Formal Methods in the Field (FMitF) (nsf24509)

Replaces Doc(s):NSF 22-618

Nationwide Science Basis

Directorate for Laptop and Data Science and Engineering Division of Computing and Communication Foundations Division of Laptop and Community Techniques Division of Data and Clever Techniques

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter’s native time):

February 20, 2024

Third Tuesday in February, Yearly Thereafter

IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND REVISION NOTES

REVISION NOTES

Initially, this system restricted the sphere areas to laptop networks, embedded programs, working/distributed programs, human centered computing, and machine studying. The scope of this system has now been expanded to incorporate any area areas inside laptop and data science and engineering that stand to immediately profit from a grounding in formal strategies.
A brand new observe for Schooling proposals has been added to this system with the target of supporting the event and dissemination of training materials to extend the accessibility of formal strategies.
The general annual price range has been elevated from $10,000,000 to $10,500,000, and the restrict on the award quantity for Monitor I proposals has been elevated from $750,000 to $1,000,000.

Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation needs 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 often 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 Data

Program Title:

Formal Strategies within the Area (FMitF)

Synopsis of Program:

The Formal Strategies within the Area (FMitF) program goals to carry collectively researchers in formal strategies with researchers in different areas of laptop and data science and engineering to collectively develop rigorous and reproducible methodologies for designing and implementing correct-by-construction programs and functions with provable ensures. FMitF encourages shut collaboration between two teams of researchers. The primary group consists of researchers within the space of formal strategies, which, for the needs of this solicitation, is broadly outlined as principled approaches primarily based on logic and arithmetic to specification, modeling, design, evaluation, implementation, abstraction, verification, synthesis, and optimization of programs, networks and functions. The second group consists of researchers within the “area,” which, for the needs of this solicitation, is outlined as any space inside laptop and data science and engineering that will profit from creating and making use of formal strategies of their analysis. All proposals should make a robust case for why formal strategies is acceptable for the sphere space.

The FMitF program solicits three lessons of proposals:

Monitor I: Analysis proposals: Every proposal should have at the very least one Principal Investigator (PI) or co-PI with experience in formal strategies and at the very least one with experience within the area space. Proposals are anticipated to handle elementary contributions to each formal strategies and the respective area(s) and will embrace a proof of idea within the area together with an in depth analysis plan that discusses supposed scope of applicability, trade-offs, and limitations. Monitor I proposals should comprise an in depth collaboration plan that clearly highlights and justifies the complementary experience of the PIs/co-PIs within the designated areas and describes the mechanisms for steady bi-directional interplay. Tasks are restricted to $1,000,000 in whole price range, with durations of as much as 4 years.
Monitor II: Transition to Apply (TTP) proposals: The target of this observe is to help the continued growth of extensible and sturdy formal strategies analysis prototypes/instruments to facilitate usability and accessibility to a bigger and extra numerous neighborhood of customers. These proposals are anticipated to help the event, implementation, and deployment of later-stage profitable formal strategies analysis and instruments into operational environments with the intention to bridge the hole between analysis and observe. A TTP proposal should embrace a mission plan that addresses main duties and system growth milestones in addition to an analysis plan for the working system. Proposals are anticipated to establish a goal consumer neighborhood or group that may function an early adopter of the know-how. Collaborations with business are strongly inspired. Tasks are restricted to $150,000 in whole price range, with durations of as much as two years.
Monitor III: Schooling proposals: The target of this observe is to help the event and dissemination of training materials to extend the accessibility of formal strategies. These proposals are anticipated to develop new course materials in formal strategies both as a standalone course or as a part of a course in a area space to which formal strategies is relevant. An training proposal should embrace a mission plan that addresses dissemination efforts and articulates the brand new communities that might be impacted by the hassle. Collaborations with organizations that do not need robust formal strategies training within the curriculum are strongly inspired. Tasks are restricted to $250,000 in whole price range, with durations of as much as 36 months.

The Venture Description will be as much as 15 pages for Monitor I proposals, and as much as 7 pages for the Monitor II and Monitor III proposals.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

Please be aware that the next info is present on the time of publishing. See program web site for any updates to the factors of contact.

Pavithra Prabhakar, Program Director, CISE/CCF, phone: (703) 292-8910, electronic mail: [email protected]
Alhussein A. Abouzeid, Program Director, CISE/CNS, phone: (703) 292-8950, electronic mail: [email protected]
Anindya Banerjee, Program Director, CISE/CCF, phone: (703) 292-7885, electronic mail: [email protected]
Damian Dechev, Program Director, CISE/CCF, phone: (703) 292-8910, electronic mail: [email protected]
Sorin Draghici, Program Director, CISE/IIS, phone: (703) 292-2232, electronic mail: [email protected]
Jason O. Hallstrom, Program Director, CISE/CNS, phone: (703) 292-8950, electronic mail: [email protected]
Thomas Martin, Program Director, CISE/IIS, phone: 703-292-2170, electronic mail: [email protected]
Daniela Oliveira, Program Director, CISE/CNS, phone: (703) 292-4352, electronic mail: [email protected]

Relevant Catalog of Federal Home Help (CFDA) Quantity(s):

47.070 — Laptop and Data Science and Engineering

Award Data

Anticipated Sort of Award: Customary Grant or Persevering with Grant

Estimated Variety of Awards: 18

Roughly 9 Monitor I awards of as much as $1,000,000 per award with durations as much as 4 years, 7 Monitor II awards of as much as $150,000 per award with durations as much as 24 months, and a couple of Monitor III awards of as much as $ 250,000 per award with durations as much as 36 months are anticipated, topic to availability of funds and the standard of proposals obtained.

Anticipated Funding Quantity: $10,500,000 topic to availability of funds and high quality of proposals obtained. Estimated program price range, variety of awards and common award measurement/period are topic to the supply of funds and high quality of proposals obtained.

Eligibility Data

Who Could Submit Proposals:

Proposals might solely be submitted by the next:

Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Unbiased museums, observatories, analysis laboratories, skilled societies and comparable organizations positioned within the U.S. which are immediately related to academic or analysis actions.
Establishments of Larger Schooling (IHEs) – Two- and four-year IHEs (together with neighborhood schools) accredited in, and having a campus positioned within the US, appearing on behalf of their college members.

Who Could Function PI:

By the submission deadline, any PI, co-PI, or different senior mission personnel should maintain both:

a tenured or tenure-track place, or
a main, full-time, paid appointment in a analysis or educating place

at a US-based campus of a corporation eligible to undergo this solicitation (see above), with exceptions granted for household or medical depart, as decided by the submitting group. People with main appointments at for-profit non-academic organizations or at abroad department campuses of U.S. establishments of upper training should not eligible.

A mission submitted to Monitor I should have at the very least one (co)-PI specializing in formal strategies and at the very least one specializing in one other space inside laptop and data science and engineering.

Restrict on Variety of Proposals per Group:

There aren’t any restrictions or limits.

Restrict on Variety of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 3

An investigator might take part as PI, co-PI, or Senior Personnel in at most one proposal in every observe per deadline in response to this solicitation.

These eligibility constraints might be strictly enforced with the intention to deal with everybody pretty and persistently. Within the occasion that a person exceeds this restrict, solely the primary submitted proposal in any class earlier than the deadline might be accepted. No exceptions might be made.

Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation might not duplicate or be considerably just like different proposals concurrently into consideration by NSF.

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

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter’s native time):

February 20, 2024

Third Tuesday in February, Yearly Thereafter

Proposal Assessment Data Standards

Advantage Assessment Standards:

Nationwide Science Board permitted standards. Further benefit evaluate standards apply. Please see the total textual content of this solicitation for additional info.

Award Administration Data

Award Circumstances:

Further award situations apply. Please see the total textual content of this solicitation for additional info.

Reporting Necessities:

Customary NSF reporting necessities apply.

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

Computing and communication networks and programs impression all points of our day by day lives, from our financial and societal infrastructure to nationwide safety. These networks and programs are advanced and notoriously laborious to design and analyze, they usually usually include important efficiency expectations and difficult bodily constraints. To complicate issues additional, many vital functions that run on these programs and networks are more and more depending on machine studying to make necessary data-driven predictions or choices and will require interactions with the bodily world or people to be “within the loop.” It’s not stunning that this advanced computing ecosystem results in error-prone programs, networks, and functions that lack vital correctness and security ensures, with doubtlessly catastrophic penalties. There may be, due to this fact, an pressing want to maneuver the needle on guaranteeing reliability and resilience in any respect ranges of the computing and communication stack. Formal strategies embrace principled approaches primarily based on logic and arithmetic for specification, modeling, design, evaluation, implementation, abstraction, verification, synthesis, and optimization of programs, networks, and functions. These function the muse for all points of knowledge, communication, and management applied sciences. Whereas formal strategies have been utilized in areas like distributed programs, cyber-physical programs, software program growth, and robotics, there stay many different analysis areas that might profit from their principled software.

The target of the Formal Strategies within the Area (FMitF) program is to construct a neighborhood of researchers who will work symbiotically on integrating formal strategies into the design and growth of vital programs to allow correctness by development. Impressed by Robin Milner’s double thesis1 that “the design of computing programs can solely correctly succeed whether it is nicely grounded in idea, and that the necessary ideas in a idea can solely emerge by protracted publicity to software,” the FMitF program goals to carry collectively researchers in formal strategies with these in different areas of laptop and data science and engineering to collectively develop rigorous and reproducible methodologies for designing and implementing programs and functions with provable correctness ensures.

1 Inaugural lecture “Is Computing an Experimental Science?”, Robin Milner, 1986

II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

FMitF program posits the necessity for shut and steady collaboration between two teams of researchers. The primary group consists of researchers within the space of formal strategies, which, for the needs of this solicitation, is broadly outlined as principled approaches primarily based on logic and arithmetic to specification, modeling, design, evaluation, implementation, abstraction, verification, synthesis, and optimization of programs, networks and functions. The second group consists of researchers within the “area,” which, for the needs of this solicitation, is outlined as any space inside laptop and data science and engineering that will profit from creating and making use of formal strategies of their analysis. Initially, this system restricted the sphere areas to laptop networks, embedded programs, working/distributed programs, human centered computing, and machine studying. The scope of this system has now been expanded to incorporate any area areas inside laptop and data science and engineering that stand to immediately profit from a grounding in formal strategies.

At present, these two teams of researchers function largely independently of each other, resulting in a big hole between idea and observe. Many sensible programs are constructed with out clear design ideas and sometimes lack fundamental security and correctness ensures. On the similar time, many formal strategies are primarily based on assumptions that don’t correspond to practical programs or functions. The event of recent formal strategies, or the difference of present ones to handle the number of sensible issues that come up within the design and implementation of advanced programs, necessitates partnerships and collaborations which are usually not in place. Alternatively, satisfactory options for these sensible issues may current new alternatives and challenges for the formal strategies communities and spur the event of novel theories and abstractions. This bi-directional fertilization envisioned by the FMitF program can result in new fields of research on either side, in addition to to cutting-edge theories, instruments, and experiments impressed by challenges confronted within the area.

By working collectively, researchers from these completely different communities will regularly inform one another and collaboratively forge new formal strategies which are impressed by sensible issues, or discover novel, unanticipated functions of present formal strategies that may be validated within the area. The long-term imaginative and prescient is that new formal strategies realized by protracted publicity to functions will result in design ideas, abstractions, and methodologies for implementing advanced programs and functions which are right by development.

The FMitF program solicits proposals in three lessons:

Monitor I: Analysis proposals: FMitF solicits proposals that advance common theories, ideas, and methodologies that transcend particular downside cases. FMitF seeks to help proposals which have the potential to make advances in each formal strategies and within the software space to which the formal strategies are being deployed. A perfect proposal will combine each formal strategies and area elements and argue the potential for lasting impression on either side. Proposals that make robust advances totally on one facet of this relationship should not in scope. Proposals that search to use present formal strategies with out theoretical advances that leverage traits of the underlying software area are additionally not in scope. Analysis that features safety as a part of a extra common effort to make sure correctness and reliability is in scope, whereas efforts which are targeted on defending in opposition to particular vulnerabilities or assaults should not in scope. Lastly, proposals that solely discover theoretical advances with out robust connection to the applying area, or these that don’t goal a sensible downside within the area, should not in scope.

Proposals are anticipated to obviously handle the basic contributions to formal strategies and the respective area(s) and will (if acceptable) embrace a plan for creating a proof of idea within the area together with an in depth analysis plan that discusses the scope of applicability, trade-offs, and limitations. This dialogue needs to be in a separate part within the Venture Description titled “Contributions to Formal Strategies and the Area.” Monitor I proposals should comprise an in depth collaboration plan, included as a Supplementary Doc, that clearly highlights and justifies the complementary experience of the PIs within the designated areas and describes the mechanisms for steady bi-directional collaboration. Tasks are restricted to $1,000,000 in whole price range, with durations of as much as 4 years. The Venture Description will be as much as 15 pages.

Monitor II: Transition to Apply (TTP) proposals: The target of this observe is to help the continued growth of extensible and sturdy formal strategies analysis prototypes/instruments to allow usability and accessibility to a bigger and extra numerous neighborhood of customers. Monitor II proposals ought to help the event, implementation, and deployment of later-stage profitable formal strategies analysis and instruments into an operational surroundings with the intention to bridge the hole between analysis and observe. A TTP proposal should embrace a mission plan that addresses main duties and system growth milestones, in addition to an analysis plan for the working system. Proposals are anticipated to establish a goal consumer neighborhood or group that may function an early adopter of the know-how. Collaborations with business are strongly inspired. Tasks are restricted to $150,000 in whole price range, with durations of as much as 24 months. The Venture Description will be as much as 7 pages.

Monitor III: Schooling proposals: The target of this observe is to help the event and dissemination of training materials to extend the accessibility of formal strategies. These proposals are anticipated to develop new course supplies in formal strategies, both as a standalone course or as a part of a course in a area space to which formal strategies is relevant. An training proposal should embrace a mission plan that addresses dissemination efforts and articulates the brand new communities that might be impacted by the hassle. Collaboration with organizations that do not need robust formal strategies training within the curriculum are strongly inspired. Tasks are restricted to $250,000 in whole price range, with durations of as much as 36 months. The Venture Description will be as much as 7 pages.

FMitF PI Assembly

The FMitF program is aiming to develop a brand new analysis neighborhood. On this spirit, this system plans to host a digital or in-person PI assembly yearly, with participation from all funded PIs, together with different representatives from the analysis neighborhood, authorities, and business. For every Monitor I award, at the very least one collaborating PI specializing in formal strategies and at the very least one PI specializing in the sphere should attend the PI assembly every year. For Monitor II and Monitor III proposals, at the very least one PI should attend the PI assembly every year.

III. AWARD INFORMATION

Anticipated Sort of Award: Customary Grant or Persevering with Grant

Estimated Variety of Awards: 18

Roughly 9 Monitor I awards of as much as $1,000,000 per award with durations as much as 4 years, 7 Monitor II awards of as much as $150,000 per award with durations as much as 24 months, and a couple of Monitor III awards of as much as $250,000 per award with durations as much as 36 months are anticipated, topic to availability of funds and the standard of proposals obtained.

Anticipated Funding Quantity: $10,500,000, topic to availability of funds and high quality of proposals obtained.

IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

Who Could Submit Proposals:

Proposals might solely be submitted by the next:

Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Unbiased museums, observatories, analysis laboratories, skilled societies and comparable organizations positioned within the U.S. which are immediately related to academic or analysis actions.
Establishments of Larger Schooling (IHEs) – Two- and four-year IHEs (together with neighborhood schools) accredited in, and having a campus positioned within the US, appearing on behalf of their college members.

Who Could Function PI:

By the submission deadline, any PI, co-PI, or different senior mission personnel should maintain both:

a tenured or tenure-track place, or
a main, full-time, paid appointment in a analysis or educating place

at a US-based campus of a corporation eligible to undergo this solicitation (see above), with exceptions granted for household or medical depart, as decided by the submitting group. People with main appointments at for-profit non-academic organizations or at abroad department campuses of U.S. establishments of upper training should not eligible.

A mission submitted to Monitor I should have at the very least one (co)-PI specializing in formal strategies and at the very least one specializing in one other space inside laptop and data science and engineering.

Restrict on Variety of Proposals per Group:

There aren’t any restrictions or limits.

Restrict on Variety of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 3

An investigator might take part as PI, co-PI, or Senior Personnel in at most one proposal in every observe per deadline in response to this solicitation.

These eligibility constraints might be strictly enforced with the intention to deal with everybody pretty and persistently. Within the occasion that a person exceeds this restrict, solely the primary submitted proposal in any class earlier than the deadline might be accepted. No exceptions might be made.

Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation might not duplicate or be considerably just like different proposals concurrently into consideration by NSF.

Further Eligibility Information:

For US IHE and non-profit, non-academic organizations with abroad campuses/workplaces, this solicitation restricts eligibility to analysis actions utilizing the services, gear, and different assets of the campuses/workplaces positioned within the US solely.

Additional, subawards should not permitted to abroad campuses/workplaces of US-based proposing organizations.

V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

A. Proposal Preparation Directions

Full Proposal Preparation Directions: Proposers might decide 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 needs 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 out there 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 needs to be ready and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Utility Information: A Information for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Purposes through Grants.gov. The entire textual content of the NSF Grants.gov Utility Information is out there 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 Varieties Bundle, click on on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov website, then click on on the Apply Step 1: Obtain a Grant Utility Bundle and Utility Directions hyperlink and enter the funding alternative quantity, (this system solicitation quantity with out the NSF prefix) and press the Obtain Bundle 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 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 gives further info on collaborative proposals.

See PAPPG Chapter II.D.2 for steerage 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.

Titles:

Proposal titles should point out the FMitF program, adopted by a colon, adopted by the observe, adopted by a colon, and adopted by the title of the mission. For a collaborative proposal (that’s, one submitted as separate submissions from a number of organizations), all taking part establishments ought to use the identical title, which ought to start with Collaborative Analysis adopted by a colon. Thus, a single-institution proposal to Monitor III would have a title of the shape FMitF: Monitor III: Title, and a collaborative proposal to Monitor I might use the shape Collaborative Analysis: FMitF : Monitor I: Title. Please be aware that if submitting through Analysis.gov, the system will routinely insert the prepended title “Collaborative Analysis” when the collaborative set of proposals is created.

Venture Abstract:

All Monitor I proposals should embrace a number of key phrases describing the sphere space(s) of the proposal on the Venture Abstract web page, on the finish of the Overview part (earlier than the part on Mental Advantage).

Price range:

Every proposal should embrace the prices of attending a FMitF PI assembly per 12 months as a part of the price range of the mission. The price range ought to cowl participation by the PIs and/or co-PIs, as described above beneath “FMitF PI Assembly”.

Knowledge Administration Plan: Along with the necessities specified within the PAPPG, the Knowledge Administration Plan should handle the dissemination of the algorithmic contributions and ensuing functions, instruments, languages, compilers, libraries, architectures, programs, software program, architectures, information, and so forth. Open-source launch of those artifacts is strongly inspired.

Different Supplementary Paperwork:

Collaboration Plan: All Monitor I tasks are required to incorporate a Collaboration Plan submitted by the lead establishment as a separate Supplementary Doc (restricted to three pages). This plan should describe the distinct experience supplied by the PIs as required above beneath “Who Could Function PI” in addition to plans for working collectively to advance information in each formal strategies and at the very least one area space. Joint supervision of scholars and postdoctoral researchers is strongly inspired. The collaboration plan should additionally describe clear measures of success for each the formal strategies and area points of the mission and a plan for evaluating success. Tasks with out this doc might be returned with out evaluate.

Letters of Collaboration: Documentation of collaborative preparations of significance to the proposal by Letters of Collaboration (if relevant) ought to comply with the PAPPG tips as under:

There are two varieties of collaboration, one involving people/organizations which are included within the price range, and the opposite involving people/organizations that aren’t included within the price range. Collaborations which are included within the price range needs to be described within the Venture Description. Any substantial collaboration with people/organizations not included within the price range needs to be described within the Services, Tools and Different Sources part of the proposal (see NSF PAPPG Chapter II.D.2). In both case, whether or not or not the collaborator is included within the price range, a letter of collaboration from every named taking part group aside from the submitting lead, non-lead, and/or subawardee organizations needs to be supplied on the time of submission of the proposal. Such letters ought to explicitly state the character of the collaboration, seem on the group’s letterhead and be signed by the suitable organizational consultant. These letters should not in any other case deviate from the format supplied within the NSF PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.

Please be aware that letters of help might not be submitted. Such letters don’t doc collaborative preparations of significance to the mission, however primarily convey a way of enthusiasm for the mission and/or spotlight the {qualifications} of the PI or co-PI. Reviewers might be instructed to not contemplate these letters of help in reviewing the deserves of the proposal.

B. Budgetary Data

Price Sharing:

Inclusion of voluntary dedicated value sharing is prohibited.

Price range Preparation Directions:

Budgets for all tasks should embrace funding for journey to attend a FMitF PI Assembly every year of the mission. For price range preparation functions, PIs might assume this assembly might be held within the Washington, DC, space.

C. Due Dates

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter’s native time):

February 20, 2024

Third Tuesday in February, Yearly Thereafter

D. Analysis.gov/Grants.gov Necessities

For Proposals Submitted Through Analysis.gov:

To arrange and submit a proposal through Analysis.gov, see detailed technical directions obtainable 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 1-800-381-1532 or e-mail [email protected]. The Analysis.gov Assist Desk solutions common technical questions associated to the usage of the Analysis.gov system. Particular questions associated to this program solicitation needs 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 out there 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 relating to the technical preparation of proposals through Grants.gov. For Grants.gov consumer help, contact the Grants.gov Contact Heart at 1-800-518-4726 or by electronic mail: [email protected]. The Grants.gov Contact Heart solutions common technical questions associated to the usage of Grants.gov. Particular questions associated to this program solicitation needs 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 gives submission steerage to candidates and hyperlinks to useful assets together with the NSF Grants.gov Utility 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 the intention 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 satisfactory time to handle 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 test the standing of an software on Grants.gov. After proposers have obtained an e-mail notification from NSF, Analysis.gov needs to be used to test 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 evaluate. All proposals are rigorously reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and often 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 evaluate course of. Proposers are invited to recommend names of individuals they consider are particularly nicely certified to evaluate the proposal and/or individuals they would like not evaluate the proposal. These solutions might function one supply within the reviewer choice course of on the Program Officer’s discretion. Submission of such names, nonetheless, is optionally available. Care is taken to make sure that reviewers haven’t any conflicts of curiosity with the proposal. As well as, Program Officers might acquire feedback from website visits earlier than recommending ultimate motion on proposals. Senior NSF workers 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 benefit evaluate course of is out there on the NSF web site at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/coverage/merit_review/.

Proposers must also pay attention to core methods which are important to the success of NSF’s mission, as articulated in Main the World in Discovery and Innovation, STEM Expertise Improvement 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 the mixing of analysis and training and broadening participation in NSF packages, tasks, and actions.

One of many strategic aims in help of NSF’s mission is to foster integration of analysis and training by the packages, tasks, and actions it helps at tutorial 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 beneath the steerage of the Nation’s most artistic scientists and engineers. NSF additionally helps growth of a robust science, know-how, engineering, and arithmetic (STEM) workforce by investing in constructing the information that informs enhancements in STEM educating and studying.

NSF’s mission requires the broadening of alternatives and increasing participation of teams, establishments, and geographic areas which are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is important 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, tasks, and actions it considers and helps.

A. Advantage Assessment Ideas and Standards

The Nationwide Science Basis strives to spend money on a sturdy and numerous portfolio of tasks that creates new information and allows breakthroughs in understanding throughout all areas of science and engineering analysis and training. To establish which tasks to help, NSF depends on a benefit evaluate course of that includes consideration of each the technical points of a proposed mission 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 evaluate course of for the choice of tasks.

1. Advantage Assessment Ideas

These ideas are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when getting ready proposals and managing tasks, by reviewers when studying and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program workers when figuring out whether or not or to not suggest proposals for funding and whereas overseeing awards. On condition that NSF is the first federal company charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in fundamental analysis and training, the next three ideas apply:

All NSF tasks needs to be of the very best high quality and have the potential to advance, if not remodel, the frontiers of information.
NSF tasks, within the combination, ought to contribute extra broadly to attaining societal targets. These “Broader Impacts” could also be completed by the analysis itself, by actions which are immediately associated to particular analysis tasks, or by actions which are supported by, however are complementary to, the mission. The mission 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 tasks needs to be primarily based on acceptable metrics, maintaining in thoughts the possible correlation between the impact of broader impacts and the assets supplied to implement tasks. If the dimensions of the exercise is restricted, analysis of that exercise in isolation isn’t prone to be significant. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of those actions might greatest be achieved at a better, extra aggregated, stage than the person mission.

With respect to the third precept, even when evaluation of Broader Impacts outcomes for explicit tasks is completed at an aggregated stage, PIs are anticipated to be accountable for finishing up the actions described within the funded mission. Thus, particular person tasks ought to embrace 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 evaluate ideas present the idea for the benefit 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 use of the 2 Nationwide Science Board permitted benefit evaluate standards. In some cases, nonetheless, NSF will make use of further standards as required to spotlight the precise aims of sure packages and actions.

The 2 benefit evaluate standards are listed under. Each standards are to be given full consideration throughout the evaluate and decision-making processes; every criterion is important however neither, by itself, is ample. Subsequently, proposers should absolutely handle each standards. (PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i). comprises further info to be used by proposers in growth of the Venture 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 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’ll know in the event that they succeed, and what advantages may accrue if the mission is profitable. These points apply each to the technical points of the proposal and the way in which during which the mission might make broader contributions. To that finish, reviewers might be requested to judge 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 learn society and contribute to the achievement of particular, desired societal outcomes.

The next components needs to be thought-about within the evaluate for each standards:

What’s the potential for the proposed exercise to

Advance information and understanding inside its personal area or throughout completely different fields (Mental Advantage); and
Profit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?

To what extent do the proposed actions recommend and discover artistic, authentic, or doubtlessly 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, staff, or group to conduct the proposed actions?
Are there satisfactory assets obtainable to the PI (both on the residence group or by collaborations) to hold out the proposed actions?

Broader impacts could also be completed by the analysis itself, by the actions which are immediately associated to particular analysis tasks, or by actions which are supported by, however are complementary to, the mission. NSF values the development of scientific information and actions that contribute to achievement of societally related outcomes. Such outcomes embrace, however should not restricted to: full participation of ladies, individuals with disabilities, and different underrepresented teams in science, know-how, engineering, and arithmetic (STEM); improved STEM training and educator growth at any stage; 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 america; and enhanced infrastructure for analysis and training.

Proposers are reminded that reviewers may even be requested to evaluate the Knowledge Administration Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as acceptable.

Further Solicitation Particular Assessment Standards

Monitor I proposals might be evaluated on the idea of the next solicitation-specific evaluate standards: (1) the extent to which the proposal addresses a number of area areas; (2) the extent to which elementary contributions to each formal strategies and the sphere space are a possible final result of this mission; and (3) the extent to which the collaboration plan meets the factors recognized within the solicitation.

Monitor II proposals might be evaluated on the idea of the next solicitation-specific evaluate standards: (1) the diploma to which the mission plan addresses system growth milestones and an analysis plan for the working system; (2) the diploma to which a goal consumer group or group who (that) will function an early adopter of the know-how is recognized; and (3) the composition and observe file of the proposing staff, which ought to reveal not solely technical experience but additionally abilities in programs growth.

Monitor III proposals might be evaluated on the idea of the next solicitation-specific evaluate standards: (1) the diploma to which the mission plan describes course materials growth milestones; (2) the diploma to which the dissemination plan targets new communities; and (3) the composition and observe file of the proposing staff, which ought to reveal not solely technical experience but additionally training and outreach actions past classroom educating in their very own universities.

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.

Reviewers might be requested to judge proposals utilizing two Nationwide Science Board permitted benefit evaluate standards and, if relevant, further program particular standards. A abstract ranking and accompanying narrative will typically 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 suggestion.

After scientific, technical and programmatic evaluate and consideration of acceptable elements, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether or not the proposal needs 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. Massive or notably advanced proposals or proposals from new recipients might require further 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 suggestion.

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 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 might make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No dedication on the a part of NSF needs 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 danger.

As soon as an award or declination choice has been made, Principal Investigators are supplied suggestions about their proposals. In all instances, critiques are handled as confidential paperwork. Verbatim copies of critiques, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying info, are despatched to the Principal Investigator/Venture 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 critiques, not together with the identification of the reviewer, might be supplied routinely to the Principal Investigator. (See Part VI.B. for extra info 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 price range, 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, resembling Grant Basic Circumstances (GC-1)*; or Analysis Phrases and Circumstances* and (5) any announcement or different NSF issuance which may be integrated 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 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 info on NSF Award Circumstances and different necessary info on the administration of NSF awards is contained within the NSF Proposal & Award Insurance policies & Procedures Information (PAPPG) Chapter VII, obtainable 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, Making certain the Future is Made in All of America by All of America’s Staff (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, according to legislation, the usage of items, merchandise, and supplies produced in, and providers supplied in, america.

In step 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 obtainable by this funding alternative could also be obligated for an award except all iron, metal, manufactured merchandise, and development supplies used within the mission are produced in america. For added info, go to NSF’s Construct America, Purchase America webpage.

Particular Award Circumstances:

C. Reporting Necessities

For all multi-year grants (together with each customary and persevering with grants), the Principal Investigator should submit an annual mission report back to the cognizant Program Officer no later than 90 days previous to the tip of the present price range interval. (Some packages or awards require submission of extra frequent mission studies). No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI is also required to submit a ultimate mission report, and a mission outcomes report for most people.

Failure to supply the required annual or ultimate mission studies, or the mission 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 look at the codecs of the required studies upfront to guarantee availability of required information.

PIs are required to make use of NSF’s digital project-reporting system, obtainable by Analysis.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and ultimate mission studies. Such studies present info on accomplishments, mission individuals (particular person and organizational), publications, and different particular merchandise and impacts of the mission. Submission of the report through Analysis.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are correct and full. The mission outcomes report additionally have to be ready and submitted utilizing Analysis.gov. This report serves as a short abstract, ready particularly for the general public, of the character and outcomes of the mission. This report might be posted on the NSF web site precisely as it’s submitted by the PI.

Extra complete info on NSF Reporting Necessities and different necessary info on the administration of NSF awards is contained within the NSF Proposal & Award Insurance policies & Procedures Information (PAPPG) Chapter VII, obtainable electronically on the NSF Web site at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg.

VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS

Please be aware that this system contact info 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 needs to be made to:

For questions associated to the usage of NSF programs 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 Heart: 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 gives essentially the most complete supply of knowledge on NSF Directorates (together with contact info), 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, necessary modifications in proposal and award insurance policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences. Subscribers are knowledgeable by e-mail or the consumer’s Net browser every time new publications are issued that match their recognized pursuits. “NSF Replace” additionally is out there on NSF’s web site.

Grants.gov gives a further digital functionality to seek for Federal government-wide grant alternatives. NSF funding alternatives could also be accessed through this mechanism. Additional info 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 grants and cooperative agreements to greater than 2,000 schools, universities, Okay-12 college programs, companies, casual science organizations and different analysis organizations all through the US. The Basis accounts for about one-fourth of Federal help to tutorial establishments for fundamental analysis.

NSF receives roughly 55,000 proposals every year for analysis, training and coaching tasks, 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 help Nationwide Analysis Facilities, consumer 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 tutorial 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 tasks. See the NSF Proposal & Award Insurance policies & Procedures Information Chapter II.F.7 for directions relating to preparation of a lot of these 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 common info. TDD could also be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.

The Nationwide Science Basis Data Heart could also be reached at (703) 292-5111.

The Nationwide Science Basis promotes and advances scientific progress in america by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for analysis and training 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 Data(NSF Data Heart):

(703) 292-5111

TDD (for the hearing-impaired):

(703) 292-5090

To Order Publications or Varieties:

Ship an e-mail to:

[email protected]

or phone:

(703) 292-8134

(703) 292-5111

PRIVACY ACT AND PUBLIC BURDEN STATEMENTS

The data requested on proposal kinds and mission studies is solicited beneath the authority of the Nationwide Science Basis Act of 1950, as amended. The data on proposal kinds might be utilized in reference to the choice of certified proposals; and mission studies submitted by proposers might be used for program analysis and reporting inside the Government Department and to Congress. The data requested could also be disclosed to certified reviewers and workers assistants as a part of the proposal evaluate course of; to proposer establishments/grantees to supply or acquire information relating to the proposal evaluate course of, award choices, or the administration of awards; to authorities contractors, consultants, volunteers and researchers and educators as essential to finish assigned work; to different authorities companies or different entities needing info relating to proposers or nominees as a part of a joint software evaluate course of, or with the intention 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 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 supply full and full info, nonetheless, might scale back the potential for receiving an award.

An company might not conduct or sponsor, and an individual isn’t required to answer, an info assortment except it shows a sound Workplace of Administration and Price range (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 every other side of this assortment of knowledge, together with solutions for lowering this burden, to:

Suzanne H. Plimpton
Reviews Clearance Officer
Coverage Workplace, Division of Establishment and Award Help
Workplace of Price range, Finance, and Award Administration
Nationwide Science Basis
Alexandria, VA 22314

Source link