Replaces Doc(s):NSF 23-546
Nationwide Science Basis
Directorate for Mathematical and Bodily Sciences Division of Mathematical Sciences
Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Financial Sciences Division of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences Division of Social and Financial Sciences
Directorate for Organic Sciences Division of Environmental Biology
Nationwide Institutes of Well being
Nationwide Institute on Drug Abuse
Submission Window Date(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter’s native time):
February 01, 2024 – February 14, 2024
February 1 – February 14, Yearly Thereafter
IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND REVISION NOTES
The one modifications are to the due dates and NIH/NIDA associated updates in Part II. Program Description and the Particular Award Situations in Part VII. Award Administration Data.
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 repeatedly 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:
Incorporating Human Conduct in Epidemiological Fashions (IHBEM)
Synopsis of Program:
The Incorporating Human Conduct in Epidemiological Fashions (IHBEM) Program helps analysis that comes with analysis on social and behavioral processes in mathematical epidemiological fashions. This system supplies help for initiatives that contain balanced participation from the mathematical sciences and from the social, behavioral, and financial sciences.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
Please observe that the next data is present on the time of publishing. See program web site for any updates to the factors of contact.
Zhilan J. Feng, Program Director, MPS/DMS, phone: (703) 292-7523, e mail: [email protected]
Joseph M. Whitmeyer, Program Director, SBE/SES, phone: (703) 292-7808, e mail: [email protected]
Katharina Dittmar, Program Director, BIO/DEB, phone: (703) 292-7799, e mail: [email protected]
Susan Wright, Program Director, NIH/NIDA, phone: (301) 443-1124, e mail: [email protected]
Amina Eladdadi, Program Director, MPS/DMS, phone: (703) 292-8128, e mail: [email protected]
Trisha Van Zandt, Program Director, SBE/BCS, phone: (703) 292-8740, e mail: [email protected]
Relevant Catalog of Federal Home Help (CFDA) Quantity(s):
47.049 — Mathematical and Bodily Sciences
47.074 — Organic Sciences
47.075 — Social Behavioral and Financial Sciences
93.279 — Nationwide Institute on Drug Abuse
Award Data
Anticipated Sort of Award: Normal Grant or Persevering with Grant or R01 mission (if the proposal is chosen to be funded by NIH/NIDA)
Estimated Variety of Awards: 10 to fifteen
Roughly 10 to fifteen awards from this competitors could also be made by both NSF or NIH on the possibility of the companies, not the grantee. The variety of awards will depend upon the standard of obtained proposals and finances availability.
Anticipated Funding Quantity: $4,000,000 to $5,500,000
As much as $5,500,000 per 12 months for brand spanking new awards (as much as $3,500,000 from NSF and as much as $2,000,000 from NIH/NIDA), topic to availability of funds and receipt of meritorious proposals, with complete budgets of as much as $1,000,000 for an award length of 3-4 years.
Eligibility Data
Who Might Submit Proposals:
Proposals might solely be submitted by the next:
Establishments of Greater Schooling (IHEs) – Two- and four-year IHEs (together with neighborhood faculties) accredited in, and having a campus positioned within the US, appearing on behalf of their college members. Particular Directions for Worldwide Department Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal contains funding to be offered to a global department campus of a US establishment of upper training (together with by use of subawards and marketing consultant preparations), the proposer should clarify the profit(s) to the mission of efficiency on the worldwide department campus, and justify why the mission actions can’t be carried out on the US campus.
Who Might 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: 1
An individual could also be PI or co-PI on not more than ONE proposal. Taking part in a proposal as different senior personnel doesn’t rely on this restrict. Modifications in investigator roles post-submission to fulfill the eligibility limits won’t be allowed. It’s the duty of the submitters to verify that your complete crew is inside the eligibility tips.
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
Submission Window Date(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter’s native time):
February 01, 2024 – February 14, 2024
February 1 – February 14, Yearly Thereafter
Proposal Evaluation Data Standards
Benefit Evaluation Standards:
Nationwide Science Board authorized standards. Extra benefit assessment standards apply. Please see the complete textual content of this solicitation for additional data.
Award Administration Data
Award Situations:
Extra award circumstances apply. Please see the complete textual content of this solicitation for additional data.
Reporting Necessities:
Extra reporting necessities apply. Please see the complete textual content of this solicitation for additional data.
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 Evaluation Procedures
Benefit Evaluation Ideas and Standards
Evaluation and Choice Course of
Award Administration Data
Notification of the Award
Award Situations
Reporting Necessities
Company Contacts
Different Data
I. INTRODUCTION
The COVID-19 pandemic revealed three vital info about epidemiological modeling:
Epidemiological fashions are invaluable, important instruments in combating a pandemic
Present fashions are far much less helpful than they could possibly be for dealing with an ongoing pandemic
A big neighborhood of researchers is offered and wanting to contribute to the event and enchancment of those modeling efforts.
Present fashions have proved inadequate to understanding the course of the pandemic, partially, because of human behavioral and social processes which are lacking from the fashions. These processes embody structural traits corresponding to differential dwelling circumstances and patterns of social interplay, and behavioral traits corresponding to responsiveness to incentives and data by completely different segments of the inhabitants. In consequence, the mathematical fashions and, instruments for mannequin analyses and simulations that had been developed to answer the pandemic weren’t as efficient or helpful as they might have been.
The IHBEM program is motivated by the pressing want to offer extra dependable modeling instruments to tell determination making and to judge public well being insurance policies throughout pandemics and different public well being crises, with the premise that vital advances could also be made by incorporating human behavioral and social processes in mathematical epidemiological fashions. The purpose of this program is to attenuate unintended outcomes of public well being interventions.
II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The aim of the Incorporating Human Conduct in Epidemiological Fashions exercise is to help interdisciplinary collaborations that combine analysis on behavioral and/or social processes in mathematical epidemiological fashions. Initiatives supported underneath this exercise must be collaborative in nature and rely for his or her development on the coordinated interplay of two or extra PIs/co-PIs, with balanced participation from each the mathematical sciences and the social, behavioral, and financial sciences. Extra members from different disciplines, particularly the organic sciences, are additionally welcome.
Every mission ought to give attention to a major and well-delineated analysis problem that integrates behavioral and social processes into mathematical epidemiological fashions. Examples of analysis challenges embody, however not are restricted to:
1) Behavioral realism and sensitivity evaluation. A standard essential flaw attributed to epidemiological fashions of the COVID-19 pandemic has been a failure to include life like fashions of habits. The problem, subsequently, is to include realism whereas on the identical time sustaining the tractability of the fashions. This realism contains variations in behavioral and social distributions alongside completely different traits of human populations and their intersections, together with revenue, age, area, faith, race and ethnicity, gender, and training. Accompanying the incorporation of those behavioral fashions must be sensitivity analyses that decide how and to what extent these traits matter for predicting the outcomes of various pandemic-related interventions.
2) Incorporation of behavioral change. Folks’s habits modifications over time: it could change as they purchase extra data, in strategic response to others’ (together with organizations’ and governments’) behaviors, due to fatigue or growing stress or growing deprivation, and so forth. The implication is that incorporating fastened assumptions about habits into epidemiological fashions could also be insufficient for understanding how greatest to answer a pandemic. A dynamic method that embraces how habits modifications over time shall be vital.
3) Incorporation of a number of environments: local weather, seasonal, political, social. Local weather impacts human epidemiology in some ways, a kind of being that it impacts human habits. Local weather change additionally impacts animal habitats, which may have an effect on human-animal interactions such that some pathogens initially occurring solely amongst animals might develop into transmissible in a human inhabitants. Local weather is expounded to seasonal variation, which once more has robust results on patterns of human habits. Political and social environments, whereas basically completely different from climatic and seasonal environments, additionally exert a powerful affect on habits. Incorporation of those and different environmental concerns into epidemiological fashions is crucial particularly due to how they fluctuate over completely different localities and the way they alter over time.
4) Incorporation of inhabitants heterogeneity and coverage fashions. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted that illness might have an effect on completely different segments of the inhabitants otherwise. Contemplating this heterogeneity, it could be vital to mannequin endogenous mechanisms describing decision-makers’ inaction of public well being insurance policies (corresponding to social distancing, masks carrying, vaccination) and social insurance policies (for instance, eviction moratoria, childcare provisions, and employment flexibility), and the way these guidelines affect public well being and welfare. This includes modeling political components, communication, behavioral responses, and interactions between dynamically coupled processes.
5) Knowledge wants for wealthy mathematical epidemiological fashions. As wealthy theoretical fashions are constructed with, for instance, completely different attainable transmission strategies and behavioral responses, it turns into invaluable to research what knowledge are required to validate the fashions, and what knowledge are essential to separate and arbitrate between fashions, whereas acknowledging the constraints posed by knowledge which are both observational or unrepresentative.
Initiatives needn’t give attention to human pathogens or human hosts, though such analysis should nonetheless incorporate human habits and/or social processes. Examples of analysis on non-human programs embody: how modifications in behaviors or farming practices have an effect on the transmission of foot-and-mouth illness, how financial components have an effect on the worldwide unfold of pathogens by the pet commerce, or how searching impacts the unfold of prions in white-tail deer.
All proposals ought to describe clearly the analysis challenges related to the proposed mathematical epidemiological fashions and the approaches of incorporating social, behavioral, or financial processes, in addition to the applicability of the fashions in actual populations. As well as, the coaching of scholars and postdoctoral researchers on the intersection of the mathematical sciences and social, behavioral, and financial sciences is inspired. Focus on how trainees shall be recruited, mentored, and retained, and clarify how these efforts will enhance participation of individuals from all demographics, thereby together with these underrepresented within the scientific enterprise. Analysis groups are required to disseminate the outcomes of their work in a well timed and efficient trend.
NIDA is particularly fascinated with proposals that help scientific analysis on drug use and its well being and social penalties throughout the spectrum, from occasional use to problematic use and substance use problems (SUDs), that integrates social, behavioral, or financial processes to answer the general public well being disaster corresponding to drug overdose, HIV, and HCV. Some examples of areas of curiosity embody:
Utilizing know-how and superior statistical strategies to tell our understanding of each social, behavioral and neurobiological parts of drug use which are strongly influenced by various environmental and social components within the context of responding to public well being disaster corresponding to drug overdose, HIV, and HCV.
The event and validation of applied sciences, analytics, and fashions to assist people collect, handle, and use knowledge and data associated to drug use and their private well being within the context of responding to public well being disaster corresponding to drug overdose, HIV, and HCV.
Strategies and algorithms for aggregation of knowledge together with, however not restricted to, digital well being data (EHRs), laboratory generated knowledge, environmental, and/or behavioral knowledge.
Diagnostic/monitoring instruments and know-how platforms to optimize drug use interventions and supply, within the context of responding to public well being disaster corresponding to drug overdose, HIV, and HCV.
III. AWARD INFORMATION
Below this solicitation, proposals could also be submitted for as much as 4 years length and with budgets totaling not more than $1,000,000. The finances should be commensurate with the mission and totally justified within the proposal. The IHBEM Program expects to fund roughly 10-15 awards per 12 months, relying on the standard of submissions and the provision of funds.
Upon conclusion of the assessment course of, meritorious proposals could also be beneficial for funding by both NSF or NIH, on the possibility of the companies, not the proposing organizations. Unattributed opinions and the panel abstract shall be shared with NIH. Proposals chosen for funding by NIH will should be reformatted and resubmitted to that company. Subsequent submission and grant administration procedures shall be in accordance with the person insurance policies of the awarding company. Additional data shall be offered to those proposers after choice.
IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
Who Might Submit Proposals:
Proposals might solely be submitted by the next:
Establishments of Greater Schooling (IHEs) – Two- and four-year IHEs (together with neighborhood faculties) accredited in, and having a campus positioned within the US, appearing on behalf of their college members. Particular Directions for Worldwide Department Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal contains funding to be offered to a global department campus of a US establishment of upper training (together with by use of subawards and marketing consultant preparations), the proposer should clarify the profit(s) to the mission of efficiency on the worldwide department campus, and justify why the mission actions can’t be carried out on the US campus.
Who Might 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: 1
An individual could also be PI or co-PI on not more than ONE proposal. Taking part in a proposal as different senior personnel doesn’t rely on this restrict. Modifications in investigator roles post-submission to fulfill the eligibility limits won’t be allowed. It’s the duty of the submitters to verify that your complete crew is inside the eligibility tips.
Extra Eligibility Information:
NIH/NIDA and its employees are ineligible to be concerned in any proposals submitted to this funding alternative, together with as unfunded collaborators, by way of letters of collaboration or help, or by way of some other means.
NIH/NIDA Eligibility: Medical trials are usually not allowed. The NIH will solely think about proposals that don’t suggest scientific trials. People who’re contemplating submitting a proposal in response to this solicitation ought to assessment https://grants.nih.gov/ct-decision/ in figuring out whether or not the mission meets the NIH definition of a Medical Trial.
V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
A. Proposal Preparation Directions
Full Proposal Preparation Directions: Proposers might choose to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation 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 overall tips contained within the NSF Proposal and Award Insurance policies and Procedures Information (PAPPG). The entire textual content of the PAPPG is offered 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 Software Information: A Information for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Purposes by way of Grants.gov. The entire textual content of the NSF Grants.gov Software Information is offered on the Grants.gov web site and on the NSF web site at: (https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide). To acquire copies of the Software Information and Software Kinds Bundle, click on on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov web site, then click on on the Apply Step 1: Obtain a Grant Software Bundle and Software 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 Software Information additionally could also be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, phone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected].
In figuring out which technique to make the most of within the digital preparation and submission of the proposal, please observe the next:
Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from a number of organizations should be submitted by way of Analysis.gov. PAPPG Chapter II.E.3 supplies further data on collaborative proposals.
See PAPPG Chapter II.D.2 for steerage on the required sections of a full analysis proposal submitted to NSF. Please observe that the proposal preparation directions offered on this program solicitation might deviate from the PAPPG directions.
The next directions complement or deviate from the PAPPG:
Title: To facilitate well timed processing, the title of the proposal ought to start with the 5 characters “IHBEM:” and the title of collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from a number of organizations ought to start with the designation “Collaborative Analysis: IHBEM:” All proposals in a collaborative mission ought to have the identical title. Please observe that if submitting by way of Analysis.gov, the system will routinely insert the prepended title “Collaborative Analysis” when the collaborative set of proposals is created.
Outcomes from Prior NSF and/or NIH Assist: If any Principal Investigator (PI) or co-PI recognized on the mission has obtained NSF or NIH funding with (i) an award with an finish date prior to now 5 years, or (ii) any present funding, together with any no price extensions, data on the award(s) is required. Every PI and co-PI who has obtained a couple of award should report on the award most carefully associated to the proposal. Not more than three complete pages could also be used to explain the outcomes, which should be summarized in a single, separate part, clearly titled “Outcomes from Prior NSF/NIH Assist.”
The next data should be offered:
The NSF or NIH award quantity, quantity and interval of help
The title of the mission
A abstract of the outcomes of the finished work, together with accomplishments associated to the Broader Influence actions supported by the award
Proof of analysis merchandise and their availability, together with, however not restricted to: knowledge, publications, samples, bodily collections, software program, and fashions.
Administration Plan: All proposals should embody a Administration Plan, not more than 3 pages lengthy, submitted as a separate Supplementary Doc. The plan ought to focus on the function of every investigator, in addition to the governance and organizational construction of the management crew and the analysis mission, together with communication plans, course of for making choices on scientific instructions, and procedures for resolving conflicts. The estimated period of time dedicated to the mission should be offered for every of the important thing personnel; these with different supported analysis should additionally clarify how they are going to allocate effort and time among the many initiatives.
Safety of Human Topics/Use and Care of Vertebrate Animals: Each NSF and NIH have guidelines concerning using human topics and/or vertebrate animals in analysis. Proposals that contain human topics or use vertebrate animals MUST INCLUDE the data required by each companies. See the NSF PAPPG AND the NIH SF 424 software information for added data (https://grants.nih.gov/grants/how-to-apply-application-guide/forms-g/normal/g.500-phs-human-subjects-and-clinical-trials-information.htm). Data on using human topics and/or vertebrate animals is taken into account within the assessment of the proposals and must be submitted individually as a Supplementary Doc.
Letters of Collaboration: Letters of collaboration doc vital collaborative preparations and should be restricted to stating the intent to collaborate and mustn’t comprise endorsements or analysis of the proposed mission or investigators. The beneficial format for letters of collaboration is as follows:
“If the proposal submitted by Dr. [insert the full name of the Principal Investigator] entitled [insert the proposal title] is chosen for funding by NSF or NIH, it’s my intent to collaborate and/or commit sources as detailed within the Undertaking Description or the Amenities, Gear or Different Assets part of the proposal.”
The Undertaking Description ought to doc the necessity for and nature of collaborations, corresponding to mental contributions to the mission, permission to entry a web site, an instrument, or a facility, provide of knowledge, samples and supplies for analysis, logistical help to the analysis and training program, or mentoring of U.S. college students at a overseas web site. All letters of collaboration should be included on the time of submission as separate Supplementary Paperwork.
B. Budgetary Data
Price Sharing:
Inclusion of voluntary dedicated price sharing is prohibited.
C. Due Dates
Submission Window Date(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter’s native time):
February 01, 2024 – February 14, 2024
February 1 – February 14, Yearly Thereafter
D. Analysis.gov/Grants.gov Necessities
For Proposals Submitted By way of Analysis.gov:
To arrange and submit a proposal by way of Analysis.gov, see detailed technical directions accessible 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 normal technical questions associated to using 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 By way of 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 offered on the Grants.gov Applicant Assets webpage: https://www.grants.gov/internet/grants/candidates.html. As well as, the NSF Grants.gov Software Information (see hyperlink in Part V.A) supplies 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 e mail: [email protected]. The Grants.gov Contact Middle solutions normal technical questions associated to using 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 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 shall be transferred to Analysis.gov for additional processing.
The NSF Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Analysis.gov informational web page supplies submission steerage to candidates and hyperlinks to useful sources together with the NSF Grants.gov Software Information, Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Analysis.gov how-to information, and Grants.gov Submitted Proposals Ceaselessly Requested Questions. Grants.gov proposals should move all NSF pre-check and post-check validations with a view to be accepted by Analysis.gov at NSF.
When submitting by way of Grants.gov, NSF strongly recommends candidates provoke proposal submission at the very least 5 enterprise days upfront of a deadline to permit ample time to deal with NSF compliance errors and resubmissions by 5:00 p.m. submitting group’s native time on the deadline. Please observe 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 appropriate and submit the in-progress proposal in Analysis.gov.
Proposers that submitted by way of Analysis.gov might use Analysis.gov to confirm the standing of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted by way of Grants.gov, till an software has been obtained and validated by NSF, the Approved Organizational Consultant might verify the standing of an software on Grants.gov. After proposers have obtained an e-mail notification from NSF, Analysis.gov must be used to verify the standing of an software.
VI. NSF PROPOSAL PROCESSING AND REVIEW PROCEDURES
Proposals obtained by NSF are assigned to the suitable NSF program for acknowledgement and, in the event that they meet NSF necessities, for assessment. 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 outdoors NSF both as advert hoc reviewers, panelists, or each, who’re consultants within the specific fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are chosen by Program Officers charged with oversight of the assessment course of. Proposers are invited to recommend names of individuals they consider are particularly properly certified to assessment the proposal and/or individuals they would like not assessment the proposal. These recommendations might function one supply within the reviewer choice course of on the Program Officer’s discretion. Submission of such names, nevertheless, is elective. Care is taken to make sure that reviewers don’t have any conflicts of curiosity with the proposal. As well as, Program Officers might receive feedback from web site visits earlier than recommending last motion on proposals. Senior NSF employees additional assessment suggestions for awards. A flowchart that depicts your complete NSF proposal and award course of (and related timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1.
A complete description of the Basis’s benefit assessment course of is offered on the NSF web site at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/coverage/merit_review/.
Proposers also needs to 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 assessment is one half. NSF’s mission is especially well-implemented by the combination of analysis and training and broadening participation in NSF applications, initiatives, and actions.
One of many strategic goals in help of NSF’s mission is to foster integration of analysis and training by the applications, initiatives, and actions it helps at tutorial 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 financial system. NSF’s contribution to the nationwide innovation ecosystem is to offer cutting-edge analysis underneath the steerage of the Nation’s most inventive scientists and engineers. NSF additionally helps growth of a powerful science, know-how, engineering, and arithmetic (STEM) workforce by investing in constructing the data that informs enhancements in STEM instructing and studying.
NSF’s mission requires the broadening of alternatives and increasing participation of teams, establishments, and geographic areas which are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is crucial to the well being and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is dedicated to this precept of variety and deems it central to the applications, initiatives, and actions it considers and helps.
A. Benefit Evaluation Ideas and Standards
The Nationwide Science Basis strives to spend money on a sturdy and various portfolio of initiatives that creates new data 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 benefit assessment course of that comes with consideration of each the technical elements 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 assessment course of for the number of initiatives.
1. Benefit Evaluation Ideas
These rules 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 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 rules apply:
All NSF initiatives must be of the very best high quality and have the potential to advance, if not remodel, the frontiers of information.
NSF initiatives, within the mixture, ought to contribute extra broadly to attaining societal objectives. These “Broader Impacts” could also be achieved by the analysis itself, by actions which are instantly associated to particular analysis initiatives, or by actions which are supported by, however are complementary to, the mission. The mission actions could also be based mostly on beforehand established and/or modern strategies and approaches, however in both case should be properly justified.
Significant evaluation and analysis of NSF funded initiatives must be based mostly on applicable metrics, holding in thoughts the seemingly correlation between the impact of broader impacts and the sources offered to implement initiatives. If the dimensions of the exercise is proscribed, analysis of that exercise in isolation is just not prone to be significant. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of those actions might greatest be executed at a better, extra aggregated, degree than the person mission.
With respect to the third precept, even when evaluation of Broader Impacts outcomes for specific initiatives is finished at an aggregated degree, PIs are anticipated to be accountable for finishing up the actions described within the funded mission. Thus, particular person initiatives ought to embody clearly said objectives, 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 assessment rules present the premise for the benefit assessment standards, in addition to a context inside which the customers of the standards can higher perceive their intent.
2. Benefit Evaluation Standards
All NSF proposals are evaluated by use of the 2 Nationwide Science Board authorized benefit assessment standards. In some situations, nevertheless, NSF will make use of further standards as required to spotlight the precise goals of sure applications and actions.
The 2 benefit assessment standards are listed under. Each standards are to be given full consideration throughout the assessment and decision-making processes; every criterion is important however neither, by itself, is adequate. Due to this fact, proposers should totally handle each standards. (PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i). comprises further data to be used by proposers in growth of the Undertaking Description part of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly inspired to assessment the standards, together with PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i), previous to the assessment of a proposal.
When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers shall be requested to think about what the proposers need to do, why they need to do it, how they plan to do it, how they are going to know in the event that they succeed, and what advantages might accrue if the mission is profitable. These points apply each to the technical elements of the proposal and the best way during which the mission might make broader contributions. To that finish, reviewers shall be requested to judge all proposals towards two standards:
Mental Benefit: The Mental Benefit criterion encompasses the potential to advance data; and
Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to learn society and contribute to the achievement of particular, desired societal outcomes.
The next parts must be thought-about within the assessment for each standards:
What’s the potential for the proposed exercise to
Advance data and understanding inside its personal discipline or throughout completely different fields (Mental Benefit); and
Profit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?
To what extent do the proposed actions recommend and discover inventive, authentic, or probably transformative ideas?
Is the plan for finishing up the proposed actions well-reasoned, well-organized, and based mostly on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to evaluate success?
How properly certified is the person, crew, or group to conduct the proposed actions?
Are there ample sources accessible to the PI (both on the dwelling group or by collaborations) to hold out the proposed actions?
Broader impacts could also be achieved by the analysis itself, by the actions which are instantly associated to particular analysis initiatives, or by actions which are supported by, however are complementary to, the mission. NSF values the development of scientific data and actions that contribute to achievement of societally related outcomes. Such outcomes embody, however are usually 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 degree; elevated public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and know-how; improved well-being of people in society; growth of a various, globally aggressive STEM workforce; elevated partnerships between academia, trade, and others; improved nationwide safety; elevated financial competitiveness of the US; and enhanced infrastructure for analysis and training.
Proposers are reminded that reviewers can even be requested to assessment the Knowledge Administration Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as applicable.
Extra Solicitation Particular Evaluation Standards
Along with Mental Deserves and Broader Impacts, reviewers shall be requested to think about:
The extent to which the proposed subject and analysis combine behavioral and social processes into mathematical epidemiological fashions, as evidenced within the Undertaking Description and Administration Plan.
The extent to which the analysis crew is properly balanced between these with experience within the mathematical sciences and the behavioral and social sciences.
The extent to which the Administration Plan is complete and well-developed, together with however not restricted to mission administration strategies, coordination of the analysis crew, soundness of the finances, and feasibility of the schedule.
The appropriateness of the metrics to evaluate the success of the mission included within the proposal.
Reviewers could also be requested to offer numeric NIH total influence scores from 1 (highest) to 9 (lowest) based mostly upon their evaluations of the mental deserves and broader impacts of the purposes.
Total Influence refers back to the chance that the mission will exert a sustained, highly effective affect on the analysis discipline(s) concerned and is predicated on the next 5 core assessment standards and related further assessment standards. An software doesn’t should be robust in all classes to be judged prone to have main scientific influence.
The 5 core assessment standards for NIH are:
Significance. Does the applicant focus on the strengths and weaknesses of the rigor of the prior analysis used to help the proposed mission? (Rigor of the prior analysis, which incorporates preliminary and revealed outcomes, considerations the standard and power of the analysis being cited by the applicant as essential to help the applying; that is distinct from the speculation or justification.) How will the proposed analysis handle weaknesses, gaps, vital issues, or important boundaries to progress within the discipline? If the mission goals are achieved, how will scientific data, technical functionality, and/or scientific follow be improved? Will profitable completion of the goals change the ideas, strategies, remedies, applied sciences, companies, or preventative interventions that drive this discipline?
Investigator(s). Are the principal investigator (PI), mission director (PD), collaborators, and different researchers properly suited to the mission? For these within the early phases of impartial careers, have they got applicable expertise and coaching? For extra established investigators, have they demonstrated an ongoing file of accomplishments which have superior their discipline(s)? If the mission is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and built-in experience; are their management method, governance, and organizational construction applicable for the mission?
Innovation. Does the applying problem and search to shift present analysis or scientific follow paradigms by using novel theoretical ideas, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the ideas, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to at least one discipline of analysis or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, enchancment, or new software of theoretical ideas, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?
Method. Are the general technique, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned, applicable, and supported by rigor within the prior analysis to perform the mission’s particular goals? Is there scientific rigor within the proposed research? (Scientific rigor is outlined because the strict software of the scientific technique to make sure sturdy and unbiased experimental design, methodology, evaluation, interpretation, and reporting of outcomes.) Are potential issues, various methods, and benchmarks for fulfillment introduced? If the mission is within the early phases of growth, will the technique set up feasibility, and can significantly dangerous elements be managed? Have the investigators introduced ample plans to deal with related organic variables (e.g., intercourse, age, weight, well being situation, human ethnicity, animal species and strains, and so forth.) for research in vertebrate animals or human topics? If the mission includes human topics, are there plans for the safety of human topics from analysis dangers, and the inclusion (or exclusion) of people on the premise of intercourse/gender, race, and ethnicity, in addition to the inclusion (or exclusion) of people of all ages (together with kids and older adults), justified when it comes to the scientific objectives and analysis technique proposed?
Surroundings. Will the scientific setting during which the work shall be executed contribute to the likelihood of success? Are the institutional help, gear, and different bodily sources accessible to the investigators ample for the mission proposed? Will the mission profit from distinctive options of the scientific setting, topic populations, or collaborative preparations?
As related to the proposed mission, the next further assessment standards shall be addressed and regarded within the willpower of scientific benefit and score as a part of the Total Influence rating.
Protections for Human Topics.
To be thought-about human topics analysis, the taking part people should be dwelling and identifiable, and the information and/or specimens are particularly obtained for the proposed analysis. For analysis that includes human topics however doesn’t contain one of many classes of analysis which are exempt underneath 45 CFR Half 46.104, the committee will consider the justification for involvement of human topics and the proposed protections from analysis danger regarding their participation in accordance with the next assessment standards: 1) danger to topics, 2) adequacy of safety towards dangers, 3) potential advantages to the themes and others, and 4) significance of the data to be gained. For analysis that includes human topics and meets the standards for a number of of the eight classes of analysis which are exempt underneath 45 CFR Half 46.104, the committee will consider: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human topics involvement and traits, and three) sources of supplies.
Inclusion of Ladies, Minorities, and People Throughout the Lifespan. When the proposed mission includes human topics and/or NIH-defined scientific analysis, the committee will consider the proposed plans for the inclusion (or exclusion) of people on the premise of intercourse/gender, race/ethnicity or if non-US residents, in addition to the inclusion (or exclusion) of people of all ages together with kids (underneath 18 years previous), adults (18 to 64 years previous) and older adults (over 64 years previous) to find out whether it is justified when it comes to the scientific objectives and analysis technique proposed.
Vertebrate Animals. The committee will consider the involvement of reside vertebrate animals as a part of the scientific evaluation in accordance with the next standards: (1) a concise description of proposed procedures involving animals, together with figuring out the species, strains, ages, intercourse, and complete quantity for use and if concerned, the sources of canines or cats; (2) the justifications that the species are applicable for the proposed analysis and explaining why the analysis objectives can’t be achieved utilizing another mannequin (e.g., computational, human, invertebrate, in vitro); (3) the interventions to attenuate discomfort, misery, ache and damage; and (4) the justification for euthanasia technique if NOT according to the American Veterinary Medical Affiliation Pointers for the Euthanasia of Animals. Reviewers will assess using chimpanzees as they’d some other software proposing using vertebrate animals.
Biohazards. Reviewers will establish potential biohazards (organic organisms or their merchandise, corresponding to toxins, that pose a menace to human well being) and different hazards (corresponding to radioactivity, harmful chemical compounds, or recombinant DNA) which are identified of their skilled neighborhood to pose a very vital danger to analysis personnel and/or the setting. Reviewers will assess whether or not supplies or procedures proposed are probably hazardous to analysis personnel and/or the setting, and if wanted, decide whether or not ample safety is proposed.
B. Evaluation and Choice Course of
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation shall be reviewed by Advert hoc Evaluation and/or Panel Evaluation.
Reviewers shall be requested to judge proposals utilizing two Nationwide Science Board authorized benefit assessment standards and, if relevant, further program particular standards. A abstract score and accompanying narrative will usually be accomplished and submitted by every reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to handle the proposal’s assessment will think about the recommendation of reviewers and can formulate a advice.
Upon conclusion of the assessment course of, meritorious proposals could also be beneficial for funding by both NSF or NIH, on the possibility of the companies, not the proposing organizations. Unattributed opinions and the panel abstract shall be shared with NIH. Proposals chosen for funding by NIH will should be reformatted and resubmitted to that company. Subsequent submission and grant administration procedures shall be in accordance with the person insurance policies of the awarding company. Additional data shall be offered to those proposers after choice.
NSF Course of: After scientific, technical and programmatic assessment and consideration of applicable components, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether or not the proposal must be declined or beneficial for award. NSF strives to have the ability to inform candidates whether or not their proposals have been declined or beneficial for funding inside six months. Massive or significantly complicated proposals or proposals from new awardees might require further assessment 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 beneficial for funding shall be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements or the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Assist for assessment of enterprise, monetary, and coverage implications. After an administrative assessment 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 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 determination has been made, Principal Investigators are offered suggestions about their proposals. In all instances, opinions are handled as confidential paperwork. Verbatim copies of opinions, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying data, are despatched to the Principal Investigator/Undertaking Director by the Program Officer. As well as, the proposer will obtain a proof of the choice to award or decline funding.
NIH Course of: Proposals chosen for funding consideration by NIH shall be invited to submit reformatted purposes to the Division of Receipt and Referral (DRR) in NIH’s Middle for Scientific Evaluation (CSR). A receipt date of roughly February 1 yearly is in impact for the NIH formatted purposes. Following the preliminary peer assessment, beneficial purposes which were resubmitted to the NIH are required to go to second degree assessment by the Advisory Council or Advisory Board of the awarding Institute or Middle. The next shall be thought-about in making funding choices:
Scientific and technical benefit of the proposed mission as decided by scientific peer assessment.
Availability of funds.
Relevance of the proposed mission to program priorities.
Subsequent award processing and grant administration procedures shall be in accordance with NIH insurance policies and procedures.
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 opinions, not together with the identification of the reviewer, shall be offered routinely to the Principal Investigator. (See Part VI.B. for added data on the assessment course of.)
B. Award Situations
An NSF award consists of: (1) the award discover, which incorporates any particular provisions relevant to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the finances, which signifies the quantities, by classes of expense, on which NSF has based mostly 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 circumstances, corresponding to Grant Basic Situations (GC-1)*; or Analysis Phrases and Situations* 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 Situations (CA-FATC) and the relevant Programmatic Phrases and Situations. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the group 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 Situations and different vital data on the administration of NSF awards is contained within the NSF Proposal & Award Insurance policies & Procedures Information (PAPPG) Chapter VII, accessible 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 manager department to make use of phrases and circumstances of Federal monetary help awards to maximise, according to legislation, using items, merchandise, and supplies produced in, and companies supplied in, the US.
In keeping 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 accessible by this funding alternative could also be obligated for an award except all iron, metal, manufactured merchandise, and building supplies used within the mission are produced in the US. For extra data, go to NSF’s Construct America, Purchase America webpage.
Particular Award Situations:
Grants made by NSF shall be topic to NSF’s award circumstances. Grants made by NIH shall be topic to NIH’s award circumstances (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/coverage/awardconditions.htm).
For NIDA Awards, please check with the NIDA Particular Concerns Web page: https://nida.nih.gov/funding/special-considerations-for-nida-funding.
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 top of the present finances interval. (Some applications or awards require submission of extra frequent mission experiences). No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI is also required to submit a last mission report, and a mission outcomes report for most people.
Failure to offer the required annual or last mission experiences, or the mission outcomes report, will delay NSF assessment 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 experiences upfront to guarantee availability of required knowledge.
PIs are required to make use of NSF’s digital project-reporting system, accessible by Analysis.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and last mission experiences. Such experiences present data on accomplishments, mission members (particular person and organizational), publications, and different particular merchandise and impacts of the mission. 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 mission outcomes report additionally should 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 mission. 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, accessible electronically on the NSF Web site at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg.
Awardees shall be required to submit the Analysis Efficiency Progress Report (RPPR)yearly and monetary statements as required within the NIH Grants Coverage Assertion.
A last progress report, invention assertion, and the expenditure knowledge portion of the Federal Monetary Report are required for closeout of an award, as described within the NIH Grants Coverage Assertion.
The Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (Transparency Act), features a requirement for awardees of Federal grants to report details about first-tier subawards and government compensation underneath Federal help awards issued in FY2011 or later. All awardees of relevant NIH grants and cooperative agreements are required to report back to the Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS) accessible at https://www.fsrs.gov/ on all subawards over $25,000. See the NIH Grants Coverage Assertion for added data on this reporting requirement.
VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS
Please observe 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:
Zhilan J. Feng, Program Director, MPS/DMS, phone: (703) 292-7523, e mail: [email protected]
Joseph M. Whitmeyer, Program Director, SBE/SES, phone: (703) 292-7808, e mail: [email protected]
Katharina Dittmar, Program Director, BIO/DEB, phone: (703) 292-7799, e mail: [email protected]
Susan Wright, Program Director, NIH/NIDA, phone: (301) 443-1124, e mail: [email protected]
Amina Eladdadi, Program Director, MPS/DMS, phone: (703) 292-8128, e mail: [email protected]
Trisha Van Zandt, Program Director, SBE/BCS, phone: (703) 292-8740, e mail: [email protected]
For questions associated to using NSF programs contact:
NSF Assist Desk: 1-800-381-1532
Analysis.gov Assist Desk e-mail: [email protected]
For questions regarding Grants.gov contact:
Grants.gov Contact Middle: If the Approved Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not obtained a affirmation message from Grants.gov inside 48 hours of submission of software, please contact by way of phone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail:[email protected].
IX. OTHER INFORMATION
The NSF web site supplies probably the most complete supply of data on NSF Directorates (together with contact data), applications and funding alternatives. Use of this web site by potential proposers is strongly inspired. As well as, “NSF Replace” is an information-delivery system designed to maintain potential proposers and different events apprised of latest NSF funding alternatives and publications, vital 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 offered on NSF’s web site.
Grants.gov supplies a further 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 grants and cooperative agreements to greater than 2,000 faculties, universities, Okay-12 faculty 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 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 tutorial degree.
Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) present funding for particular help or gear to allow individuals with disabilities to work on NSF-supported initiatives. See the NSF Proposal & Award Insurance policies & Procedures Information Chapter II.F.7 for directions concerning preparation of all 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 applications, employment or normal 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 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 Middle):
(703) 292-5111
TDD (for the hearing-impaired):
(703) 292-5090
To Order Publications or Kinds:
Ship an e-mail to:
or phone:
(703) 292-8134
(703) 292-5111
PRIVACY ACT AND PUBLIC BURDEN STATEMENTS
The knowledge requested on proposal kinds and mission experiences is solicited underneath the authority of the Nationwide Science Basis Act of 1950, as amended. The knowledge on proposal kinds shall be utilized in reference to the number of certified proposals; and mission experiences submitted by proposers shall be used for program analysis and reporting inside the Government Department and to Congress. The knowledge requested could also be disclosed to certified reviewers and employees assistants as a part of the proposal assessment course of; to proposer establishments/grantees to offer or receive knowledge concerning the proposal assessment course of, award choices, or the administration of awards; to authorities contractors, consultants, volunteers and researchers and educators as needed to finish assigned work; to different authorities companies or different entities needing data concerning proposers or nominees as a part of a joint software assessment course of, or with a view to coordinate applications or coverage; and to a different Federal company, courtroom, or celebration 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 out potential candidates to function peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See System of Document Notices, NSF-50, “Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Related Information,” and NSF-51, “Reviewer/Proposal File and Related Information.” Submission of the data is voluntary. Failure to offer full and full data, nevertheless, might scale back the opportunity of receiving an award.
An company might not conduct or sponsor, and an individual is just not required to answer, an data assortment except it shows a legitimate 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 data is estimated to common 120 hours per response, together with the time for reviewing directions. Ship feedback concerning the burden estimate and some other facet of this assortment of data, together with recommendations for lowering this burden, to:
Suzanne H. Plimpton
Reviews Clearance Officer
Coverage Workplace, Division of Establishment and Award Assist
Workplace of Finances, Finance, and Award Administration
Nationwide Science Basis
Alexandria, VA 22314
