Description: This report discusses the Comparative Assessment of Peer Review (CAPR) project outcomes. Public funding agencies are required to demonstrate accountability to their government funders (e.g., Congress) as well as to the public. Some agencies - including the US National Science Foundation (NSF) - have used broader societal impacts criteria as part of the review process of grant proposals in order to connect scientific research to societal needs. But these agencies have often encountered questions from scientists and engineers for how to integrate such demands for broader societal impacts into their research proposals. In an effort to help clarify the idea of broader impacts, in 2010 NSF and Congress proposed a list of national needs that NSF-funded research would be required to meet. But was this the best solution? This report discusses the authors' research.