incorporated into process"]
[null,null,34,"Second-season Operations",null,null,"No second-season operations","Second-season activities suffer from variable input & outputs; frequent & consequential failures; fails to deliver high value","Second-season locations are available & provide appropriate selection environments (if used for selection) & support good quality seed production; produces valuable results in most years","Second-season location(s) well suited for selection (if relevant) & high-quality seed production; facilities & farming operations well equipped & maintained; permanent staff experienced in plant breeding operations; routinely produces high-value results"]
[null,"Breeding Pipeline ",35,"Breeding Objectives",null,null,"Breeding objectives do not reflect grower/market or commercial needs; no systematic review or modification takes place; objectives frequently reflect funding opportunities rather than crop strategic value","Breeding objectives chosen with some understanding of grower/commercial/market needs; objectives overly influenced by short term funding opportunities rather than strategic needs","Breeding objectives chosen with a good understanding of grower/commercial/market need; system in place for formal review of objectives but not optimized; objectives based on short term funding generally fit both with crop strategy & capabilities","Breeding objectives chosen with clear understanding of grower, commercial needs & product attributes required to gain market acceptance; objectives systematically reviewed & modified to reflect changing market needs & new opportunities; project-based objectives well integrated with crop strategy & program capabilities"," In this metric commercial seed is defined as \"meeting the needs of the commercial marketing team\" (this can be public or private), e.g., recognition of seed purity, seed health, multiplication rate capacity."]
[null,null,36,"Project-based Objectives",null,null,"Project submissions are not strategically relevant; no internal grading of projects prior to submission to sponsors","Project submissions are not strategically relevant; submissions usually driven by scientific interest rather than strategic impact","Project submissions are strategically relevant; peer review system in place & able to rank projects in terms of strategic relevance & quality of science; little or no reference to strategic partners working on the same crop","Project submissions are strategically relevant & meet exacting standards (in terms of science); independently assessed & compared with competing projects (both internal & external) to prioritize those with highest potential for impact","Assessor should note if a low score is due to policy decisions by funders or due to institution's lack of strategic prioritization."]
[null,null,37,"Crop Team Meetings",null,null,"No crop group meetings","Crop group meets irregularly & on an informal basis with little reference to crop strategy; meetings cover day-to-day activities rather than strategic &/or staff needs; allied disciplines that support the crop may or may not participate & are not considered accountable to the process; no designated leader responsible & accountable for objectives related to plan","Regular crop group meetings but mainly administrative in nature; address some strategic issues but lack detail & neglect engagement with remote staff; allied disciplines usually involved but only marginally committed to the process; designated leader somewhat responsible & accountable for objectives related to plan","Crop group meets regularly (at least once per month) using technology when required (e.g., video conferencing); minutes taken & action plans reviewed at each meeting; allied disciplines actively participate & are considered accountable to the group; designated leader responsible & accountable for objectives related to plan ","For institutions focused on only one crop, the \"crop team meeting\" likely includes all the respective breeding programs (e.g., institution could be organized by geography or trait). For assessment visits where team is assessing specific crops within a broader institution, the \"crop team meeting\" would be for each individual crop being assessed."]
[null,null,38,"Delineation of Target Population of Environments (TPE)",null,null,"TPE is determined by political boundaries; no effort made to detect, manage or exploit GxE within the TPE; no zonation of the TPE","TPE is determined by political boundaries; no effort is made to monitor GxE; TPE is divided into zones based on agro ecological factors but validity of the zonation in terms of managing GxE has not been tested; trial results are reported by zones","TPE is based on agro ecological knowledge confirmed by GxE & genetic correlation analysis; test results are reported by zones; GxE within & among zones is monitored; no effort is made to generate BLUPs appropriately weighting information across regions","TPE is based on agro ecological knowledge confirmed by GxE & genetic correlation analysis; test results are reported by zones; GxE within & among zones is monitored; BLUPs appropriately weighting information across regions are generated"]
[null,null,39,"Program Design",null,null,"Breeding approach not suitable for stated breeding objectives; cannot articulate rationale for program design & lacks competence to alter program","Breeding approach based on methods in general use in crop; cannot articulate rationale for program design but can implement design changes provided by a third party","Breeding approach reflects common practices in crop; can articulate rationale for program design but has limited ability to improve on program design without significant outside input","Breeding approach optimized to meet stated breeding objectives; fully understands & can explain rationale for program design; engages in knowledgeable discussion on program design features with breeders & geneticists; can & will modify program design & processes to overcome barriers, utilize new technology & achieve revised objectives "]
[null,null,40,"Generation Advancement",null,null,"No consideration or use of methods or approaches designed to achieve rapid generation advancement (e.g., Double Haploids, SSD, other)","Attempts to use methods favorable to rapid generation advancement","Has designed system for rapid generation advancement; used inconsistently & with less impact than it could be","Well-designed & executed system(s) for rapid generation advancement; used routinely & to great success; continuous improvement is integral to processes"]
[null,null,41,"Breeding Cycle Time",null,null,"Breeders are unaware of the importance of minimizing breeding cycle time; yield testing delayed beyond justifiable limits; new lines tested for > 4 years before they are recycled as parents","Breeders are aware of the importance of minimizing breeding cycle time but no early generation yield testing is carried out; new lines are tested for > 3 years before they are recycled as parents; total breeding cycle is 6 to 8 years","Breeders are aware of the importance of minimizing breeding cycle time; early generation testing is used but new lines are tested for > 2 years before they are recycled as parents; total breeding cycle is 5 to 6 years","Breeders are aware of the importance of minimizing breeding cycle time; early generation testing employed & new lines are tested for no more than 2 years before they are recycled as parents; total breeding cycle is < 5 years","Breeding cycle is defined as length of time from cross to utilization as parental line."]
[null,null,42,"Documentation & Continuity",null,null,"No documentation of protocols & SOPs","Occasional documentation of protocols & SOPs but not complete or well executed","Semi-consistent documentation of protocols & SOPs; helpful but not complete enough to ensure continuity of program or adequate training","Annual or ongoing documentation of internal protocols & SOPs to ensure continuity of program & training of new staff"]
[null,"Trait Pipeline",43,"Germplasm Characterization",null,null,"No characterization of germplasm resources","Some varietal characteristics recorded but at a basic level; germplasm records not easily accessible to breeders","Basic information about variety characteristics recorded & available for access","Sophisticated information (genotypic & phenotypic) available about stored material in a format that breeders can access "]
[null,null,44,"Utilization of Genetic Resources from Germplasm Collections",null,null,"No utilization; do not recognize any value in accessing germplasm collections","Ad hoc use of germplasm; tends to be more speculative in nature & not focused on key traits","Recognize value of germplasm but often lack precise information regarding trait identification & associated markers/QTLs; some use within the breeding program but lacks precision","Breeders target traits from available germplasm collections to address breeding objectives; well-structured strategies for incorporation into adapted germplasm using a range of new technologies including Marker Assisted Selection (MAS)"]
[null,null,45,"Access to Third-party Germplasm",null,null,"No access to third-party germplasm; operate in a \"genetic vacuum\"","Limited access to third-party germplasm; not fully engaged with providers & tend to obtain germplasm irregularly; not fully aware of regulatory, plant health or legal implications","Good access to third-party germplasm but some limitations to full exploitation from regulatory, plant health or legal challenges","Well connected with third-party genetic providers; all aspects of germplasm access covered, i.e., regulatory, plant health & legal conditions; robust documentation & paper trails in place","Note the reasons for the scores, i.e., lack of awareness/interest/organizational needs, etc."]
[null,null,46,"Trait Prioritization Strategy",null,null,"No assessment mechanism ","Some informal, in-house assessment processes; individual programs make their own assessments rather than collaboratively","In-house strategic planning in place, with defined priorities identified & implemented","Sophisticated prioritization system based upon robust data & science reviews; independently assessed & verified by third parties","This question is intended to evaluate an organization actively operating a trait discovery program. In many cases, this will not apply to a national program, & hence, it is shaded. However, some institutions may not cleanly fit this distinction. Use judgment in evaluating programs attempting to operate trait discovery programs to assess how effective/likely to be effective they are in the context of the institution's overall capability. There may be a need for recommendations about whether an institution is or is not well suited to trait discovery."]
[null,null,47,"Trait Mapping (Quantitative Trait Loci Discovery)",null,null,"No capability","Limited capacity (infrastructure, intellectual capacity or both) for meaningful outcomes; primarily driven by individual interests or funding sources","Capabilities to map traits extant but not utilized strategically; could become a valuable contributor to breeding programs with appropriate guidance","Intellectual, technical & infrastructure resources present & utilized for trait discovery; institution & scientists demonstrate ability to conduct trait discovery activities","Assessor should note source of molecular markers & confirm application is for breeding rather than purely research & development purposes."]
[null,null,48,"Pre-breeder Activity Deployment & Coordination",null,null,"No pre-breeding activity for traits","Lack of strategic coordination between breeding & trait mapping teams; no consideration of marker/QTL impact in design of marker-assisted breeding activities; no overall trait team lead","Trait & breeding teams coordinated on paper but not in practice; lack of coordination reduces utilization of markers in breeding programs; trait leads are clearly identified but do not have a fully articulated trait prioritization, advancement & delivery plan","Well-coordinated trait & breeding teams have effective working relationships; factors affecting use of markers (e.g., cost or technical limitations) well understood & incorporated into breeding process; routine interaction & evaluation of results leads to effective use of markers in breeding program; trait team leads are responsible & accountable for progress; trait team has a clearly articulated trait prioritization, advancement & delivery plan"]
[null,null,49,"Validation of Expression of Introgressed QTLs & Efficacy Relative to Traditional Approaches",null,null,"No validation systems in place","Some ad hoc validation takes place but not formalized & not applicable to all traits","Good validation systems in place but not formalized; some traits not fully verified","Effective follow-up & feedback mechanisms in place; sophisticated analysis & verification processes are standard "]
[null,null,50,"Effective QTL Deployment within Mainstream Breeding Programs",null,null,"Markers not used","Some use of markers, primarily for Marker-Assisted Backcross (MAB); limited by budget &/or expertise","Markers primarily used for MAB; minimal use for forward selection (MAS); institution sees value in technology but may not be considering opportunities to further enhance program outcomes","Mix of MAB & MAS that complement the balance of breeding activities; institution clearly sees value & is working to increase impact of technology","Assess how EFFECTIVELY QTLs are being deployed. For institutions developing own QTLs, consider Items 46 to 49 when evaluating effectiveness of program & highlight areas for improvement if deployment results are lacking. The question also applies to institutions deploying QTLs developed by third parties."]
[null,null,51,"GM Trait Deployment",null,null,"Does not exist","Minimal, poorly targeted effort; not integrated into product pipeline; no stewardship program ","Program targets generally valuable; poor integration into product pipeline; inadequate stewardship program ","Well designed & executed in all phases; targeted to high-impact traits; well integrated with product development pipeline; excellent stewardship program in place & functioning","Assessor should use N/A rating if GM trait deployment is not available or allowed for given situation. Describe whether constraint is regulatory, technical or FTO. \"1\" rating indicates GM trait deployment should be considered but is not currently."]
[null,"Breeding methodology",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"AVERAGE($L$53:$L$81)","v":{"$error":"#DIV/0!"}}]
["Cultivar Development, Release & Production","Cultivar Development & Commercial Release",52,"Product Advancement Decisions (up to & including commercial release)",null,null,"Advancement criteria ill-defined or based upon poor or limited datasets; no competitive cultivars included in trials; no system to ensure rapid progress through testing program; no grower participatory trials considered or used","Varieties advanced upon a system encompassing a range of datasets but not comprehensive; competitive cultivars included don't provide meaningful comparisons; minimal consideration of approaches to speed product advancement; grower participatory trials seldom considered or implemented","Varieties advanced based upon a strong dataset & verifiable systems, but year-to-year variation limits decision quality; best competitive cultivars included; advancement program not optimized for rapid progress; grower participatory trials may be used inconsistently","Excellent advancement system with well-defined targets & verification of datasets in place; best competitive cultivars provide meaningful comparisons in target environment & are integral component of product advancement; testing system & strategy optimized to move cultivars from first yield trial through variety release; grower participatory trials included as appropriate","Decision to release products for commercial use may be under control of a national program rather than the institution. If that is the case, disregard the commercial aspect. Judgment is needed in determining applicability of participatory trial use in advancement decisions; Participatory trials are highly desired, but they must produce meaningful & objective data."]
[null,null,53,"Engagement with External Bodies to Support Release Strategies",null,null,"No engagement","No institutionally defined processes for engagement with external bodies (e.g., regulatory bodies, testing authorities, growers, end users, agronomic advisers, etc.); breeders & other research staff seek input on ad hoc basis","Institution acknowledges need for engaging external parties (e.g., regulatory bodies, testing authorities, growers, end users, agronomic advisers, etc.) in release decisions but has no formal system in place; breeders seek input from external bodies but process is ad hoc & inconsistent","Formal release process in place which requires participation by external bodies (e.g., regulatory bodies, testing authorities, growers, end users, agronomic advisers, etc.); external stakeholders actively engaged in process; release decision reflects input from external stakeholders"]
[null,null,54,"Transition from Research (Breeding) Pipeline to Commercial Development",null,null,"No interface systems ","Limited interactions between breeders & individuals or entities responsible for commercialization; not a priority for breeding institution; often seen as separate disciplines","Institution acknowledges need for connecting breeding pipeline to commercial development but has no formal system in place; breeders &/or commercial teams proactively communicate to enhance uptake but process is ad hoc & inconsistent","Institution committed to moving products from breeding pipeline to commercial development; interactions between breeding staff & commercialization team are defined & occur on regular basis; breeding staff proactively engages with & is available to commercialization team to provide support ","Commercialization team may or may not be within target institution. Assessor should consider interaction with external commercial bodies also, as appropriate & realistic for the market situation. The intent is that the transition should be proactively managed regardless of who/where it occurs."]
[null,null,55,"Post-release Product Performance",null,null,"No system in place to monitor performance of released products in commercial production","Ad hoc monitoring of released products in commercial production; information not obviously incorporated into breeding plans or activities","System in place to monitor product performance; inconsistent data collection &/or inconsistent use of performance data to inform breeding strategy or actions","System in place to monitor product performance; data collected & utilized to inform breeding strategies & actions regularly & consistently"]
[null,"Breeders' Seed Production",56,"Breeder Seed Production Coordinated with Commercial Seed Producers",null,null,"No understanding or alignment with commercial seed producer needs","Inconsistent alignment with commercial seed producer needs; no process for determining breeder seed requirements","Some alignment between breeder seed production & commercial seed producer needs; process for determining breeder seed requirements exists but is not formalized","Breeder seed production fully aligned with commercial seed producer needs; a formal process exists for generating breeder seed requirements"]
[null,null,57,"Breeder Seed Production & Processing Mechanics",null,null,"Low priority or little understanding of genetic purity &/or high-quality seed production, resulting in poor purity record","Understand the need for genetic purity & attempt to produce high-quality breeder seed; results not always acceptable","Understand the need for genetic purity & have ability to produce high-quality breeder seed but do not always achieve intended results","Field operations are organized & conducted to ensure genetic purity & high-quality breeder seed; output regularly meets purity & quality criteria"]
[null,null,58,"Systems to Enhance Multiplication Rates & Accelerate Distribution",null,null,"No systems in place","Limited capability & recognition of opportunities; some specific increases taken up","Some advanced systems in place but not standardized for all new varieties","Aware of opportunities & advanced systems in place enhancing speed of variety development (e.g., low seed rate, high multiplication systems, mechanization opportunities, seed processing machinery)"]
[null,null,59,"Quality Assurance & Quality Control Procedures",null,null,"Limited QA/QC abilities & not recognized as a problem","Some QA/QC systems in place but generally of low quality; little to no effort to confirm seed purity","Recognized as key activity with some processes in place but not formalized; no formal feedback system in place (e.g., grow-out or molecular fingerprinting) to ensure breeders routinely confirm genetic purity","Due diligence exemplary with good results & rapid multiplication normalized; sophisticated feedback system in place (e.g., grow-out or molecular fingerprinting) to ensure breeders routinely confirm genetic purity","Note that quality could include viability, genetic purity, physical purity, weed-free, & disease-free. Assessor should note importance of these to crop being examined & relevance to seed exchange/shipments to third parties."]
[null,null,60,"GM Product Stewardship",null,null,"No systems in place","Aware of stewardship requirements but low level of activity","Good understanding of requirements but systems not fully optimized & vulnerable to errors","Good, well-defined systems in place with excellent due diligence ","Only relevant if GM crops are being commercialized."]
[null,"Cultivar development, release & production",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"AVERAGE($L$83:$L$91)","v":{"$error":"#DIV/0!"}}]
["Product Support","Product Support",61,"Validated & Documented Agronomic Practices for Optimum Product Performance ",null,null,"No extension service engagement","Some development work but limited benefits to growers","Basic agronomy & support systems but generic in nature","Excellent link between genetics & extension support; recognizes value of this activity & that it enhances new variety uptake"]
[null,null,62,"Field Agronomist Familiar with Product Prior to Commercial Availability",null,null,"No knowledge of varieties until release","Some limited awareness but tends to be of a general nature","Recognizes some traits & characters of new varieties & enhances variety uptake but lacks consistency","Good understanding of variety strengths & weaknesses & provides good solutions; agronomic support enhances variety uptake"]
[null,"Product  support",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"AVERAGE($L$93:$L$94)","v":{"$error":"#DIV/0!"}}]
["Program Impact","Process to Measure Impact",63,"Impact Measurement Process",null,null,"No process to measure impact on genetic gain or variety uptake in market","Very limited process to measure impact on genetic gain &/or market success; not effective enough to contribute to breeding objectives or strategic planning ","Ad hoc measurement of impact on genetic gain &/or market success; utilizes some data sources but could be improved; information not necessarily integrated to impact future breeding objectives & strategic planning","Intentional, regular & informative process in place to measure impact on genetic gain & market success; utilizes effective combination of internal & external data sources (e.g., government statistics, internal tracking, specific studies); information used to contribute to breeding objectives & strategic planning","This metric is intended to capture whether the institution devotes resources & attention to intentionally tracking impact. An institution may score high on having systems in place to measure but low on following metrics of actual impact."]
[null,"Gain from Selection Impact",64,"Advanced Line or Hybrid Performance",null,null,"< 10% of advanced lines/hybrids significantly outperform best competitive cultivars","10% to 25% of advanced lines/hybrids significantly outperform best competitive cultivars","25% to 50% of advanced lines/hybrids significantly outperform best competitive cultivars","> 50% of advanced lines/hybrids significantly outperform best competitive cultivars","Attention should be given to obtaining the data required to assess these factors in order to improve benchmark values over time."]
[null,null,65,"Best Candidate Cultivar Performance",null,null,"Best candidate no different than best competitive cultivar for any trait","Best candidate 2% to 3% better than best competitive cultivar for highest value traits; may be significantly worse than best competitive cultivars for some secondary traits ","Best candidate 3% to 5% better than best competitive cultivar for highest value traits; no significant weaknesses in secondary traits","Best candidate > 5% better than best competitive cultivar for highest value traits; ≥ to best competitive cultivar for secondary traits"]
[null,"Program Impact in Market",66,"Evidence of Marketability",null,null,"Best candidates routinely demonstrate flaws that would be unacceptable in the market; no feedback is obtained by the program from growers & end users","Best candidates usually have one or more flaws affecting marketability; institution shows no evidence of addressing flaws in a systematic way; feedback from growers & end users, including women, is obtained informally","Best candidates meet or exceed market specifications for MOST attributes affecting marketability; may have a small number of flaws impacting marketability; formal quality & marketability assessment systems involving end users are in place, but are not disaggregated by gender or wealth status","Best candidates meet or exceed market specifications for all attributes affecting marketability; formal quality & marketability assessment systems involving end users are in place, generating data that are disaggregated by gender or wealth status","Market share & variety lifespan are good indicators of program effectiveness. However, the effectiveness of the seed value chain can have a major impact on these measures. Although the assessment focuses on breeding programs, explore the value chain question if market share &/or variety lifespan ratings are very low."]
[null,null,67,"Current Market Share of Program Varieties Released in Last 10 Years",null,null,"Never planted on more than 2% of hectarage","Planted on 2% to 10% of hectarage","Planted on 10% to 25% of hectarage ","Planted on > 25% of hectarage"]
[null,null,68,"Percent of Released Varieties Coming from Own Breeding Program",null,null,"< 10%","10% to 60%","60% to 80%","> 80%"]
[null,null,69,"Current Market Share of Varieties & Germplasm from Own Program in Other Territories Released in Last 10 Years (specify)",null,null,"< 10%","10% to 25%","25% to 50%","> 50%","This is not expected to be a factor for most national programs, but is likely to be very important for CGIAR centers."]
[null,"Program impact",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"AVERAGE($L$96:$L$102)","v":{"$error":"#DIV/0!"}}]
["Strategic Planning & Management","Strategic Planning",70,"Organization Strategic Vision",null,null,"Organization lacks direction & does not have clear 3- to 5-year priorities","Organization has wide program focus which limits ability to identify priorities & prioritize resources","Organization has clearly articulated strategic vision spanning 3 to 5 years","In addition to (3), organization has a vision for how its strategy will evolve in the long term (> 10 years)"]
[null,null,71,"Coordinated Product Profile Strategy",null,null,"No integrated planning process in place; breeders independently prioritize opportunities","Internal strategic discussions occur beyond breeding team but often without market research or quantitative methodology","Strategic plan in place & refreshed at least every 3 to 5 years through a collaborative process with breeders & market researchers; lacks product profile strategies ","All of (3), plus strategic plan establishes product profile strategies with vision of how products will be optimized & disseminated downstream"]
[null,null,72,"Market Research",null,null,"Organization lacks market research function","Organization has market research focus, but focus limited to 1 or 2 elements of market research (e.g., end consumer or competitive landscape)","Organization has comprehensive market research focus on the end consumer, competitive landscape & value chain; focus is short-term (3 to 5 years); no gender-disaggregated data collected","All of (3), plus the team identifies needs & opportunities in the long term (10+ years) as well as the short-term; gender-disaggregated data collected "]
[null,null,73,"\"Go to Market\" (GTM) Strategy",null,null,"Little focus on downstream/GTM strategy & uptake; varieties simply released freely on the open market","Institution has informal mechanisms (e.g., conversations throughout downstream value chain) to encourage uptake post-variety release","Institution has active, formal mechanism to include interactions with downstream value chain both pre- & post-variety release; access plan for women farmers not explicitly developed","Institution has clear GTM strategies for each product (e.g., key interaction points with market, strategy to proactively influence value chain & farmer adoption, view of value chain partners, whether & how to create IP, etc.); access plan for women farmers explicitly developed","GTM strategy certainly includes feedback from farmers but could also include downstream value chain participants such as seed sellers, buyers & consumers."]
[null,"Strategic Management & Alignment",74,"Strategic & Management Alignment",null,null,"Little shared understanding through organization of overall strategy","Breeders broadly aligned on organization strategic vision but ambiguous about how day-to-day roles fit into strategy ","Breeders & supporting scientists broadly aligned on organization strategic vision & have a sense of how day-to-day roles fit into strategy ","All of (3), plus breeders & supporting scientists have an understanding of how their roles will evolve in the short- & medium-term (3 to 5 years), given the current strategy"]
[null,null,75,"Attitude toward Change",null,null,"Conservative approach, unwilling to accept change at any level","Willing to look at changes in strategy, logistics & technology but unlikely to want rapid deployment; general reluctance to change","Changes in strategy, logistics & technology welcomed but lack resource or strategic awareness to implement at all levels","Dynamic approach with change in strategies, logistics & novel technologies readily discussed & implemented when appropriate; positive outlook on future prospects"]
[null,null,76,"Collaboration with International Breeding Institutions",null,null,"Organization is indirectly linked with international partners & there is limited collaboration","Organization loosely linked with international partners & breeders have relationships simply on an ad hoc basis","Organization linked with international partners & breeders unevenly have direct ties (e.g., through trainings, regular conversations) with respective programs","Organization closely linked with international partners & all breeders have direct ties (e.g., through trainings, regular conversations) with respective programs"]
[null,null,77,"Collaboration with National Breeding Partners",null,null,"Organization is indirectly linked with national partners; there is limited collaboration","Organization loosely linked with national partners; breeders have relationships on ad hoc basis","Organization linked with national partners; breeders unevenly have direct ties with respective programs (e.g., through trainings, regular conversations, etc.) ","Organization closely linked with national partners; all breeders have direct ties with respective programs (e.g., through trainings, regular conversations, etc.) "]
[null,null,78,"Collaboration Across Programs & Divisions",null,null,"Very little collaboration across divisions or between programs (e.g., pathology & breeding)","Organization does not have formal mechanism to encourage collaboration across programs or divisions; collaboration occurs on an ad hoc basis; there are no service agreements or charge-back mechanisms for services","Organization has varying levels of formal mechanisms to encourage collaboration across programs or divisions (e.g., process between breeders & labs to define materials needed & by when); has some service level agreement or charge-back mechanisms","Service level agreements or defined milestones encourage collaboration across divisions or between programs (e.g., included as part of review process, milestones) "]
[null,null,79,"Succession Planning",null,null,"Breeding programs have no succession plan strategy","Succession plans are made on an ad hoc basis & when needs arise","Succession planning is recognized as an important aspect of successful breeding programs, but no formal strategies are in place","Succession planning is part of the institution's strategic plan; detailed strategies are in place for the next 5 years, with clear career milestones for key staff "]
[null,"Strategic planning & management",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"AVERAGE($L$104:$L$113)","v":{"$error":"#DIV/0!"}}]
["Budget & Finance","Budget & Finance",80,"Budget Management",null,null,"Project leaders have no input into budget development & no control over expenditure","Project leaders have limited input & influence","Project leaders nominally responsible for budget development & management but are routinely overridden","Project leaders have major impact on budget development & are responsible for budget management"]
[null,null,81,"Capital Equipment Replacement Strategy",null,null,"No capital equipment replacement policy","Some capital finance plans made (& funds requested) but replacement on an ad hoc basis","Funding & mechanism to maintain equipment in place but not aligned with crop strategies or essential needs","Robust capital equipment replacement policy based upon crop strategic needs; recognizes new technology opportunities & initiates plans to engage with these"]
[null,null,82,"Tracking of Activity-based Breeding Costs",null,null,"No visibility to cost of breeding program components","Cost components tracked on ad hoc basis","Most component costs regularly tracked but not driving decisions","Clear visibility to cost of breeding program components & regularly considers how to optimize (e.g., insource vs. outsource)"]
[null,null,83,"Cost Metrics Used to Drive Efficiencies",null,null,"Little use of financial metrics across organization; no benchmarking","Financial metrics utilized on an ad hoc basis or inefficiently across the organization; no regular benchmarking ","Financial metrics utilized across the organization but not systematically; benchmarking occurs but not against most relevant examples","Financial metrics tracked on an organizational level; active efforts in continuous improvement through benchmarking"]
[null,null,84,"Understanding of Financial Planning",null,null,"Breeders & other project leaders receive no financial training",null,"Breeders & other project leaders are included in formal budgeting &/or accounting financial training","All of (3), plus ongoing resources if breeders & project leaders have budgeting &/or finance questions"]
[null,"Budget & finance",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"AVERAGE($L$115:$L$119)","v":{"$error":"#DIV/0!"}}]
["Performance Management","Performance Evaluation",85,"Regular Evaluation Process",null,null,"Performance evaluations vary across the organization; mainly used to decide job promotion","Annual performance evaluation process carried out consistently in the breeding division customized to role (e.g., breeder vs. post-doc); outlines personal development plan; no explicit evaluation of contribution to program goals","All of (2), plus process parallels the same one used as basis for job promotion; differentiates staff into distinct rating groups that provide scientists with understanding of how they track against short- & long-term expectations; contribution to program goals is taken into account in individual evaluation","All of (3), plus process actively seeks collaborative feedback from others in the organization beyond to supervisor; evaluation process is fully & explicitly aligned with program goals"]
[null,null,86,"Individual & Team Metrics Incorporated into Evaluation Process",null,null,"Few, if any, best practice metrics utilized in evaluation process","Use of metrics applied unevenly across organization & focus largely on traditional academic contribution criteria (e.g., published papers); little to no emphasis on allied disciplines' participation in breeding team's outcomes & process","Clearly defined metrics for breeders covering academic contribution, research practices/outcomes & administration; less clear metrics for allied disciplines to contribute to breeding team's outcomes & process","All of (3), plus clear metrics for supporting scientists linked to their support of breeding process (e.g., for marker lab, tracking of delivery time to return material, number of complaints); explicit expectations for allied disciplines to contribute to breeding team's outcomes & process","Assessor should particularly note inclusion of allied disciplines. Are they held accountable for participation in crop group planning, as well as meeting service level requirements? Are they motivated to consider themselves part of crop team rather than separate entity?"]
[null,null,87,"Corresponding Targets for Performance Metrics",null,null,"Limited targets associated with metrics in the performance evaluation process",null,"Targets correspond to metrics used in individual performance reviews (e.g., number of publications in given period)","All of (3), plus clear team targets (e.g., reduced lab delivery time to x) displayed prominently in office "]
[null,"Incentives",88,"Incentives",null,null,"Few incentives beyond promotions; no clear linkage to performance ratings","Various incentives (e.g., financial, recognition such as plaques, mentions in publications) beyond promotion","Incentives are clearly linked to performance ratings & are transparently conveyed (e.g., clearly defined career trajectory based on performance level)","All of (3), plus team incentives for meeting published team goals, including explicit inclusion of allied disciplines that support given breeding team"]
[null,"Training",89,"Training",null,null,"Very few formal trainings across the organization","Various levels of ongoing technical training (e.g., spending weeks/months at another institution learning a new topic)","All of (2), plus formal onboarding program for new hires to familiarize them with organization structure, strategy & logistical support","All of (3), plus ongoing soft-skill trainings, such as project management, budgeting & accounting "]
[null,"Recruiting",90,"Recruiting: Metrics",null,null,"No metrics identified","Metrics defined, but not regularly used by staff","Metrics defined & tracked as part of annual review process for recruiting","All of (3), plus metrics referred to throughout year (e.g., quarterly)"]
[null,null,91,"Recruiting: Sourcing",null,null,"Organization targets specific talent sources primarily based on volume & individual biases (e.g., alumni relationships)","Organization targets sources with a high number of candidates who meet externally validated or generic selection criteria (e.g., papers published, course lists)","Organization tiers & prioritizes sources known to have high-quality recruits (based on data analysis on internal performance of recruits)","All of (3), plus organization pinpoints sources that help meet organization’s identified diversity & other community needs"]
[null,null,92,"Recruiting: Selection",null,null,"Criteria not well defined or consistent; selection over-reliant on interviewer/ manager judgment","Criteria provide consistent guidance to interviewers to ensure new hires have skills required for the job","Criteria screen for job-specific skills, attitudes & behaviors most desirable in employees; criteria are customized for pivotal roles","All of (3), plus innovative interviewing techniques to surface the attitudes & behaviors of candidates (e.g., full-day technical sessions with scientists)"]
[null,null,93,"Recruiting: Candidate Experience",null,null,"Communications with candidates are inconsistent, infrequent & impersonal","Recruiting process is HR-led, but research program leads make the final hiring decisions","Research programs are involved in every aspect of the process (e.g., sourcing, recruiting & interviewing); candidates are cultivated during all aspects of recruiting","All of (3), plus the entire organization is involved & aligned on the importance of recruiting; performance evaluations recognize recruiting participation"]
[null,"Performance management",null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,null,{"$f":"AVERAGE($L$121:$L$129)","v":{"$error":"#DIV/0!"}}]