Replaces Doc(s):
NSF 22-526
Nationwide Science Basis
Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Financial Sciences     SBE Workplace of Multidisciplinary Actions
Workplace of Worldwide Science and Engineering
Directorate for Organic Sciences
Directorate for Laptop and Info Science and Engineering
Directorate for Engineering
Directorate for Geosciences
Directorate for Mathematical and Bodily Sciences
Directorate for STEM Training
Directorate for Expertise, Innovation and Partnerships
Full Proposal Goal Date(s):
     January 25, 2024
     Fourth Thursday in January, Yearly Thereafter
IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND REVISION NOTES
The synopsis, introduction and program description have been up to date to mirror NSF precedence areas, together with these said within the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 (PUBLIC LAW 117–167), in addition to to make clear what varieties of analysis questions and subjects are of explicit curiosity to this system.
Essential Info
The ER2 program doesn’t contemplate proposals targeted totally on ethics for medical college students or in medical schooling. ER2 might, nevertheless, settle for proposals for evaluation that tackle the moral dimensions of medical informatics, biomedical engineering, methods engineering and social scientific research of well being and drugs.
Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation ought to be submitted in accordance with the NSF Proposal & Award Insurance policies & Procedures Information (PAPPG) that’s in impact for the related due date to which the proposal is being submitted. The NSF PAPPG is frequently revised and it’s the accountability of the proposer to make sure that the proposal meets the necessities specified on this solicitation and the relevant model of the PAPPG. Submitting a proposal previous to a specified deadline doesn’t negate this requirement.
SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
Basic Info
Program Title:
Moral and Accountable Analysis (ER2)
Synopsis of Program:
The Moral and Accountable Analysis (ER2) program goals to assist elementary analysis about what constitutes or promotes accountable and moral conduct of analysis (RECR). The ER2 program seeks to encourage science, know-how, engineering and arithmetic (STEM) researchers, practitioners and educators in any respect profession levels to conduct analysis with integrity and to coach others about RECR. Analysis questions of curiosity to this system may tackle moral points involving range, fairness, inclusion, accessibility, bias, tradition, transparency and mentoring or different interpersonal behaviors in analysis environments, in addition to the next:
What constitutes accountable and moral conduct of analysis (RECR) and why?
What are the similarities and variations between RECR norms in numerous fields, sectors (for instance, academia, business and non-profit), or areas (states, areas or international locations), and what can they study from each other by way of selling moral analysis practices?
Which organizational practices, contexts, and incentives promote moral and accountable STEM analysis and why?
Which practices contribute to establishing and sustaining moral cultures, and the way can these practices be transferred and built-in into different analysis and studying settings?
Proposals from or involving substantial collaboration with organizations in EPSCoR-eligible jurisdictions, minority-serving establishments, ladies’s schools or organizations primarily serving individuals with disabilities are strongly inspired. Proposals that embody worldwide collaborations are inspired if the distinctive assets, experience, services or areas of worldwide companions improve the benefit of the proposed work. Please see the NSF PAPPG for steering on worldwide collaborations.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
Please be aware that the next data is present on the time of publishing. See program web site for any updates to the factors of contact.
Jason Borenstein (SBE), Program Director, SBE/SMA, phone: (703) 292-4207, e mail: [email protected]
Frederick M. Kronz (SBE), Program Director, SBE/SES, phone: (703) 292-7283, e mail: [email protected]
Wenda Bauchspies (OISE), Program Director, OD/OISE, phone: (703) 292-5034, e mail: [email protected]
Cindy Bethel (CISE), Program Director, CISE/IIS, phone: (703) 292-4420, e mail: [email protected]
George Richter- Addo (MPS), Program Director, MPS/CHE, phone: (703) 292-7528, e mail: [email protected]
Elizabeth L. Rom (GEO), Program Director, GEO/RISE, phone: (703) 292-7709, e mail: [email protected]
Danielle F. Sumy (TIP), Program Director, TIP/ITE, phone: (703) 292-4217, e mail: [email protected]
Edda Thiels (BIO), Program Director, phone: (703) 292-8421, e mail: [email protected]
Matthew A. Verleger (ENG), Program Director, ENG/EEC, phone: (703) 292-2961, e mail: [email protected]
Alexander A. Romero II, Program Analyst, SBE/OAD, phone: (703) 292-2184, e mail: [email protected]
Relevant Catalog of Federal Home Help (CFDA) Quantity(s):
47.041 — Engineering
47.049 — Mathematical and Bodily Sciences
47.050 — Geosciences
47.070 — Laptop and Info Science and Engineering
47.074 — Organic Sciences
47.075 — Social Behavioral and Financial Sciences
47.076 — STEM Training
47.079 — Workplace of Worldwide Science and Engineering
47.083 — Workplace of Integrative Actions (OIA)
47.084 — NSF Expertise, Innovation and Partnerships
Award Info
Anticipated Kind of Award: Normal Grant
Estimated Variety of Awards: 10 to fifteen
Anticipated Funding Quantity: $5,450,000
This solicitation will contemplate proposals for 4 varieties of initiatives:
Convention Initiatives with a complete price range of $50,000 and a most length of 12 months.
Incubation Initiatives with a complete price range of as much as $90,000 and a most length of 12 months.
Normal Analysis Initiatives with a complete price range of as much as $400,000 and a most length of three years.
Institutional Transformation Analysis Initiatives with a complete price range of as much as $700,000 and a most length of 5 years.
Challenge durations and budgets have to be commensurate with the scope of the work proposed and with steering supplied elsewhere on this solicitation relating to anticipated program assets. NSF anticipates a portfolio of awards with a spread of budgets and durations as much as the utmost quantity.
Estimated program price range, variety of awards, and common award dimension/length are topic to the supply of funds.
Eligibility Info
Who Might Submit Proposals:
Proposals might solely be submitted by the next:
Establishments of Increased Training (IHEs) – Two- and four-year IHEs (together with neighborhood schools) accredited in, and having a campus situated within the US, appearing on behalf of their school members. Particular Directions for Worldwide Department Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal consists of funding to be supplied to a world department campus of a US establishment of upper schooling (together with by way of use of subawards and marketing consultant preparations), the proposer should clarify the profit(s) to the undertaking of efficiency on the worldwide department campus, and justify why the undertaking actions can’t be carried out on the US campus.
Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Unbiased museums, observatories, analysis laboratories, skilled societies and comparable organizations situated within the U.S. which can be instantly related to instructional or analysis actions.
Who Might Function PI:
The management of undertaking groups should have applicable experience. This would possibly embody experience within the STEM domains on which the undertaking focuses, or in ethics, values, analysis and pedagogy. For an Institutional Transformation Analysis Challenge proposal, it’s extremely really useful that at the very least one senior member of the submitting group’s administration (for instance, the provost, a vice provost, and/or the campus president) function the PI or co-PI on the undertaking.
Restrict on Variety of Proposals per Group:
There are not any restrictions or limits.
Restrict on Variety of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 2
A person might seem as PI, co-PI, or Senior Personnel on not more than two proposals submitted in response to this solicitation.
Within the occasion that a person exceeds this restrict, the primary two proposals obtained previous to the goal date might be evaluated by this system for evaluation, and the rest of the person’s proposals might be returned with out evaluation. This limitation consists of proposals submitted by a lead group and any subawards included as a part of a collaborative proposal involving a number of establishments. No exceptions to this rule might be made.
Proposal Preparation and Submission Directions
A. Proposal Preparation Directions
Letters of Intent: Not required
Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required
Full Proposals:
B. Budgetary Info
Value Sharing Necessities:
Inclusion of voluntary dedicated price sharing is prohibited.
Oblique Value (F&A) Limitations:
Not Relevant
Different Budgetary Limitations:
Different budgetary limitations apply. Please see the total textual content of this solicitation for additional data.
C. Due Dates
Full Proposal Goal Date(s):
     January 25, 2024
     Fourth Thursday in January, Yearly Thereafter
Proposal Assessment Info Standards
Benefit Assessment Standards:
Nationwide Science Board authorised standards. Further benefit evaluation standards apply. Please see the total textual content of this solicitation for additional data.
Award Administration Info
Award Situations:
Further award situations apply. Please see the total textual content of this solicitation for additional data.
Reporting Necessities:
Further reporting necessities apply. Please see the total textual content of this solicitation for additional data.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract of Program Necessities
Introduction
Program Description
Award Info
Eligibility Info
Proposal Preparation and Submission Directions
Proposal Preparation Directions
Budgetary Info
Due Dates
Analysis.gov/Grants.gov Necessities
NSF Proposal Processing and Assessment Procedures
Benefit Assessment Ideas and Standards
Assessment and Choice Course of
Award Administration Info
Notification of the Award
Award Situations
Reporting Necessities
Company Contacts
Different Info
Appendix
I. INTRODUCTION
In August of 2017, the NSF Director despatched a discover to universities, schools and different NSF grantee organizations reiterating NSF’s requirement, in accordance with Part 7009 of the America COMPETES Act (H.R. 2272), that every group should “…present applicable coaching and oversight within the moral conduct of analysis to all undergraduates, graduate college students, and postdoctoral researchers who might be supported by NSF to conduct analysis” and “…enhance methods for fostering analysis integrity.” The CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 (PUBLIC LAW 117–167) modified NSF’s accountable and moral conduct of analysis (RECR) coaching and oversight necessities to incorporate “…school and different senior personnel who might be supported by NSF to conduct analysis.” Outcomes from the Moral and Accountable Analysis (ER2) program contribute to the data base, assets and finest practices that inform the implementation of the aforementioned federal legal guidelines.
The ER2 program encourages analysis that generates an improved understanding of how and why analysis approaches, practices and norms foster or hinder ethics schooling and coaching of science, know-how, engineering and arithmetic (STEM) researchers and practitioners. This system goals to assist the formation, enchancment and dissemination of moral analysis practices in STEM fields and to foster organizational cultures that worth and reward educational and analysis integrity (NASEM 2016; NASEM 2017; NASEM 2019). This system additionally seeks to inspire, inform and educate STEM researchers, together with undergraduate and graduate college students, postdoctoral fellows and school, to determine and discover the moral dimensions of analysis in order that their work is attentive to the wants and values of society.
II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The ER2 program goals to assist elementary analysis about what constitutes or promotes accountable and moral conduct of analysis. The ER2 program goals to encourage STEM researchers, practitioners and educators in any respect profession levels to conduct analysis with integrity and to coach others about RECR. A undertaking can embody the event of interventions or functions that search to advertise accountable analysis practices, together with in interdisciplinary, inter-institutional and worldwide contexts. A undertaking may additionally search to determine elements that undermine or erode accountable and moral analysis practices and consider measures to stop or mitigate such elements. A complete method to moral STEM not solely influences particular person conduct, however it additionally maintains and fosters an moral, equitable and simply tradition inside a corporation or analysis discipline. Thus, investigators submitting to this system are inspired to look at organizational and cultural elements that affect moral and accountable analysis apply.
Analysis questions of curiosity to this system may tackle moral points involving range, fairness, inclusion, accessibility, bias, tradition, transparency and mentoring or different interpersonal behaviors in analysis environments, in addition to the next:
What constitutes accountable and moral conduct of analysis (RECR) and why?
What are the similarities and variations between RECR norms in numerous STEM fields or sectors (for instance, academia, business and non-profit), and what can these fields or sectors study from each other by way of selling moral analysis apply?
Which organizational practices, contexts and incentives promote moral and accountable STEM analysis and why?
Which practices contribute to establishing and sustaining moral cultures, and the way can these practices be transferred and built-in into different analysis and studying settings?
The ER2 program helps research that advance the understanding of analysis integrity and the ethics of conducting analysis. This system additionally helps investigating the moral penalties of analysis actions in rising scientific and technological areas. Matters of curiosity to this system embody however should not restricted to moral dimensions of:
Environmental, environmental justice, geoengineering or local weather change analysis.
Analysis involving rising applied sciences corresponding to gene modifying, artificial biology, synthetic intelligence, robotics or cryptography.
Rising applied sciences and their impacts on analysis practices corresponding to authorship, collaboration, mentoring, peer evaluation or analysis misconduct.
Analysis that’s co-designed with practitioners or customers or that includes bringing collectively groups from a number of sectors (for instance, academia, business and non-profit).
Information-related analysis practices corresponding to assortment, governance, entry, possession, administration, sharing and reporting.
Variety, fairness, inclusion and accessibility in STEM analysis, together with mentoring of scholars and postdocs with disabilities.
The prevention of sexual harassment in STEM fields.
STEM analysis in worldwide contexts.
Analysis with Indigenous populations or different traditionally underrepresented teams in STEM or in areas which can be owned or thought of sacred by Indigenous communities.
Initiatives can embody qualitative, quantitative or blended strategies approaches. When working with analysis companions corresponding to native communities, this system expects to see finest practices of accountable analysis being carried out, together with on worldwide initiatives, to co-create data equitably in addition to to develop sturdy partnerships.
Proposals ought to specify plans to disseminate findings to applicable analysis and academic communities and help them to implement initiatives or packages primarily based on the findings. As well as, ER2 awardees should submit undertaking deliverables corresponding to ethics case research, modules and teacher supplies to the On-line Ethics Middle for Engineering and Science and share undertaking findings at biennial ER2 PI conferences. The PI conferences might alternate between in-person and digital codecs. PIs are chargeable for masking the bills of taking part in these conferences all through the length of their award and should embody these prices of their proposed price range.
Along with publications housed inside NSF’s Public Entry Repository, investigators can find most of the ethics supplies developed by way of initiatives beforehand supported by the ER2 program at a number of of the next:
Ethics Training Library, Middle for Examine of Ethics within the Professions, Illinois Institute of Expertise
IDEESE: Worldwide Dimensions of Ethics Training in Science & Engineering, College of Massachusetts Amherst.
Nationwide Middle for Skilled & Analysis Ethics, College of Illinois.
On-line Ethics Middle, College of Virginia.
The objects within the above listing are ethics useful resource facilities which have obtained funding from NSF. A number of the supplies out there by way of these facilities concentrate on discipline-specific moral points whereas others are geared toward broader points which can be frequent throughout disciplines. Such supplies can enhance particular person and collective conduct by fostering moral apply throughout all levels of analysis and all through the analysis enterprise.
Word: The ER2 program doesn’t contemplate proposals targeted totally on ethics for medical college students or in medical schooling. ER2 might, nevertheless, settle for proposals for evaluation that tackle the moral dimensions of medical informatics, biomedical engineering, methods engineering and social scientific research of well being and drugs.
Mentoring and Scholar Researchers
A proposal that requests funding for undergraduate or graduate college students to conduct analysis is anticipated to incorporate a bit that describes mentoring-related actions. This part should seem within the Challenge Description below the title, “Mentoring Scholar Researchers.” It may be positioned, for instance, inside the Broader Impacts part.
TYPES OF PROPOSALS
Normal Analysis Initiatives
Normal Analysis Initiatives ought to produce new data about what fosters moral analysis. Normal Analysis Challenge proposals will be collaborative. See the Reporting Necessities part of this solicitation (Part VII.C) for pertinent data regarding commonplace analysis awards.
Finances Pointers for Normal Analysis Initiatives
A proposal for an ER2 Normal Analysis Challenge can request a complete price range of as much as $400,000 and a most length of three years.
Institutional Transformation Analysis Initiatives
Institutional Transformation Analysis Initiatives are designed to assist the event, implementation and analysis of progressive systemic change methods that promote accountable and moral conduct of analysis inside a number of establishments of upper schooling. Profitable proposals sometimes have a comparative dimension, both (1) between or inside institutional settings, or (2) over time — earlier than and after an intervention. Investigators are anticipated to collect and report baseline knowledge within the first annual report. Institutional Transformation Analysis Initiatives will be collaborative. A proposal of this kind should embody “Institutional Transformation” inside its title.
See the Reporting Necessities part of this solicitation (Part VII.C) for pertinent data regarding Institutional Transformation Analysis awards.
Finances Pointers for Institutional Transformation Analysis ProjectsA proposal for an ER2 Institutional Transformation Challenge can request a complete price range of as much as $700,000 and a most length of 5 years.
Incubation Initiatives
Incubation Initiatives present funds for STEM researchers and directors from a number of organizations to collaborate to develop and later submit a ER2 Normal Analysis or Institutional Transformation proposal. An Incubation Challenge can solely present one 12 months of assist, should span at the very least two organizations and will contain a pilot research and/or workshop(s).
Those that intend to submit an Incubation Challenge proposal should seek the advice of with an ER2 program officer earlier than submitting to establish the suitability of the envisioned exercise. Challenge Incubation proposals ought to be submitted by the goal date for this solicitation and are reviewed together with analysis proposals. A proposal of this kind should embody “Incubation Challenge” inside its title.
Finances Pointers for Incubation Initiatives
A proposal for an ER2 Incubation Challenge ought to sometimes request a price range of not more than $90,000 in complete prices.
Convention Initiatives
The ER2 program helps thematic conferences designed to carry collectively researchers and different stakeholders, particularly those that haven’t partnered beforehand, to foster new analysis, determine rising challenges and alternatives or develop new requirements pertaining to moral and accountable practices inside STEM communities. Convention proposals ought to usually concentrate on organizational or cultural elements that affect such practices. The ER2 program doesn’t assist gatherings whose major goal is to share the outcomes of accomplished analysis.
Convention proposals ought to typically be submitted a 12 months upfront of the proposed occasion. The ER2 program encourages convention proposals to explain plans for together with graduate college students and members of traditionally underrepresented teams as lively convention individuals.
Convention proposals could also be reviewed at any time, together with after this system’s goal date for analysis proposals. A proposal of this kind should embody “Convention” inside its title. For basic steering about conferences, together with an inventory of required parts and price range exclusions, observe the PAPPG steering for making ready Convention Proposals (PAPPG Chapter II.F).
Finances Pointers for Convention Initiatives
A proposal for an ER2 Convention Challenge ought to sometimes request a price range of not more than $50,000 in complete prices. The ER2 program will contemplate requests for conferences that exceed this quantity solely in particular circumstances.
III. AWARD INFORMATION
Anticipated Kind of Award: Normal Grant
Estimated Variety of Awards: 10-15
Anticipated Funding Quantity: $5,450,000
Estimated complete annual funding quantity is $5,450,000 topic to the supply of funds. The utmost quantity for 5-year awards is $700,000 (together with oblique prices), and the utmost quantity for 3-year awards is $400,000 (together with oblique prices).
Estimated program price range, variety of awards and common award dimension/length are topic to the supply of funds.
IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
Who Might Submit Proposals:
Proposals might solely be submitted by the next:
Establishments of Increased Training (IHEs) – Two- and four-year IHEs (together with neighborhood schools) accredited in, and having a campus situated within the US, appearing on behalf of their school members. Particular Directions for Worldwide Department Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal consists of funding to be supplied to a world department campus of a US establishment of upper schooling (together with by way of use of subawards and marketing consultant preparations), the proposer should clarify the profit(s) to the undertaking of efficiency on the worldwide department campus, and justify why the undertaking actions can’t be carried out on the US campus.
Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Unbiased museums, observatories, analysis laboratories, skilled societies and comparable organizations situated within the U.S. which can be instantly related to instructional or analysis actions.
Who Might Function PI:
The management of undertaking groups should have applicable experience. This would possibly embody experience within the STEM domains on which the undertaking focuses, or in ethics, values, analysis and pedagogy. For an Institutional Transformation Analysis Challenge proposal, it’s extremely really useful that at the very least one senior member of the submitting group’s administration (for instance, the provost, a vice provost, and/or the campus president) function the PI or co-PI on the undertaking.
Restrict on Variety of Proposals per Group:
There are not any restrictions or limits.
Restrict on Variety of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 2
A person might seem as PI, co-PI, or Senior Personnel on not more than two proposals submitted in response to this solicitation.
Within the occasion that a person exceeds this restrict, the primary two proposals obtained previous to the goal date might be evaluated by this system for evaluation, and the rest of the person’s proposals might be returned with out evaluation. This limitation consists of proposals submitted by a lead group and any subawards included as a part of a collaborative proposal involving a number of establishments. No exceptions to this rule might be made.
Further Eligibility Information:
Different varieties of organizations will be included solely as non-lead collaborators or subawardees.
Proposals from or involving substantial collaboration with organizations in EPSCoR-eligible jurisdictions, minority-serving establishments , ladies’s schools or organizations primarily serving individuals with disabilities are strongly inspired. Proposals that embody worldwide collaborations are inspired if the distinctive assets, experience, services or areas of worldwide companions improve the benefit of the proposed work. Please see the NSF PAPPG for steering on worldwide collaborations.
V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
A. Proposal Preparation Directions
Full Proposal Preparation Directions: Proposers might choose to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation through Analysis.gov or Grants.gov.
Full Proposals submitted through Analysis.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation ought to be ready and submitted in accordance with the final tips contained within the NSF Proposal and Award Insurance policies and Procedures Information (PAPPG). The entire textual content of the PAPPG is on the market electronically on the NSF web site at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg. Paper copies of the PAPPG could also be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, phone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected]. The Put together New Proposal setup will immediate you for this system solicitation quantity.
Full proposals submitted through Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation through Grants.gov ought to be ready and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Software Information: A Information for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Purposes through Grants.gov. The entire textual content of the NSF Grants.gov Software Information is on the market on the Grants.gov web site and on the NSF web site at: (https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide). To acquire copies of the Software Information and Software Varieties Package deal, click on on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov web site, then click on on the Apply Step 1: Obtain a Grant Software Package deal and Software Directions hyperlink and enter the funding alternative quantity, (this system solicitation quantity with out the NSF prefix) and press the Obtain Package deal button. Paper copies of the Grants.gov Software Information additionally could also be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, phone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected].
In figuring out which methodology to make the most of within the digital preparation and submission of the proposal, please be aware the next:
Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from a number of organizations have to be submitted through Analysis.gov. PAPPG Chapter II.E.3 offers extra data on collaborative proposals.
See PAPPG Chapter II.D.2 for steering on the required sections of a full analysis proposal submitted to NSF. Please be aware that the proposal preparation directions supplied on this program solicitation might deviate from the PAPPG directions.
Please discuss with Part II, Program Description, for particular proposal preparation data and directions.
B. Budgetary Info
Value Sharing:
Inclusion of voluntary dedicated price sharing is prohibited.
Different Budgetary Limitations:
Different budgetary limitations apply. Please see the total textual content of this solicitation (Sections V.B and VII.B) for additional data.
C. Due Dates
Full Proposal Goal Date(s):
     January 25, 2024
     Fourth Thursday in January, Yearly Thereafter
D. Analysis.gov/Grants.gov Necessities
For Proposals Submitted Through Analysis.gov:
To organize and submit a proposal through Analysis.gov, see detailed technical directions out there at: https://www.analysis.gov/research-portal/appmanager/base/desktop?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=research_node_display&_nodePath=/researchGov/Service/Desktop/ProposalPreparationandSubmission.html. For Analysis.gov person assist, name the Analysis.gov Assist Desk at 1-800-381-1532 or e-mail [email protected]. The Analysis.gov Assist Desk solutions basic technical questions associated to the usage of the Analysis.gov system. Particular questions associated to this program solicitation ought to be referred to the NSF program workers contact(s) listed in Part VIII of this funding alternative.
For Proposals Submitted Through Grants.gov:
Earlier than utilizing Grants.gov for the primary time, every group should register to create an institutional profile. As soon as registered, the applicant’s group can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov web site. Complete details about utilizing Grants.gov is on the market on the Grants.gov Applicant Assets webpage: https://www.grants.gov/net/grants/candidates.html. As well as, the NSF Grants.gov Software Information (see hyperlink in Part V.A) offers directions relating to the technical preparation of proposals through Grants.gov. For Grants.gov person assist, contact the Grants.gov Contact Middle at 1-800-518-4726 or by e mail: [email protected]. The Grants.gov Contact Middle solutions basic technical questions associated to the usage of Grants.gov. Particular questions associated to this program solicitation ought to be referred to the NSF program workers contact(s) listed in Part VIII of this solicitation.
Submitting the Proposal: As soon as all paperwork have been accomplished, the Licensed Organizational Consultant (AOR) should submit the applying to Grants.gov and confirm the specified funding alternative and company to which the applying is submitted. The AOR should then signal and submit the applying to Grants.gov. The finished software might be transferred to Analysis.gov for additional processing.
The NSF Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Analysis.gov informational web page offers submission steering to candidates and hyperlinks to useful assets together with the NSF Grants.gov Software Information, Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Analysis.gov how-to information, and Grants.gov Submitted Proposals Ceaselessly Requested Questions. Grants.gov proposals should cross all NSF pre-check and post-check validations with a view to be accepted by Analysis.gov at NSF.
When submitting through Grants.gov, NSF strongly recommends candidates provoke proposal submission at the very least 5 enterprise days upfront of a deadline to permit enough time to deal with NSF compliance errors and resubmissions by 5:00 p.m. submitting group’s native time on the deadline. Please be aware that some errors can’t be corrected in Grants.gov. As soon as a proposal passes pre-checks however fails any post-check, an applicant can solely right and submit the in-progress proposal in Analysis.gov.
Proposers that submitted through Analysis.gov might use Analysis.gov to confirm the standing of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted through Grants.gov, till an software has been obtained and validated by NSF, the Licensed Organizational Consultant might verify the standing of an software on Grants.gov. After proposers have obtained an e-mail notification from NSF, Analysis.gov ought to be used to verify the standing of an software.
VI. NSF PROPOSAL PROCESSING AND REVIEW PROCEDURES
Proposals obtained by NSF are assigned to the suitable NSF program for acknowledgement and, in the event that they meet NSF necessities, for evaluation. All proposals are rigorously reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and normally by three to 10 different individuals exterior NSF both as advert hoc reviewers, panelists, or each, who’re consultants within the explicit fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are chosen by Program Officers charged with oversight of the evaluation course of. Proposers are invited to recommend names of individuals they imagine are particularly nicely certified to evaluation the proposal and/or individuals they would favor not evaluation the proposal. These recommendations might function one supply within the reviewer choice course of on the Program Officer’s discretion. Submission of such names, nevertheless, is non-compulsory. Care is taken to make sure that reviewers haven’t any conflicts of curiosity with the proposal. As well as, Program Officers might get hold of feedback from web site visits earlier than recommending remaining motion on proposals. Senior NSF workers additional evaluation suggestions for awards. A flowchart that depicts your complete NSF proposal and award course of (and related timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1.
A complete description of the Basis’s benefit evaluation course of is on the market on the NSF web site at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/coverage/merit_review/.
Proposers also needs to concentrate on core methods which can be important to the success of NSF’s mission, as articulated in Main the World in Discovery and Innovation, STEM Expertise Growth and the Supply of Advantages from Analysis – NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2022 – 2026. These methods are built-in in this system planning and implementation course of, of which proposal evaluation is one half. NSF’s mission is especially well-implemented by way of the mixing of analysis and schooling and broadening participation in NSF packages, initiatives, and actions.
One of many strategic aims in assist of NSF’s mission is to foster integration of analysis and schooling by way of the packages, initiatives, and actions it helps at educational and analysis establishments. These establishments should recruit, prepare, and put together a various STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and take part within the U.S. technology-based economic system. NSF’s contribution to the nationwide innovation ecosystem is to supply cutting-edge analysis below the steering of the Nation’s most inventive scientists and engineers. NSF additionally helps growth of a powerful science, know-how, engineering, and arithmetic (STEM) workforce by investing in constructing the data that informs enhancements in STEM instructing and studying.
NSF’s mission requires the broadening of alternatives and increasing participation of teams, establishments, and geographic areas which can be underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is crucial to the well being and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is dedicated to this precept of range and deems it central to the packages, initiatives, and actions it considers and helps.
A. Benefit Assessment Ideas and Standards
The Nationwide Science Basis strives to spend money on a strong and various portfolio of initiatives that creates new data and permits breakthroughs in understanding throughout all areas of science and engineering analysis and schooling. To determine which initiatives to assist, NSF depends on a benefit evaluation course of that includes consideration of each the technical elements of a proposed undertaking and its potential to contribute extra broadly to advancing NSF’s mission “to advertise the progress of science; to advance the nationwide well being, prosperity, and welfare; to safe the nationwide protection; and for different functions.” NSF makes each effort to conduct a good, aggressive, clear benefit evaluation course of for the choice of initiatives.
1. Benefit Assessment Ideas
These ideas are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when making ready proposals and managing initiatives, by reviewers when studying and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program workers when figuring out whether or not or to not advocate proposals for funding and whereas overseeing awards. On condition that NSF is the first federal company charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in primary analysis and schooling, the next three ideas apply:
All NSF initiatives ought to be of the best high quality and have the potential to advance, if not remodel, the frontiers of information.
NSF initiatives, within the combination, ought to contribute extra broadly to attaining societal targets. These “Broader Impacts” could also be achieved by way of the analysis itself, by way of actions which can be instantly associated to particular analysis initiatives, or by way of actions which can be supported by, however are complementary to, the undertaking. The undertaking actions could also be primarily based on beforehand established and/or progressive strategies and approaches, however in both case have to be nicely justified.
Significant evaluation and analysis of NSF funded initiatives ought to be primarily based on applicable metrics, maintaining in thoughts the possible correlation between the impact of broader impacts and the assets supplied to implement initiatives. If the scale of the exercise is restricted, analysis of that exercise in isolation will not be prone to be significant. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of those actions might finest be achieved at the next, extra aggregated, degree than the person undertaking.
With respect to the third precept, even when evaluation of Broader Impacts outcomes for explicit initiatives is completed at an aggregated degree, PIs are anticipated to be accountable for finishing up the actions described within the funded undertaking. Thus, particular person initiatives ought to embody clearly said targets, particular descriptions of the actions that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to doc the outputs of these actions.
These three benefit evaluation ideas present the idea for the benefit evaluation standards, in addition to a context inside which the customers of the standards can higher perceive their intent.
2. Benefit Assessment Standards
All NSF proposals are evaluated by way of use of the 2 Nationwide Science Board authorised benefit evaluation standards. In some situations, nevertheless, NSF will make use of extra standards as required to focus on the precise aims of sure packages and actions.
The 2 benefit evaluation standards are listed beneath. Each standards are to be given full consideration throughout the evaluation and decision-making processes; every criterion is critical however neither, by itself, is ample. Subsequently, proposers should absolutely tackle each standards. (PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i). comprises extra data to be used by proposers in growth of the Challenge Description part of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly inspired to evaluation the standards, together with PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i), previous to the evaluation of a proposal.
When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers might be requested to think about what the proposers need to do, why they need to do it, how they plan to do it, how they are going to know in the event that they succeed, and what advantages may accrue if the undertaking is profitable. These points apply each to the technical elements of the proposal and the way in which by which the undertaking might make broader contributions. To that finish, reviewers might be requested to judge all proposals towards two standards:
Mental Benefit: The Mental Benefit criterion encompasses the potential to advance data; and
Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to learn society and contribute to the achievement of particular, desired societal outcomes.
The next parts ought to be thought of within the evaluation for each standards:
What’s the potential for the proposed exercise to
Advance data and understanding inside its personal discipline or throughout totally different fields (Mental Benefit); and
Profit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?
To what extent do the proposed actions recommend and discover inventive, authentic, or probably transformative ideas?
Is the plan for finishing up the proposed actions well-reasoned, well-organized, and primarily based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to evaluate success?
How nicely certified is the person, workforce, or group to conduct the proposed actions?
Are there enough assets out there to the PI (both on the dwelling group or by way of collaborations) to hold out the proposed actions?
Broader impacts could also be achieved by way of the analysis itself, by way of the actions which can be instantly associated to particular analysis initiatives, or by way of actions which can be supported by, however are complementary to, the undertaking. NSF values the development of scientific data and actions that contribute to achievement of societally related outcomes. Such outcomes embody, however should not restricted to: full participation of girls, individuals with disabilities, and different underrepresented teams in science, know-how, engineering, and arithmetic (STEM); improved STEM schooling and educator growth at any degree; elevated public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and know-how; improved well-being of people in society; growth of a various, globally aggressive STEM workforce; elevated partnerships between academia, business, and others; improved nationwide safety; elevated financial competitiveness of the US; and enhanced infrastructure for analysis and schooling.
Proposers are reminded that reviewers may also be requested to evaluation the Information Administration Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as applicable.
Further Solicitation Particular Assessment Standards
The next extra evaluation standards are given for Institutional Transformation Analysis Challenge proposals:
How important will the research of the proposed institutional transformation actions be to the data base about what fosters moral analysis?
To what diploma are the proposed actions linked to the institutional context, and are there indicators of institutional readiness and dedication to the undertaking’s transformational actions and targets?
To what diploma does the proposal embody well-formulated and possible plans for analysis of the effectiveness of the proposed institutional transformation actions?
How nicely is the related social science literature integrated into the design of the proposed actions?
Are mechanisms deliberate and clearly described to make sure the long-term sustainability of transformational actions or targets past the length of the funded undertaking?
Are there enough supporting supplies to doc dedication from the people and establishments listed as having a substantive position within the undertaking?
B. Assessment and Choice Course of
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation might be reviewed by Advert hoc Assessment and/or Panel Assessment, or Inner NSF Assessment.
Reviewers might be requested to judge proposals utilizing two Nationwide Science Board authorised benefit evaluation standards and, if relevant, extra program particular standards. A abstract score and accompanying narrative will typically be accomplished and submitted by every reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to handle the proposal’s evaluation will contemplate the recommendation of reviewers and can formulate a advice.
After scientific, technical and programmatic evaluation and consideration of applicable elements, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether or not the proposal ought to be declined or really useful for award. NSF strives to have the ability to inform proposers whether or not their proposals have been declined or really useful for funding inside six months. Giant or notably advanced proposals or proposals from new recipients might require extra evaluation and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or goal date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer’s advice.
After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals really useful for funding might be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements or the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Help for evaluation of enterprise, monetary, and coverage implications. After an administrative evaluation has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers carry out the processing and issuance of a grant or different settlement. Proposers are cautioned that solely a Grants and Agreements Officer might make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No dedication on the a part of NSF ought to be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or group that makes monetary or personnel commitments within the absence of a grant or cooperative settlement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their very own threat.
As soon as an award or declination choice has been made, Principal Investigators are supplied suggestions about their proposals. In all circumstances, evaluations are handled as confidential paperwork. Verbatim copies of evaluations, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying data, are despatched to the Principal Investigator/Challenge Director by the Program Officer. As well as, the proposer will obtain a proof of the choice to award or decline funding.
VII. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION
A. Notification of the Award
Notification of the award is made to the submitting group by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer. Organizations whose proposals are declined might be suggested as promptly as doable by the cognizant NSF Program administering this system. Verbatim copies of evaluations, not together with the identification of the reviewer, might be supplied routinely to the Principal Investigator. (See Part VI.B. for added data on the evaluation course of.)
B. Award Situations
An NSF award consists of: (1) the award discover, which incorporates any particular provisions relevant to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the price range, which signifies the quantities, by classes of expense, on which NSF has primarily based its assist (or in any other case communicates any particular approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced within the award discover; (4) the relevant award situations, corresponding to Grant Basic Situations (GC-1)*; or Analysis Phrases and Situations* and (5) any announcement or different NSF issuance that could be integrated by reference within the award discover. Cooperative agreements are also administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Settlement Monetary and Administrative Phrases and Situations (CA-FATC) and the relevant Programmatic Phrases and Situations. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the group through e-mail.
*These paperwork could also be accessed electronically on NSF’s Web site at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper copies could also be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, phone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected].
Extra complete data on NSF Award Situations and different necessary data on the administration of NSF awards is contained within the NSF Proposal & Award Insurance policies & Procedures Information (PAPPG) Chapter VII, out there electronically on the NSF Web site at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg.
Administrative and Nationwide Coverage Necessities
Construct America, Purchase America
As expressed in Govt Order 14005, Guaranteeing the Future is Made in All of America by All of America’s Staff (86 FR 7475), it’s the coverage of the manager department to make use of phrases and situations of Federal monetary help awards to maximise, per legislation, the usage of items, merchandise, and supplies produced in, and companies supplied in, the US.
In line with the necessities of the Construct America, Purchase America Act (Pub. L. 117-58, Division G, Title IX, Subtitle A, November 15, 2021), no funding made out there by way of this funding alternative could also be obligated for an award except all iron, metal, manufactured merchandise, and building supplies used within the undertaking are produced in the US. For extra data, go to NSF’s Construct America, Purchase America webpage.
Particular Award Situations:
Normal NSF award situations apply.
As well as, ER2 awardees should submit undertaking deliverables corresponding to ethics case research, modules and teacher supplies to the On-line Ethics Middle for Engineering and Science and share undertaking findings at biennial ER2 PI conferences. The PI conferences might alternate between in-person and digital codecs. PIs are chargeable for masking the bills of taking part in these conferences all through the length of their award and should embody these prices of their proposed price range.
C. Reporting Necessities
For all multi-year grants (together with each commonplace and persevering with grants), the Principal Investigator should submit an annual undertaking report back to the cognizant Program Officer no later than 90 days previous to the top of the present price range interval. (Some packages or awards require submission of extra frequent undertaking studies). No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI is also required to submit a remaining undertaking report, and a undertaking outcomes report for most of the people.
Failure to supply the required annual or remaining undertaking studies, or the undertaking outcomes report, will delay NSF evaluation and processing of any future funding increments in addition to any pending proposals for all recognized PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs ought to study the codecs of the required studies upfront to guarantee availability of required knowledge.
PIs are required to make use of NSF’s digital project-reporting system, out there by way of Analysis.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and remaining undertaking studies. Such studies present data on accomplishments, undertaking individuals (particular person and organizational), publications, and different particular merchandise and impacts of the undertaking. Submission of the report through Analysis.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are correct and full. The undertaking outcomes report additionally have to be ready and submitted utilizing Analysis.gov. This report serves as a quick abstract, ready particularly for the general public, of the character and outcomes of the undertaking. This report might be posted on the NSF web site precisely as it’s submitted by the PI.
Extra complete data on NSF Reporting Necessities and different necessary data on the administration of NSF awards is contained within the NSF Proposal & Award Insurance policies & Procedures Information (PAPPG) Chapter VII, out there electronically on the NSF Web site at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg.
The next reporting necessities are given due to this system’s emphasis on the comparative dimension of various approaches to the formation of STEM researchers who’re dedicated to moral educational and analysis practices and to the cultivation of institutional cultures that worth, count on, and reward educational and analysis integrity.
Within the “Accomplishments” part of annual and remaining studies, PIs are required to report on the next: What actions have been taken because of ER2 that instantly or not directly result in the formation of moral STEM researchers and to larger consideration to the aim of and means for creating moral sociotechnical methods? How is the effectiveness of those interventions being measured?
For Institutional Transformation Analysis Proposals, the PIs may also report on: What actions have been taken by establishments because of the ER2 program which have instantly or not directly contributed to a tradition that prioritizes educational and analysis integrity? How is the effectiveness of those actions being measured?
VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS
Please be aware that this system contact data is present on the time of publishing. See program web site for any updates to the factors of contact.
Basic inquiries relating to this program ought to be made to:
Jason Borenstein (SBE), Program Director, SBE/SMA, phone: (703) 292-4207, e mail: [email protected]
Frederick M. Kronz (SBE), Program Director, SBE/SES, phone: (703) 292-7283, e mail: [email protected]
Wenda Bauchspies (OISE), Program Director, OD/OISE, phone: (703) 292-5034, e mail: [email protected]
Cindy Bethel (CISE), Program Director, CISE/IIS, phone: (703) 292-4420, e mail: [email protected]
George Richter- Addo (MPS), Program Director, MPS/CHE, phone: (703) 292-7528, e mail: [email protected]
Elizabeth L. Rom (GEO), Program Director, GEO/RISE, phone: (703) 292-7709, e mail: [email protected]
Danielle F. Sumy (TIP), Program Director, TIP/ITE, phone: (703) 292-4217, e mail: [email protected]
Edda Thiels (BIO), Program Director, phone: (703) 292-8421, e mail: [email protected]
Matthew A. Verleger (ENG), Program Director, ENG/EEC, phone: (703) 292-2961, e mail: [email protected]
Alexander A. Romero II, Program Analyst, SBE/OAD, phone: (703) 292-2184, e mail: [email protected]
For questions associated to the usage of NSF methods contact:
NSF Assist Desk: 1-800-381-1532
Analysis.gov Assist Desk e-mail: [email protected]
For questions referring to Grants.gov contact:
Grants.gov Contact Middle: If the Licensed Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not obtained a affirmation message from Grants.gov inside 48 hours of submission of software, please contact through phone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail: [email protected].
IX. OTHER INFORMATION
The NSF web site offers essentially the most complete supply of knowledge on NSF Directorates (together with contact data), packages and funding alternatives. Use of this web site by potential proposers is strongly inspired. As well as, “NSF Replace” is an information-delivery system designed to maintain potential proposers and different events apprised of latest NSF funding alternatives and publications, necessary modifications in proposal and award insurance policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences. Subscribers are knowledgeable by way of e-mail or the person’s Net browser every time new publications are issued that match their recognized pursuits. “NSF Replace” additionally is on the market on NSF’s web site.
Grants.gov offers an extra digital functionality to seek for Federal government-wide grant alternatives. NSF funding alternatives could also be accessed through this mechanism. Additional data on Grants.gov could also be obtained at https://www.grants.gov.
ABOUT THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
The Nationwide Science Basis (NSF) is an unbiased Federal company created by the Nationwide Science Basis Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the aim of the NSF is “to advertise the progress of science; [and] to advance the nationwide well being, prosperity, and welfare by supporting analysis and schooling in all fields of science and engineering.”
NSF funds analysis and schooling in most fields of science and engineering. It does this by way of grants and cooperative agreements to greater than 2,000 schools, universities, Okay-12 faculty methods, companies, casual science organizations and different analysis organizations all through the US. The Basis accounts for about one-fourth of Federal assist to educational establishments for primary analysis.
NSF receives roughly 55,000 proposals every year for analysis, schooling and coaching initiatives, of which roughly 11,000 are funded. As well as, the Basis receives a number of thousand functions for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The company operates no laboratories itself however does assist Nationwide Analysis Facilities, person services, sure oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic analysis stations. The Basis additionally helps cooperative analysis between universities and business, US participation in worldwide scientific and engineering efforts, and academic actions at each educational degree.
Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) present funding for particular help or gear to allow individuals with disabilities to work on NSF-supported initiatives. See the NSF Proposal & Award Insurance policies & Procedures Information Chapter II.F.7 for directions relating to preparation of these kind of proposals.
The Nationwide Science Basis has Telephonic Machine for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Info Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that allow people with listening to impairments to speak with the Basis about NSF packages, employment or basic data. TDD could also be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.
The Nationwide Science Basis Info Middle could also be reached at (703) 292-5111.
The Nationwide Science Basis promotes and advances scientific progress in the US by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for analysis and schooling within the sciences, arithmetic, and engineering.
To get the most recent details about program deadlines, to obtain copies of NSF publications, and to entry abstracts of awards, go to the NSF Web site at https://www.nsf.gov
2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314
For Basic Info(NSF Info Middle):
(703) 292-5111
TDD (for the hearing-impaired):
(703) 292-5090
To Order Publications or Varieties:
Â
Ship an e-mail to:
or phone:
(703) 292-8134
(703) 292-5111
PRIVACY ACT AND PUBLIC BURDEN STATEMENTS
The data requested on proposal varieties and undertaking studies is solicited below the authority of the Nationwide Science Basis Act of 1950, as amended. The data on proposal varieties might be utilized in reference to the choice of certified proposals; and undertaking studies submitted by proposers might be used for program analysis and reporting inside the Govt Department and to Congress. The data requested could also be disclosed to certified reviewers and workers assistants as a part of the proposal evaluation course of; to proposer establishments/grantees to supply or get hold of knowledge relating to the proposal evaluation course of, award choices, or the administration of awards; to authorities contractors, consultants, volunteers and researchers and educators as obligatory to finish assigned work; to different authorities companies or different entities needing data relating to proposers or nominees as a part of a joint software evaluation course of, or with a view to coordinate packages or coverage; and to a different Federal company, courtroom, or get together in a courtroom or Federal administrative continuing if the federal government is a celebration. Details about Principal Investigators could also be added to the Reviewer file and used to pick potential candidates to function peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See System of Document Notices, NSF-50, “Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Related Data,” and NSF-51, “Reviewer/Proposal File and Related Data.” Submission of the data is voluntary. Failure to supply full and full data, nevertheless, might scale back the potential for receiving an award.
An company might not conduct or sponsor, and an individual will not be required to answer, an data assortment except it shows a sound Workplace of Administration and Finances (OMB) management quantity. The OMB management quantity for this assortment is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for this assortment of knowledge is estimated to common 120 hours per response, together with the time for reviewing directions. Ship feedback relating to the burden estimate and another facet of this assortment of knowledge, together with recommendations for lowering this burden, to:
Suzanne H. Plimpton
Stories Clearance Officer
Coverage Workplace, Division of Establishment and Award Help
Workplace of Finances, Finance, and Award Administration
Nationwide Science Basis
Alexandria, VA 22314
X. APPENDIX
References Cited
Nationwide Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medication. (2016). Optimizing the Nation’s Funding in Educational Analysis: A New Regulatory Framework for the twenty first Century. Washington, DC: The Nationwide Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/21824.
Nationwide Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medication. (2017). Fostering Integrity in Analysis. Washington, DC: The Nationwide Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/21896.
Nationwide Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medication. (2019). Reproducibility and Replicability in Science. Washington, DC: The Nationwide Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25303.
