8065	Assessment
Research Question	The general area of proposed research seems clear enough, but the research question is rather vague.  It seems to concern the disadvantages in insurance rates or coverage for people in the lower or working classes, but none of these concepts is clear enough to know where this is going.  Disadvantage, in particular, implies a comparison and it is not obvious who or what is being compared.  It could be that the research wants to show that lower class homeowners in flood zones pay higher insurance rates compared to the risk and home value than do higher class people in comparable conditions.  Or, it could be that those in flood zones pay more than those not in flood zones when indexed accurately for risk and home value (which would imply within class comparisons).  Or, it could imply concern with post-catastrophe differences, or other things.  The research cannot possible do all this, it has to make a choice and build toward it.
Relevant Literature	While the specific writings on the programs and groups to be researched are part of the relevant literature, they are only that.  The key relevant literature from a scholarly perspective includes the work that addresses theoretically relevant issues, probably including studies of the insurance industry, research on insurance rate setting (particularly under conditions of unpredictable risks), research on institutional and political discrimination against lower-class people and neighborhoods, among others.     Also, rather than baldly declaring that the NFIP “has failed,” you will want to be more precise concerning what research has shown about the NFIP’s effectiveness or failings in different domains, such as affordability, homeowner incentives, or the like. A proposal should be wary of using loaded words, and should be careful to back up such claims with references to evidence.
Causal Interpretations	While it is feasible to focus the research project on descriptive issues rather than causal ones, this does not mean that causality walked out of the room.  Without a working understanding of the relevant causal processes, one has no idea what is worth looking at, what needs to be controlled, and so forth.  So, like it or not, you need some rough model(s) of the processes that have been at work, and these are - implicitly if not explicitly - causal.  What is said in this topic proposal suggests that you have such models in mind - you need to make them explicit.
Data	The data mentioned seem relevant, but the presentation refers to too many kinds of data, independent and problematic to merge, without a clear plan for deciding what is valuable for the research.  This is a recipe for chaos.  This calls for simplification, focus, and clarity.
Research Value	The reasons offered are fine, but the value of all research depends on what it promises to offer that is not already known.  That is what you need to specify.
Timetable	It is difficult to believe that the project discussed here can be executed according to the suggested schedule.  This would become likely only by cutting back and giving much more focus.
Priorities for Developing a Full Draft	Simplify, clarify, make concrete.
Miscellaneous Notes