Replaces Doc(s):
NSF 21-611
Nationwide Science Basis
Directorate for Geosciences Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter’s native time):
Proposals Accepted Anytime
IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND REVISION NOTES
The FIRP Solicitation has been revised to make modifications primarily based on group suggestions and to make clear facets of the request course of. The abstract of key modifications follows:
Individually submitted collaborative proposals are actually allowed for all proposal Tracks. PIs ought to focus on with the related NSF Program Director (PD) whether or not a individually submitted collaborative proposal or a single proposal with subawards is most popular if there are a number of companions. Prices for the amenities part of the proposals will proceed to be funded as subawards or dietary supplements to facility suppliers.
The Monitor 1 funding cap has been raised to $75,000. Of this quantity, not more than $50,000 is allowed for deployment of property. These caps could also be waived for airborne campaigns.
Proposal deadline dates have been eliminated.
The Nationwide Middle for Atmospheric Analysis (NCAR) Earth Observing Laboratory (EOL)-led Observing Facility Evaluation Panel (OFAP) is discontinued. Evaluation of the feasibility and suitability of the experimental design shall be carried out by NSF in collaboration with the power suppliers and proposal reviewers.
Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation must 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 commonly revised and it’s the duty 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 Data
Program Title:
Facility and Instrumentation Request Course of (FIRP)
Synopsis of Program:
The Facility and Instrumentation Request Course of (FIRP) solicitation describes the mechanism by which the analysis group can suggest initiatives that require entry to instrumentation and amenities sponsored by the Amenities for Atmospheric Analysis and Training (FARE) Program within the Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences (AGS). FARE gives funding to a wide range of organizations to make specialised instrumentation and amenities out there to the atmospheric science analysis group by means of the Decrease Ambiance Observing Amenities (LAOF) and the Group Devices and Amenities (CIF) packages. FIRP permits for parallel analysis of mental advantage and broader impacts together with the feasibility of the proposed undertaking.
All proposals to AGS that require the usage of FARE-sponsored property have to be submitted by means of this solicitation.
The FIRP solicitation gives three proposal submission tracks primarily based on the kind and goal of the request:
Monitor 1 – Training and Outreach.
Monitor 2 – Single Facility Request.
Monitor 3 – Discipline Campaigns.
Choice for funding shall be given to proposals submitted to packages within the Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences (AGS) within the Geosciences Directorate (GEO). In case you are planning to submit a proposal to a program outdoors AGS, together with NSF-wide or Directorate-wide solicitations, please contact the FARE program director, Shree Mishra at [email protected] to debate the timelines, evaluate course of, and funds request for the usage of FARE property.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
Please notice that the next data is present on the time of publishing. See program web site for any updates to the factors of contact.
Relevant Catalog of Federal Home Help (CFDA) Quantity(s):
Award Data
Anticipated Sort of Award: Customary Grant or Persevering with Grant
Estimated Variety of Awards: 5 to fifteen
The variety of awards will range relying on the variety of proposals acquired, their scientific advantage, and programmatic issues.
Anticipated Funding Quantity: $10,000,000 to $20,000,000
Initiatives awarded beneath the FIRP solicitation shall be funded by a mix of disciplinary science program and FARE program funding. Analysis proposal prices, reminiscent of PI wage, scholar help, journey and publications, supplies and provides shall be funded by the related disciplinary science program(s). Discipline deployment and utilization prices for LAOF and CIF shall be funded by the FARE program.
Estimated program funds, variety of awards and common award measurement/period are topic to the provision of funds.
Eligibility Data
Who Could Submit Proposals:
The classes of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the Nationwide Science Basis are recognized within the NSF Proposal & Award Insurance policies & Procedures Information (PAPPG), Chapter I.E. Unaffiliated people will not be eligible to submit proposals in response to this solicitation.
Who Could Function PI:
There are not any restrictions or limits.
Restrict on Variety of Proposals per Group:
There are not any restrictions or limits.
Restrict on Variety of Proposals per PI or co-PI:
If a PI has had a Monitor 1 award with a specific facility, they could not submit one other Monitor 1 proposal requesting the identical facility inside 3 years of the beginning date of the earlier Monitor 1 award.
Proposal Preparation and Submission Directions
A. Proposal Preparation Directions
Letters of Intent: Not required
Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required
Full Proposals:
B. Budgetary Data
C. Due Dates
Proposal Assessment Data Standards
Advantage Assessment Standards:
Nationwide Science Board permitted standards. Extra advantage evaluate standards apply. Please see the complete textual content of this solicitation for additional data.
Award Administration Data
Award Circumstances:
Customary NSF award situations apply.
Reporting Necessities:
Customary NSF reporting necessities apply.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract of Program Necessities
Introduction
Program Description
Award Data
Eligibility Data
Proposal Preparation and Submission Directions
Proposal Preparation Directions
Budgetary Data
Due Dates
Analysis.gov/Grants.gov Necessities
NSF Proposal Processing and Assessment Procedures
Advantage Assessment Ideas and Standards
Assessment and Choice Course of
Award Administration Data
Notification of the Award
Award Circumstances
Reporting Necessities
Company Contacts
Different Data
I. INTRODUCTION
To facilitate elementary analysis within the atmospheric sciences, the Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences (AGS) helps state-of-the-art devices and amenities by means of the Amenities for Atmospheric Analysis and Training (FARE) Program. The FARE Program consists of the Decrease Ambiance Observing Amenities (LAOF) and the Group Devices and Amenities (CIF), that are summarized within the Program Description under.
This FIRP solicitation describes the method by which Principal Investigators can request entry to FARE property by means of proposals for analysis, training, and/or outreach initiatives. FIRP includes three proposal submission tracks which might be distinguished by the kind and complexity of the request. Monitor 1 proposals are small requests for restricted discipline or laboratory actions that concentrate on training and outreach. Monitor 2 proposals pertain to the usage of a single CIF or different small or single instrument facility throughout the LAOF. Monitor 3 proposals are for discipline campaigns that require important lead time and planning.
Monitor 1 proposals should describe the training and/or outreach actions that shall be carried out with the FARE property. Monitor 2 and three proposals are scientific proposals that describe the usage of FARE property as a part of the analysis plan. All proposals should connect the Facility Request doc as a supplementary doc as additional described on this solicitation. Extra particulars on the excellence between these Tracks is offered within the following part.
II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Observational science (together with discipline and laboratory-based analysis) is essential to bettering understanding of the multitude of processes within the Earth’s environment. Many observations which might be important to unraveling the mysteries of the environment can solely be carried out utilizing costly platforms and/or extremely specialised gear. To facilitate this science, AGS gives entry to a wide range of specialised instrumentation and amenities which might be supported by means of the Amenities for Atmospheric Analysis and Training (FARE) program. The suite of devices and amenities is a mix of main analysis amenities (often called the Decrease Ambiance Observing Amenities, LAOF) supported by means of the Nationwide Middle for Atmospheric Analysis (NCAR) and the College of Wyoming, and amenities funded by means of the Group Devices and Amenities (CIF) solicitation NSF 20-596. The devices and amenities which may be requested by means of the FIRP solicitation, together with facility supplier or level of contact (POC) are listed right here: https://www.nsf.gov/geo/ags/packages/fare/. This record is repeatedly up to date because the suite of accessible amenities modifications.
The intent of the FIRP solicitation is to ask proposals from the atmospheric and associated science group to make use of the instrumentation and amenities which might be sponsored by the FARE program.
Establishments with out important observational capabilities, primarily undergraduate establishments, minority serving establishments, and group schools are particularly inspired to use to the FIRP. For all three Tracks, proposers are inspired to discover progressive outreach efforts to incorporate the participation of the complete spectrum of various expertise in STEM in experiential studying.
Submission Tracks
The FIRP solicitation consists of three Tracks for requesting FARE-supported instrumentation and amenities. These Tracks are based totally on the complexity of the request and decide the timelines and procedures that must be adopted. Descriptions of the Tracks, directions for proposal submission, and a summarizing desk are offered under. Questions in regards to the suitability of a observe for a given undertaking must be addressed to FARE program ([email protected]) as early as attainable. If there’s any ambiguity about which Monitor a undertaking belongs to, contact the FARE Program about submission Monitor and timeline. If a proposal is submitted to the flawed Monitor, the proposal shall be Returned With out Assessment (RWR).
Proposals to all three Tracks could also be submitted both as a single NSF proposal with subawards to collaborating establishments, or as collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from a number of organizations. For Monitor 1 proposals with no formal Assertion of Curiosity (SoI), individually submitted collaborative proposals could also be submitted after consulting with the FARE program.
Proposals for EAGERs, RAISEs, and RAPIDs searching for the usage of FARE amenities shall be thought of in line with facility availability. PIs are instructed to electronic mail the FARE PD at [email protected] to debate potential mission concepts.
Proposals for Monitor 1 ought to choose the FARE program within the “The place to Apply” part of Analysis.gov. Monitor 2 and three ought to choose the related science program(s).
Monitor 1 (Training and Outreach): Monitor 1 proposals are requests for restricted discipline or laboratory actions that concentrate on training and outreach. Monitor 1 proposals should embody academic actions in formal and/or casual settings geared toward offering hands-on scholar coaching in discipline and/or laboratory primarily based observational analysis, and/or present important public outreach by means of coordinated occasions. The full proposal value have to be beneath $75,000. Not more than $50,000 of the whole funds could also be requested for facility use.
PIs of funded or proposed discipline campaigns ought to embody training and outreach of their unique analysis proposal and never depend on Monitor 1 proposals to reinforce the marketing campaign. The first focus of Monitor 1 proposals have to be training and outreach; initiatives with substantial analysis elements ought to often be submitted beneath Monitor 2 or Monitor 3.
If a PI has had a Monitor 1 award with a specific facility, they could not submit one other Monitor 1 proposal requesting the identical facility inside 3 years of the beginning date of the earlier Monitor 1 award.
Monitor 1 Plane Deployments
A waiver for the Monitor 1 proposal funds cap of $75,000 could also be allowed for aircraft-based academic deployments utilizing the Wyoming King Air and the NCAR-operated C-130 and G-V. Monitor 1 requests for the C-130 and G-V could solely be made together with already-funded discipline campaigns or deliberate take a look at flights. Stand-alone Monitor 1 proposals could embody the Wyoming King Air after session with the FARE program director. PIs are inspired to take a look at the record of funded airborne deployments on the NCAR EOL webpage and seek the advice of with the FARE program director in the event that they wish to add Monitor 1 academic flight(s) on a funded discipline deployment.
Monitor 2 (Single Facility Request): Monitor 2 proposals are primarily for U.S.-based analysis initiatives that require a single CIF, reminiscent of a laboratory facility or a single cellular radar/lidar facility, or a single instrument/instrument system throughout the LAOF facility pool, such because the Built-in Sounding System (ISS). Small worldwide campaigns with easy logistics could also be requested for Monitor 2 with approval from the FARE program director.
Deployments together with plane or a community of devices, or multi-year discipline deployments, will not be eligible beneath Monitor 2. NSF could settle for a multi-year request for the usage of laboratory-based gear as a Monitor 2 request relying upon the complexity of the request. Remaining dedication shall be made by the FARE program after reviewing the Assertion of Curiosity (SoI).
Monitor 3 (Discipline Campaigns): Monitor 3 proposals are for the deployment of main LAOF reminiscent of plane, a number of CIF, or a mix of LAOF and CIF. A proposal for a multi-year analysis marketing campaign will fall beneath Monitor 3. Examples of Monitor 3 actions embody analysis aircraft-based deployments, coordinated cellular distant sensing research, and deployment of observing networks.
Proposal timelines and course of
Monitor 1 (Training and Outreach):
Assertion of Curiosity
Statements of Curiosity (SoI) for Monitor 1 requests are really helpful, however not required. SoI pointers could be discovered on the finish of this part.
Proposal
Monitor 1 proposals must be submitted between 9 and 12 months previous to the beginning date of the usage of the power and at the least 6 months previous to the requested award begin date. If a Monitor 1 aircraft-based proposal intends to coordinate actions with a funded discipline deployment, the PIs should notify the FARE program director as quickly as attainable to permit sufficient time for coordination and planning.
Monitor 1 PIs should interact with the related facility supplier listed on the FARE webpage in the course of the proposal preparation course of to establish facility availability and suitability for a Monitor 1 proposal. The Monitor 1 PI will submit a request for the usage of the power to the power supplier with a duplicate to the FARE program at the least 1 month previous to proposal submission. The ability supplier shall be anticipated to offer a funds estimate for the proposed facility use as a supplemental doc for the Monitor 1 proposal. Facility use prices shall be awarded on to the power supplier by way of a complement to the CIF or LAOF award. Monitor 1 proposal budgets are capped at $75,000, inclusive of all prices, with a most of $50,000 for facility use. These funds caps don’t apply to requests pertaining to the usage of FARE-supported airborne amenities. The Facility Request doc and facility funds estimate have to be uploaded to the NSF proposal as a supplementary doc. Requests to make use of a facility for a Monitor 1 by the power supplier on behalf of one other entity require advance dialogue with the FARE PD.
Monitor 1 proposals must be submitted to the FIRP Solicitation with FARE (1529) as this system within the “The place to Apply” part of Analysis.gov. Additional steering on proposal preparation is offered in Part V of this solicitation.
Monitor 2 (Single Facility Request):
Assertion of Curiosity
PIs are required to submit a SoI by way of electronic mail to the FARE Program, with a duplicate to the related science Program Director and facility supervisor at the least 3 months previous to proposal submission (see proposal timelines and SoI directions under). NSF will affirm whether or not the potential undertaking is in keeping with the FIRP solicitation and, in that case, will present an electronic mail to the PI with the proposal observe and timeline data. This electronic mail have to be uploaded as a doc entitled “FIRP – Program Director Concurrence E mail” within the Different Supplementary Paperwork part of the proposal.
Proposal
Monitor 2 proposals are required to be submitted between 9 and 15 months previous to the beginning of the usage of the power. If the analysis/discipline exercise will not be deliberate for the primary 12 months of the proposal, the proposal have to be submitted at the least 6 months previous to the requested award begin date.
Monitor 2 initiatives that embody a number of establishments could also be submitted both as a single NSF proposal with subawards to collaborating establishments, or as collaborative proposals submitted as separate submission from a number of organizations.
Monitor 2 PIs want to interact with the power supplier in the course of the proposal preparation course of to establish the power availability and suitability for the proposed analysis. The Monitor 2 PI should submit a request for the usage of the power to the power supplier and ship a duplicate to the FARE program at the least 2 months previous to the proposal submission. Facility utilization prices for CIF must be included as subaward(s). Facility utilization prices for LAOF shall be estimated by the power supervisor for the requested facility and have to be included as a supplementary doc. Changes to the Facility Request doc are allowed previous to the proposal submission. The ultimate model of the Facility Request have to be uploaded to the proposal as a Supplementary Doc.
Monitor 2 proposals must be submitted to this solicitation with essentially the most related science program chosen within the “The place to Apply” part of Analysis.gov. Additional steering on proposal preparation is offered in Part V under.
Monitor 3 (Discipline Marketing campaign):
Assertion of Curiosity
PIs are inspired to offer a SoI as quickly as plans attain a mature stage and are required to submit the SoI at the least 3 months previous to the proposal submission (see proposal timelines and SoI directions under). NSF will affirm whether or not the potential undertaking is in keeping with the FIRP solicitation and, in that case, will present an electronic mail to the PI with the proposal observe and timeline data. This electronic mail have to be uploaded as a doc entitled “FIRP – Program Director Concurrence E mail” within the Different Supplementary Paperwork part of the proposal.
Proposal
Monitor 3 proposals have two submission time-frames, decided by the complexity of the power deployment. Complexity of deployment is correlated with the lead time required to conduct the sector marketing campaign, which is determined by the placement of the undertaking, the useful resource(s) required, the extent of instrument integration wanted, and the diploma of interagency and/or worldwide collaboration. NSF, in session with the power supplier(s), will decide the required proposal timeline.
Actions which might be deemed “easy” can have a submission window between 15 and 21 months prematurely of the marketing campaign begin date.
Actions which might be deemed “complicated” can have a submission window between 18 and 24 months prematurely of the marketing campaign begin date.
If the analysis/discipline exercise will not be deliberate for the primary 12 months of the proposal, the proposal have to be submitted at the least 6 months previous to the requested award begin date.
Monitor 3 initiatives that embody a number of establishments could also be submitted both as a single NSF proposal with subawards to collaborating establishments, or as collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from a number of organizations.
Monitor 3 PIs should interact with the power supplier(s) in the course of the proposal preparation course of to establish the power availability and suitability for the proposed analysis. The Monitor 3 PI is required to submit a request for the usage of the power to the power supplier and ship a duplicate to the FARE program director at the least 2 months previous to the proposal submission. The ability supplier is predicted to offer a funds estimate for facility use that can be utilized within the FIRP proposal. Facility utilization prices for CIF have to be included as subaward(s). Facility use prices for LAOF shall be estimated by the power supervisor for the requested facility and have to be included as a supplementary doc. Changes to the Facility Request doc are allowed previous to the proposal submission. The ultimate model of the Facility Request have to be uploaded to the proposal as a supplementary doc.
Monitor 3 analysis proposals must be submitted to the FIRP Solicitation with essentially the most related science program chosen within the “The place to Apply” part of Analysis.gov. Additional steering on proposal preparation is offered in Part V under.
Assertion of Curiosity (SoI) pointers:
The SoI have to be not than 3 pages and should include the next data.
Challenge title;
Names and affiliations of PIs, Co-PIs, and Senior Personnel;
Requested deployment schedule;
Abstract of the proposed exercise and the scientific aims;
Listing of Amenities requested together with the anticipated deployment location;
A tough order of magnitude complete undertaking funds estimate, unique of CIF and LAOF prices;
Anticipated involvement of different funding our bodies, whether or not U.S. or worldwide.
The SoI have to be emailed to the FARE Program with a duplicate to the cognizant science PD and the requested facility supplier(s) on the timelines indicated above.
Abstract of solicitation necessities
Monitor 1
Monitor 1 – Plane Request
Monitor 2
Monitor 3 – Easy
Monitor 3 – Complicated
Assertion of Curiosity (SoI)
Really helpful
Really helpful
Required
Required
Required
SoI Timeline
N/A
N/A
3 months previous to proposal submission
3 months previous to proposal submission
3 months previous to proposal submission
Facility Request Timeline
1 month previous to proposal submission
1 month previous to proposal submission
2 months previous to proposal submission
2 months previous to proposal submission
2 months previous to proposal submission
Proposal Timeline
9 to 12 months prior to start out of facility use exercise and at the least 6 months earlier than award begin date.
Not less than 12 months prior to start out of facility use exercise and at the least 6 months earlier than award begin date.
9 to fifteen months prior to start out of facility use exercise and at the least 6 months earlier than award begin date.
15 to 21 months prematurely of begin of facility use exercise and at the least 6 months earlier than award begin date.
18 to 24 months prematurely of begin of facility use exercise and at the least 6 months earlier than award begin date.
Challenge Description Size
5 pages
5 pages
15 pages
20 pages
20 pages
Proposal Finances
Whole proposal together with deployment to not exceed $75,000.
No cap
No cap
No cap
No cap
Monitor 1 facility prices are awarded on to the power supplier.
Monitor 1 facility prices are awarded on to the power supplier.
Subaward for CIF property (if mandatory)
Subaward for CIF property (if mandatory)
Subaward for CIF property (if mandatory)
Subaward for accomplice establishments (if mandatory)
Subaward for accomplice establishments (if mandatory)
Subaward for accomplice establishments (if mandatory)
Subaward for accomplice establishments (if mandatory)
Subaward for accomplice establishments (if mandatory)
Extra Supplementary Paperwork Required
Facility Request
Facility Request
Facility Request
Facility Request
Facility Request
Description of integration with current flight marketing campaign (NCAR-operated plane solely)
Experimental Design Plan (10 pages max)
Experimental Design Plan (10 pages max)
Experimental Design Plan (10 pages max)
Roles and Obligations Doc
Roles and Obligations Doc
Finances for FARE property
Finances for FARE property
Finances for NCAR or Wyoming property (if mandatory)
Finances for NCAR or Wyoming property (if mandatory)
Finances for NCAR or Wyoming property (if mandatory)
Finances for NCAR/EOL Discipline Catalog, Challenge Administration, and extra help (if mandatory)
Finances for NCAR/EOL Discipline Catalog, Challenge Administration, and extra help (if mandatory)
Finances for NCAR/EOL Discipline Catalog, Challenge Administration, and extra help (if mandatory)
Program Director electronic mail on proposal timeline
Program Director electronic mail on proposal timeline
Program Director electronic mail on proposal timeline
III. AWARD INFORMATION
Anticipated Sort of Award: Customary Grant or Persevering with Grant
Estimated Variety of Awards: 5 to 15
The variety of awards will range relying on the variety of proposals acquired, their scientific advantage and programmatic issues.
Anticipated Funding Quantity: $10,000,000 to $20,000,000
Initiatives awarded beneath the FIRP solicitation shall be funded by a mix of disciplinary science program and FARE program funding. Analysis proposal prices, reminiscent of PI wage, scholar help, journey and publications, supplies and provides shall be funded by the related disciplinary science program(s). Discipline deployment and utilization prices for LAOF and CIF shall be funded by the FARE program.
Estimated program funds, variety of awards and common award measurement/period are topic to the provision of funds.
IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
Who Could Submit Proposals:
The classes of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the Nationwide Science Basis are recognized within the NSF Proposal & Award Insurance policies & Procedures Information (PAPPG), Chapter I.E. Unaffiliated people will not be eligible to submit proposals in response to this solicitation.
Who Could Function PI:
There are not any restrictions or limits.
Restrict on Variety of Proposals per Group:
There are not any restrictions or limits.
Restrict on Variety of Proposals per PI or co-PI:
If a PI has had a Monitor 1 award with a specific facility, they could not submit one other Monitor 1 proposal requesting the identical facility inside 3 years of the beginning date of the earlier Monitor 1 award.
V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
A. Proposal Preparation Directions
Full Proposal Preparation Directions: Proposers could choose to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation by way of Analysis.gov or Grants.gov.
Full Proposals submitted by way of Analysis.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation must be ready and submitted in accordance with the final pointers contained within the NSF Proposal and Award Insurance policies and Procedures Information (PAPPG). The whole textual content of the PAPPG is obtainable 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 by way of Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation by way of Grants.gov must be ready and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Utility Information: A Information for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Purposes by way of Grants.gov. The whole textual content of the NSF Grants.gov Utility Information is obtainable 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 Utility Information and Utility Types Package deal, click on on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov website, then click on on the Apply Step 1: Obtain a Grant Utility Package deal and Utility 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 Utility 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 notice the next:
Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from a number of organizations have to be submitted by way of Analysis.gov. PAPPG Chapter II.E.3 gives 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 notice that the proposal preparation directions offered on this program solicitation could deviate from the PAPPG directions.
FIRP proposals should comply with the necessities specified within the NSF Proposal and Award Insurance policies and Procedures Information (PAPPG), besides the place totally different directions are offered under.
Challenge Title. The undertaking title should start with “AGS-FIRP Monitor 1:” or “AGS-FIRP Monitor 2:” or “AGS-FIRP Monitor 3:” and comply with with an informative title.
Challenge Description:
Along with the content material specified within the PAPPG, together with the requirement for a separate part labeled “Broader Impacts”, deviations and particulars of extra data to be offered are mentioned under. The undertaking description must reveal a robust scientific and/or training/outreach justification for the usage of the FARE property.
Monitor 1 Proposals:
The Challenge Description is restricted to five pages for requests that don’t contain an airborne deployment. Requests for airborne academic deployments could also be as much as 15 pages.
The proposal should describe the training or outreach exercise that shall be carried out, together with the scope and stage of involvement of people, integration with current or deliberate actions, anticipated variety of individuals within the training or outreach actions utilizing the FARE-sponsored facility, and the way the undertaking will use the requested FARE property to incorporate the participation of the complete spectrum of various expertise in STEM.
Monitor 2 Proposals:
Monitor 2 Challenge Descriptions are restricted to 15-pages in size. The Challenge Description should current an built-in plan that outlines the scientific goal(s) of the undertaking, how the proposed deployment will tackle the scientific aims, how the analysis shall be carried out, and efforts for training, outreach and plans for together with the participation of the complete spectrum of various expertise in STEM. The Challenge Description could refer the reader to the Experimental Design Plan within the Supplemental Paperwork however must include sufficient details about the experimental setup to permit the reader to seamlessly assess whether or not the experiment addresses the scientific questions and hypotheses.
All PIs and Co-PIs are required to report on Outcomes from Prior NSF Assist as detailed within the PAPPG. For initiatives with many PIs, NSF recommends protecting these sections concise and transferring article citations to the References Cited part.
Monitor 3 Proposals:
Monitor 3 Challenge Descriptions are restricted to twenty pages in size.
The Challenge Description should current an built-in plan that outlines the scientific goal(s) of the undertaking, how the proposed deployment will tackle the scientific aims, how the analysis shall be carried out, and efforts for training, outreach and plans for together with the participation of the complete spectrum of various expertise in STEM. The Challenge Description could refer the reader to the Experimental Design Plan within the Supplemental Paperwork however should include sufficient details about the experimental setup to permit the reader to seamlessly assess whether or not the experiment addresses the scientific questions and hypotheses.
The Challenge Description should include a piece on outcomes from any discipline marketing campaign that has centered on the identical and/or related subject(s), together with campaigns carried out by different researchers and teams.
All PIs and Co-PIs are required to report on Outcomes from Prior NSF Assist as detailed within the PAPPG. For initiatives with many PIs, NSF recommends protecting these sections concise and transferring article citations to the References Cited part.
Finances:
Monitor 1: Monitor 1 proposals are restricted to $75,000, except airborne deployments. Prices associated to PI/Personnel time for planning, outreach and time spent in the course of the deployment are restricted to 25% of the whole funds. Facility prices could not exceed $50,000 except the request pertains to the usage of plane. Proposals ought to embody the funds estimate offered by the power supplier as a Supplementary Doc except in any other case directed by the FARE PD. The proposal funding restrict is inclusive of all prices to conduct the undertaking. Proposers are inspired to discover efficient outreach efforts to incorporate the participation of the complete spectrum of various expertise in STEM in experiential studying in an effort to broaden participation. PIs are inspired to incorporate a plan and could request funds for these actions within the proposal funds. Journey prices might also be requested for supporting outreach efforts.
Monitor 2 and Monitor 3: There are not any funding limits, although the PI is inspired to interact with the FARE program director and related science program director concerning the scope of the undertaking. Facility utilization prices for CIF shall be included as subaward(s). Facility use prices for LAOF shall be estimated by the power supervisor for the requested facility and must be included as a supplementary doc.
Word: EAGER/RAISE/RAPID Proposals or proposals to cross-directorate solicitations ought to embody the price of the power use throughout the complete award funds limits of these packages.
Particular Data & Supplementary Paperwork:
The next supplementary paperwork are required for every Monitor.
Monitor 1:
A duplicate of the Facility Request.
If the academic and outreach request is for a analysis plane, the PI should present a supplemental doc of as much as 3 pages describing the “goal of alternative” flight(s) and the plan for integration with the present discipline marketing campaign or take a look at flights.
The ability funds have to be included as a supplementary doc.
Monitor 2:
A duplicate of the Facility Request.
An experimental design plan of as much as 10 pages that features the next necessities:
1) An outline of the experimental design of the undertaking, which ought to embody, however not be restricted to, deployment location, a catalog of all out there property (NSF-requested and in any other case), the combination between these observations, and mode of operation. The PI must justify the optimum timeframe and supply data on whether or not there’s any flexibility in deployment timelines.
2) A Marketing campaign Administration Plan (CMP), which ought to embody, however not be restricted to, dialogue of the administration construction for the marketing campaign, how deployment choices shall be made, instrument operation, anticipated knowledge merchandise from the power suppliers, and the anticipated knowledge availability timeline (to not exceed one 12 months from the date of completion of the sector deployment).
3) A Science Traceability Matrix (STM) which permits the reader to find out what measurements and devices are mandatory for every of the scientific aims/targets. The STM must be structured such that the observations are positioned on one axis and are traceable to the science hypotheses/questions which might be positioned on the opposite axis. Different helpful data could embody the accountable personnel for the analysis actions.
For LAOF requests, the estimated deployment funds have to be included as a supplementary doc.
For proposals which might be requesting NCAR/EOL providers, reminiscent of a Discipline Catalog or Challenge Administration, an estimated funds have to be included as a supplementary doc.
An electronic mail concerning the submission timeline have to be uploaded as a doc entitled “FIRP – Program Director Concurrence E mail” within the Different Supplementary Paperwork part of the proposal.
Monitor 3:
A duplicate of the Facility Request.
An experimental design plan of as much as 10 pages that features the next necessities:
1) An outline of the experimental design of the undertaking, which ought to embody, however not be restricted to, deployment location, a catalog of all out there property (NSF-requested and in any other case), the combination between these observations, and mode of operation. The PI must justify the optimum timeframe and supply data on whether or not there’s any flexibility in deployment timelines.
2) A Marketing campaign Administration Plan (CMP), which ought to embody, however not be restricted to, dialogue of the administration construction for the marketing campaign, how deployment choices shall be made, instrument operation, anticipated knowledge merchandise from the power suppliers, and the anticipated knowledge availability timeline (to not exceed one 12 months from the date of completion of the sector deployment).
3) A Science Traceability Matrix (STM) which permits the reader to find out what measurements and devices are mandatory for every of the scientific aims/targets. The STM must be structured such that the observations are positioned on one axis and are traceable to the science hypotheses/questions which might be positioned on the opposite axis. Different helpful data could embody the accountable personnel for the analysis actions.
Roles and Obligations doc – For all campaigns with a number of establishments, every establishment should present a doc of as much as 2 pages in size detailing the precise position of every establishment, who’s concerned within the undertaking, what devices they may function (if any), and what they individually anticipate to perform scientifically. Within the state of affairs the place two or extra distinct analysis teams from the identical establishment are concerned, the restrict could improve to three pages. Facility suppliers (CIF/LAOF) who will not be scientific collaborators don’t have to submit a Roles and Obligations doc.
For LAOF requests, the estimated deployment funds have to be included as a supplementary doc.
For proposals which might be requesting NCAR/EOL providers, reminiscent of a Discipline Catalog or Challenge Administration, an estimated deployment funds have to be included as a supplementary doc.
An electronic mail concerning the submission timeline have to be uploaded as a doc entitled “FIRP – Program Director Concurrence E mail” within the Different Supplementary Paperwork part of the proposal.
Information Administration Plan: All proposals should describe plans for knowledge administration and sharing of the merchandise of analysis. PIs should submit knowledge obtained utilizing FARE property to NCAR for archiving, no later than 1 12 months from the date of completion of the undertaking. Information archiving at NCAR shall be offered by way of NCAR-hosted Geoscience Information Alternate for NSF (GDEX) and emails concerning knowledge archiving could be directed to [email protected]. If extenuating circumstances require an extension to the 1-year deadline, a request for extension have to be despatched to the FARE program director. Investigators are inspired to reference the AGS knowledge administration steering whereas drafting their knowledge administration plan: https://www.nsf.gov/geo/geo-data-policies/ags/index.jsp.
The info administration plan should describe how knowledge collected in the course of the discipline deployment or use of the CIF/LAOF shall be high quality managed and made publicly out there, together with exclusionary interval guidelines and knowledge entry insurance policies. Information suppliers must be conscious of utilizing normal file codecs and normal vocabularies of their metadata when attainable to allow machine readable searches. Detailed data on metadata necessities could be obtained by contacting [email protected].
B. Budgetary Data
Price Sharing:
Inclusion of voluntary dedicated value sharing is prohibited.
C. Due Dates
D. Analysis.gov/Grants.gov Necessities
For Proposals Submitted Through Analysis.gov:
To arrange and submit a proposal by way of 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 consumer help, name the Analysis.gov Assist Desk at 1-800-673-6188 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 must be referred to the NSF program employees 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 obtainable on the Grants.gov Applicant Sources webpage: https://www.grants.gov/net/grants/candidates.html. As well as, the NSF Grants.gov Utility Information (see hyperlink in Part V.A) gives directions concerning the technical preparation of proposals by way of Grants.gov. For Grants.gov consumer help, contact the Grants.gov Contact Middle at 1-800-518-4726 or by electronic 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 must be referred to the NSF program employees contact(s) listed in Part VIII of this solicitation.
Submitting the Proposal: As soon as all paperwork have been accomplished, the Approved Organizational Consultant (AOR) should submit the appliance to Grants.gov and confirm the specified funding alternative and company to which the appliance is submitted. The AOR should then signal and submit the appliance to Grants.gov. The finished utility shall be transferred to the NSF FastLane system for additional processing.
Proposers that submitted by way of Analysis.gov could use Analysis.gov to confirm the standing of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted by way of Grants.gov, till an utility has been acquired and validated by NSF, the Approved Organizational Consultant could examine the standing of an utility on Grants.gov. After proposers have acquired an e-mail notification from NSF, Analysis.gov must be used to examine the standing of an utility.
VI. NSF PROPOSAL PROCESSING AND REVIEW PROCEDURES
Proposals acquired by NSF are assigned to the suitable NSF program for acknowledgement and, in the event that they meet NSF necessities, for evaluate. All proposals are fastidiously reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and often by three to 10 different individuals outdoors NSF both as advert hoc reviewers, panelists, or each, who’re specialists within the specific fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are chosen by Program Officers charged with oversight of the evaluate course of. Proposers are invited to counsel names of individuals they imagine are particularly properly certified to evaluate the proposal and/or individuals they would like not evaluate the proposal. These options could function one supply within the reviewer choice course of on the Program Officer’s discretion. Submission of such names, nevertheless, is non-obligatory. Care is taken to make sure that reviewers haven’t any conflicts of curiosity with the proposal. As well as, Program Officers could acquire feedback from website visits earlier than recommending closing motion on proposals. Senior NSF employees additional evaluate suggestions for awards. A flowchart that depicts your entire NSF proposal and award course of (and related timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1.
A complete description of the Basis’s advantage evaluate course of is obtainable on the NSF web site at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/coverage/merit_review/.
Proposers must also concentrate on core methods which might 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 evaluate is one half. NSF’s mission is especially well-implemented by means of the combination of analysis and training and broadening participation in NSF packages, initiatives, and actions.
One of many strategic aims in help of NSF’s mission is to foster integration of analysis and training by means of the packages, initiatives, and actions it helps at educational and analysis establishments. These establishments should recruit, practice, 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 offer cutting-edge analysis beneath the steering of the Nation’s most inventive scientists and engineers. NSF additionally helps growth of a robust science, expertise, engineering, and arithmetic (STEM) workforce by investing in constructing the information 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 might be underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is important to the well being and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is dedicated to this precept of variety and deems it central to the packages, initiatives, and actions it considers and helps.
A. Advantage Assessment Ideas and Standards
The Nationwide Science Basis strives to put money into a sturdy and various portfolio of initiatives that creates new information and permits breakthroughs in understanding throughout all areas of science and engineering analysis and training. To establish which initiatives to help, NSF depends on a advantage evaluate course of that comes with consideration of each the technical facets 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 advantage evaluate course of for the number of initiatives.
1. Advantage 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 employees when figuring out whether or not or to not advocate proposals for funding and whereas overseeing awards. Provided that NSF is the first federal company charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in primary analysis and training, the next three ideas apply:
All NSF initiatives must be of the best high quality and have the potential to advance, if not rework, the frontiers of information.
NSF initiatives, within the combination, ought to contribute extra broadly to reaching societal targets. These “Broader Impacts” could also be achieved by means of the analysis itself, by means of actions which might be immediately associated to particular analysis initiatives, or by means of actions which might 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 properly justified.
Significant evaluation and analysis of NSF funded initiatives must be primarily based on acceptable metrics, protecting in thoughts the seemingly correlation between the impact of broader impacts and the assets offered 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 could greatest be carried out at the next, extra aggregated, stage than the person undertaking.
With respect to the third precept, even when evaluation of Broader Impacts outcomes for specific initiatives is completed at an aggregated stage, 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 advantage evaluate ideas present the idea for the advantage evaluate standards, in addition to a context inside which the customers of the factors can higher perceive their intent.
2. Advantage Assessment Standards
All NSF proposals are evaluated by means of use of the 2 Nationwide Science Board permitted advantage evaluate standards. In some situations, nevertheless, NSF will make use of extra standards as required to spotlight the precise aims of sure packages and actions.
The 2 advantage evaluate standards are listed under. Each standards are to be given full consideration in the course of the evaluate and decision-making processes; every criterion is important however neither, by itself, is adequate. Subsequently, proposers should totally tackle each standards. (PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i). incorporates extra data to be used by proposers in growth of the Challenge Description part of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly inspired to evaluate the factors, together with PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i), previous to the evaluate of a proposal.
When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers shall be requested to contemplate what the proposers wish to do, why they wish to do it, how they plan to do it, how they may know in the event that they succeed, and what advantages might accrue if the undertaking is profitable. These points apply each to the technical facets of the proposal and the best way wherein the undertaking could make broader contributions. To that finish, reviewers shall be requested to guage all proposals in opposition to two standards:
Mental Advantage: The Mental Advantage criterion encompasses the potential to advance information; and
Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to profit society and contribute to the achievement of particular, desired societal outcomes.
The next parts must be thought of within the evaluate for each standards:
What’s the potential for the proposed exercise to
Advance information and understanding inside its personal discipline or throughout totally different fields (Mental Advantage); and
Profit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?
To what extent do the proposed actions counsel and discover inventive, unique, 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 properly certified is the person, group, or group to conduct the proposed actions?
Are there satisfactory assets out there to the PI (both on the residence group or by means of collaborations) to hold out the proposed actions?
Broader impacts could also be achieved by means of the analysis itself, by means of the actions which might be immediately associated to particular analysis initiatives, or by means of actions which might be supported by, however are complementary to, the undertaking. NSF values the development of scientific information and actions that contribute to achievement of societally related outcomes. Such outcomes embody, however will not be restricted to: full participation of ladies, individuals with disabilities, and different underrepresented teams in science, expertise, engineering, and arithmetic (STEM); improved STEM training and educator growth at any stage; elevated public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and expertise; improved well-being of people in society; growth of a various, globally aggressive STEM workforce; elevated partnerships between academia, trade, and others; improved nationwide safety; elevated financial competitiveness of the US; and enhanced infrastructure for analysis and training.
Proposers are reminded that reviewers will even be requested to evaluate the Information Administration Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as acceptable.
Extra Solicitation Particular Assessment Standards
Monitor 1 requests:
To what extent does the undertaking present a novel studying expertise?
Does the proposed undertaking considerably profit the supposed individuals?
Are the supposed individuals properly built-in into the sector marketing campaign actions (e.g. discipline marketing campaign or different scientifically related efforts associated to the deployment?
Does the proposal current efficient outreach efforts to incorporate the participation of the complete spectrum of various expertise in STEM in experiential studying?
Monitor 2 and Monitor 3 requests:
Is the proposed facility use well-aligned with the science aims?
Is the combination of the assorted elements of the deployment request well-conceived? This consists of, however will not be restricted to, integration of efforts throughout platforms, establishments and PIs, and planning for joint knowledge analyses.
Are every of the devices requested essential to reaching the aims of the undertaking?
B. Assessment and Choice Course of
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation shall be reviewed by Advert hoc Assessment and/or Panel Assessment.
Reviewers shall be requested to guage proposals utilizing two Nationwide Science Board permitted advantage evaluate standards and, if relevant, extra program particular standards. A abstract ranking and accompanying narrative will usually be accomplished and submitted by every reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to handle the proposal’s evaluate will contemplate the recommendation of reviewers and can formulate a advice.
After scientific, technical and programmatic evaluate and consideration of acceptable components, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether or not the proposal must be declined or really helpful for award. NSF strives to have the ability to inform candidates whether or not their proposals have been declined or really helpful for funding inside six months. Giant or significantly complicated proposals or proposals from new awardees could require extra evaluate 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 helpful for funding shall be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements or the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Assist for evaluate of enterprise, monetary, and coverage implications. After an administrative evaluate 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 could make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No dedication on the a part of NSF must 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 danger.
As soon as an award or declination resolution has been made, Principal Investigators are offered suggestions about their proposals. In all circumstances, critiques are handled as confidential paperwork. Verbatim copies of critiques, 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 shall be suggested as promptly as attainable by the cognizant NSF Program administering this system. Verbatim copies of critiques, not together with the id of the reviewer, shall be offered mechanically to the Principal Investigator. (See Part VI.B. for extra data on the evaluate course of.)
B. Award Circumstances
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 funds, which signifies the quantities, by classes of expense, on which NSF has primarily based its help (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, reminiscent of Grant Basic Circumstances (GC-1)*; or Analysis Phrases and Circumstances* and (5) any announcement or different NSF issuance which may be included by reference within the award discover. Cooperative agreements are also administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Settlement Monetary and Administrative Phrases and Circumstances (CA-FATC) and the relevant Programmatic Phrases and Circumstances. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the group by way of 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 Circumstances and different vital 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 Government Order 14005, Guaranteeing the Future is Made in All of America by All of America’s Employees (86 FR 7475), it’s the coverage of the chief department to make use of phrases and situations of Federal monetary help awards to maximise, in keeping with legislation, the usage of items, merchandise, and supplies produced in, and providers provided in, the US.
Per 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 means of this funding alternative could also be obligated for an award except all iron, metal, manufactured merchandise, and development supplies used within the undertaking are produced in the US. For extra data, go to NSF’s Construct America, Purchase America webpage.
C. Reporting Necessities
For all multi-year grants (together with each normal 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 tip of the present funds interval. (Some packages or awards require submission of extra frequent undertaking reviews). No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI is also required to submit a closing undertaking report, and a undertaking outcomes report for most people.
Failure to offer the required annual or closing undertaking reviews, or the undertaking outcomes report, will delay NSF evaluate 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 reviews prematurely to guarantee availability of required knowledge.
PIs are required to make use of NSF’s digital project-reporting system, out there by means of Analysis.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and closing undertaking reviews. Such reviews present data on accomplishments, undertaking individuals (particular person and organizational), publications, and different particular merchandise and impacts of the undertaking. Submission of the report by way of 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 shall be posted on the NSF web site precisely as it’s submitted by the PI.
Extra complete data on NSF Reporting Necessities and different vital 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.
VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS
Please notice 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 concerning this program must be made to:
For questions associated to the usage of NSF methods contact:
NSF Assist Desk: 1-800-673-6188
Analysis.gov Assist Desk e-mail: [email protected]
For questions referring to Grants.gov contact:
Grants.gov Contact Middle: If the Approved Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not acquired a affirmation message from Grants.gov inside 48 hours of submission of utility, please contact by way of phone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail: [email protected].
IX. OTHER INFORMATION
The NSF web site gives 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 recent NSF funding alternatives and publications, vital modifications in proposal and award insurance policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences. Subscribers are knowledgeable by means of e-mail or the consumer’s Net browser every time new publications are issued that match their recognized pursuits. “NSF Replace” additionally is obtainable on NSF’s web site.
Grants.gov gives an extra digital functionality to seek for Federal government-wide grant alternatives. NSF funding alternatives could also be accessed by way of 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 impartial 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 training in all fields of science and engineering.”
NSF funds analysis and training in most fields of science and engineering. It does this by means 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 help to educational establishments for primary analysis.
NSF receives roughly 55,000 proposals every year for analysis, training and coaching initiatives, of which roughly 11,000 are funded. As well as, the Basis receives a number of thousand purposes for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The company operates no laboratories itself however does help Nationwide Analysis Facilities, consumer amenities, sure oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic analysis stations. The Basis additionally helps cooperative analysis between universities and trade, US participation in worldwide scientific and engineering efforts, and academic actions at each educational stage.
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 concerning preparation of these kind of proposals.
The Nationwide Science Basis has Telephonic Machine for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Data 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 Data 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 training within the sciences, arithmetic, and engineering.
To get the newest 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 Data(NSF Data Middle):
(703) 292-5111
TDD (for the hearing-impaired):
(703) 292-5090
To Order Publications or Types:
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 reviews is solicited beneath the authority of the Nationwide Science Basis Act of 1950, as amended. The data on proposal varieties shall be utilized in reference to the number of certified proposals; and undertaking reviews submitted by awardees shall be used for program analysis and reporting throughout the Government Department and to Congress. The data requested could also be disclosed to certified reviewers and employees assistants as a part of the proposal evaluate course of; to proposer establishments/grantees to offer or acquire knowledge concerning the proposal evaluate course of, award choices, or the administration of awards; to authorities contractors, specialists, volunteers and researchers and educators as mandatory to finish assigned work; to different authorities companies or different entities needing data concerning candidates or nominees as a part of a joint utility evaluate course of, or so as to coordinate packages or coverage; and to a different Federal company, court docket, or get together in a court docket 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 File 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 offer full and full data, nevertheless, could scale back the potential for receiving an award.
An company could not conduct or sponsor, and an individual will not be required to reply to, 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 concerning the burden estimate and another side of this assortment of knowledge, together with options for lowering this burden, to:
Suzanne H. Plimpton
Stories Clearance Officer
Coverage Workplace, Division of Establishment and Award Assist
Workplace of Finances, Finance, and Award Administration
Nationwide Science Basis
Alexandria, VA 22314
