IUSE/Professional Formation of Engineers: Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (IUSE/PFE: RED)

Nationwide Science Basis

Directorate for Engineering
     Engineering Schooling and Facilities

Directorate for STEM Schooling
     Division of Undergraduate Schooling

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

     September 10, 2024

Planning (Monitor 1), Adaptation & Implementation (Monitor 2), Innovation (Monitor 3), and Innovation Partnerships (Monitor 4) proposals

     April 08, 2025

     Second Tuesday in April, Yearly Thereafter

Planning (Monitor 1) proposals

     September 09, 2025

     Second Tuesday in September, Yearly Thereafter

Planning (Monitor 1), Adaptation & Implementation (Monitor 2), Innovation (Monitor 3), and Innovation Partnerships (Monitor 4) proposals

Essential Info And Revision Notes

This solicitation is revised to incorporate 4 tracks.

Monitor 1 – Planning: designed to assist establishments of serious curiosity to NSF’s mission in constructing capability towards the event of proposals for tasks in Tracks 2, 3, & 4.
Monitor 2 – Adaptation & Implementation adapt and implement evidence-based organizational change methods and actions within the native context.
Monitor 3 – Innovation – Tasks develop new, revolutionary approaches and alter methods that allow the transformation of undergraduate engineering schooling.
Monitor 4 – Innovation Partnerships – Innovation tasks developed throughout a number of establishments, with explicit curiosity in tasks that assist two-year establishments in partnership with different eligible establishments.

A higher emphasis is positioned on each two- and four-year establishments being eligible to use for all tracks. This solicitation can be up to date to encourage proposals addressing a broad spectrum of engineering subjects, together with however not restricted to superior manufacturing, superior wi-fi, synthetic intelligence, biotechnology, microelectronics and semiconductors, internet zero applied sciences, sustainability, techniques engineering, and quantum engineering.

Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation ought to be submitted in accordance with the NSF Proposal & Award Insurance policies & Procedures Information (PAPPG) that’s in impact for the related due date to which the proposal is being submitted. The NSF PAPPG is often 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.

Abstract Of Program Necessities

Basic Info

Program Title:

IUSE/Skilled Formation of Engineers: Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (IUSE/PFE: RED)

Synopsis of Program:

Revolutionizing Engineering Departments (hereinafter known as RED) is designed to construct upon earlier efforts in engineering schooling analysis. Particularly, earlier and ongoing evaluations of the NSF Engineering Schooling and Facilities Division program and its predecessors, in addition to these associated applications within the Directorate for STEM Schooling, have proven that prior investments have considerably improved the primary yr of engineering college students’ experiences, incorporating engineering materials, energetic studying approaches, design instruction, and a broad introduction to skilled abilities and a way {of professional} apply – giving college students an thought of what it means to develop into an engineer. Equally, the senior yr has seen notable change by way of capstone design experiences, which ask college students to synthesize the technical information, abilities, and skills they’ve gained with skilled capacities, utilizing reflective judgment to make choices and talk these successfully. Nevertheless, this best of the senior yr has not but been absolutely realized, as a result of lots of the competencies required in capstone design, or required {of professional} engineers, are solely partially launched within the first yr and never carried ahead with important emphasis by way of the sophomore and junior years.

The Directorates for Engineering (ENG) and STEM Schooling (EDU) are funding tasks as a part of the RED program, in alignment with the Bettering Undergraduate STEM Schooling (IUSE) framework and Skilled Formation of Engineers (PFE) initiative. These tasks are designing revolutionary new approaches to engineering schooling, starting from altering the canon of engineering to basically altering the best way programs are structured to creating new departmental constructions and academic collaborations with business. A standard thread throughout these tasks is a give attention to organizational and cultural change inside the departments, involving college students, school, employees, and business in rethinking what it means to supply an engineering program.

With the intention to proceed to catalyze revolutionary approaches, whereas increasing the attain of those who have proved efficacious specifically contexts, the RED program helps 4 tracks: RED Planning (Monitor 1), RED Adaptation and Implementation (Monitor 2), RED Innovation (Monitor 3), and RED Innovation Partnerships (Monitor 4). Two- and four-year establishments are inspired to undergo any observe as acceptable for his or her targets and context.

RED Planning (Monitor 1) tasks will assist capacity-building actions at establishments of particular curiosity to NSF’s mission, particularly two-year engineering-centered applications constructing switch partnerships, two-year or four-year establishments in EPSCoR jurisdictions, Primarily Undergraduate Establishments (PUIs), and Establishments of Larger Schooling (IHEs) searching for to stage the variety of levels throughout of the complete spectrum of various expertise in engineering. Planning tasks ought to present the assist for such establishments to discover the event of a RED Tasks in Tracks 2, 3, & 4.

RED Adaptation and Implementation (Monitor 2) tasks will adapt and implement evidence-based organizational change methods and actions to the native context, which helps propagate this transformation of undergraduate engineering schooling.

RED Innovation (Monitor 3) tasks will develop new, revolutionary approaches and alter methods that allow the transformation of undergraduate engineering schooling.

RED Innovation Partnerships (Monitor 4) tasks will obtain the identical targets as Monitor 3 tasks throughout a number of establishments. Of explicit curiosity to this observe are tasks partnering two-year establishments with different eligible establishments.

Tasks in tracks 2, 3, & 4 will embrace consideration of the cultural, organizational, structural, and pedagogical adjustments wanted to remodel a number of departments to ones during which college students are engaged, develop their technical {and professional} abilities, and set up identities as skilled engineers or technologists. The main target of tasks in these tracks ought to be on the division’s disciplinary programs and program. RED challenge initiatives are anticipated to be institutionalized on the finish of the funding interval.

Proposals are particularly inspired that tackle areas of elevated nationwide curiosity together with however not restricted to superior manufacturing, superior wi-fi, synthetic intelligence, biotechnology, microelectronics and semiconductors, internet zero applied sciences, sustainability, techniques engineering, and quantum engineering.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

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

Matthew A. Verleger, ENG/EEC,

phone:
(703) 292-2961,

electronic mail: [email protected]

Christine Delahanty, EDU/DUE,

phone:
(703) 292-8492,

electronic mail: [email protected]

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

47.041
— Engineering
47.076
— STEM Schooling

Award Info

Anticipated Kind of Award:Normal Grant or Persevering with Grant

Estimated Variety of Awards: 13
to 19

This system estimates making 10-13 awards for tasks in Monitor 1. This system estimates making a complete of 3-6 awards for tasks in Tracks 2, 3, & 4.

The finances for Planning (Monitor 1) proposals is as much as $75,000 per yr for a period of as much as 2 years.

The finances for Adaptation & Innovation (Monitor 2) proposals is a most of $1,000,000 for a period of as much as 5 years.

The finances for Innovation (Monitor 3) proposals is between $1,000,000 and $2,000,000 for a period of as much as 5 years.

The finances for Innovation Partnerships (Monitor 4) proposals is between $1,500,000 and $2,500,000 for collaborations throughout a number of establishments for a period of as much as 5 years.

Anticipated Funding Quantity: $7,000,000 to $8,000,000

Estimated program finances and variety of awards are topic to the provision of funds.

Eligibility Info

Who Might Submit Proposals:

Proposals could solely be submitted by the next:

Establishments of Larger Schooling (IHEs) – Two- and four-year IHEs (together with neighborhood faculties) accredited in, and having a campus situated within the US, performing
on behalf of their school members.Particular Directions for Worldwide Department Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal contains funding to be supplied to an
worldwide department campus of a US establishment of upper schooling (together with by way of use of subawards and marketing consultant preparations), the proposer should clarify
the profit(s) to the challenge of efficiency on the worldwide department campus, and justify why the challenge actions can’t be carried out on the US campus.

Who Might Function PI:

For all tracks, the Principal Investigator (PI) should be a Division Chair/Head (or equal) of a division for whom a big share of scholars will graduate or switch to a program with a bachelor’s diploma in engineering or engineering know-how. The PI should be empowered to supply management for the proposed change course of. In instances the place the institutional obligations of a Division Chair/Head don’t allow them to assist the diploma of change being sought, a Dean, Provost, or different senior chief could function PI, supplied they are going to be liable for the energetic management of the RED challenge. The {qualifications} of the PI will be justified within the required letter from senior institutional management.

It’s endorsed that tasks take into account together with people with experience in (a) engineering schooling analysis and (b) organizational change on the management crew.

Restrict on Variety of Proposals per Group:

There are not any restrictions or limits.

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

There are not any restrictions or limits.

Proposal Preparation and Submission Directions

A. Proposal Preparation Directions

Letters of Intent: Not required

Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required

B. Budgetary Info

Different Budgetary Limitations:

Different budgetary limitations apply. Please see the complete textual content of this solicitation for additional data.

C. Due Dates

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

     September 10, 2024

Planning (Monitor 1), Adaptation & Implementation (Monitor 2), Innovation (Monitor 3), and Innovation Partnerships (Monitor 4) proposals

     April 08, 2025

     Second Tuesday in April, Yearly Thereafter

Planning (Monitor 1) proposals

     September 09, 2025

     Second Tuesday in September, Yearly Thereafter

Planning (Monitor 1), Adaptation & Implementation (Monitor 2), Innovation (Monitor 3), and Innovation Partnerships (Monitor 4) proposals

Proposal Evaluation Info Standards

Benefit Evaluation Standards:

Nationwide Science Board authorised standards. Extra benefit evaluation standards apply. Please see the complete textual content of this solicitation for additional data.

Award Administration Info

Award Circumstances:

Normal NSF award situations apply.

Reporting Necessities:

Extra reporting necessities apply. Please see the complete textual content of this solicitation for additional data.

Desk Of Contents

Abstract of Program Necessities

Introduction
Program Description
Award Info
Eligibility Info
Proposal Preparation and Submission Directions

Proposal Preparation Directions
Budgetary Info
Due Dates
Analysis.gov/Grants.gov Necessities


NSF Proposal Processing and Evaluation Procedures

Benefit Evaluation Rules and Standards
Evaluation and Choice Course of


Award Administration Info

Notification of the Award
Award Circumstances
Reporting Necessities


Company Contacts
Different Info

I. Introduction

The aim of the RED program is to catalyze revolutionary, not incrementally reformist, adjustments to the schooling of the following technology of engineers. Revolutionary means radically, all of a sudden, or fully new; producing basic, structural change; or going outdoors of or past current norms and ideas. The advanced issues going through society within the twenty first Century demand adjustments to the best way engineers are educated and the combination of latest modes of studying for engineering college students [1]. For instance, fixing the Nationwide Academy of Engineering (NAE) Grand Challenges would require engineers who not solely have deep technical information, but additionally an understanding of the societal and international contexts during which these issues happen [2]. Obstacles to alter which have been cited embrace underlying departmental and curricular constructions, school reward techniques, and college improvement. Among the many frequent challenges going through engineering departments are tips on how to weave each technical {and professional} abilities all through the curriculum, together with abilities outlined by the ABET (www.abet.org) outcomes; tips on how to promote and incentivize school engagement within the change course of; and tips on how to create cultures of inclusion which are welcoming to college students and college of all kinds. Revolutionary change is required within the construction of departments and the best way college students are educated to satisfy these challenges.

The RED program is meant to deal with the holistic formation of engineers. Engineering has many distinctive facets that differ from different STEM disciplines. Engineering undergraduate applications put together college students for skilled apply; in engineering, the BS diploma supplies eligibility to qualify for the Skilled Engineer license [3]. Moreover, within the high-tech setting upon which the worldwide economic system relies, the perennial debate about workforce shortages of engineers requires a extra exact understanding of dynamic business wants and of the skills of departments to deal with them. Subsequently, NSF is taking a holistic take a look at how engineers are being ready for lifelong careers in technical and socio-technical professions. The RED program seeks to answer the decision from completely different stakeholders (e.g., business, the general public, authorities, and the career itself) for Skilled Formation of Engineers with a broad set {of professional} skills. Skilled Formation of Engineers (PFE) refers back to the formal and casual processes and worth techniques by way of which individuals develop into engineers. This contains the moral duty of working towards engineers to maintain and develop the career to enhance high quality of life for all individuals. The RED program additionally seeks to deal with the truth that the odds of individuals from underrepresented teams coming into into and remaining within the apply of engineering are nonetheless unacceptably low, impacting the long run well being of the nationwide workforce.

[1] Nationwide Academy of Engineering. 2013. Educating Engineers: Making ready twenty first Century Leaders within the Context of New Modes of Studying: Abstract of a Discussion board. Washington, DC: The Nationwide Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18254

[2] Nationwide Academy of Engineering. (n.d.). Grand Challenges – Grand Challenges for engineering. Grand Challenges – Grand Challenges for Engineering. https://www.engineeringchallenges.org/

[3] Nationwide Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying. (2023, December 7). PE examination. NCEES. https://ncees.org/exams/pe-exam/

II. Program Description

Overview

Whereas earlier efforts have made pedagogical adjustments to the best way engineering and engineering know-how college students are educated, RED tasks should take into account the cultural, organizational, structural, and pedagogical adjustments wanted to remodel the division to at least one during which college students are engaged, develop their technical {and professional} abilities, and set up identities as skilled engineers. In recent times there was a rising recognition of the necessity to create and assist an modern and inclusive engineering career for the twenty first Century. Doing so requires an understanding of how engineers are shaped and tips on how to inculcate them with the technical {and professional} abilities wanted to unravel the advanced issues going through society. Whereas some innovation has been adopted within the freshman and senior years, the center two years stay largely untouched [4]. Educating the following technology requires that coherent technical {and professional} threads be developed and woven throughout all 4 years. The RED program is specializing in the center two years due to the importance of those years play within the retention and improvement of engineering college students and the relative lack of analysis on them in comparison with first-year and capstone analysis [4]. Additional, the RED program focuses on structural and cultural change as a result of previous makes an attempt have proven that curricular and pedagogical change doesn’t take maintain if underlying constructions stay the identical. As well as, RED funding has demonstrated the necessity to have interaction each inner (e.g., school, employees, directors, college students) and exterior (e.g., business, neighborhood) stakeholders to construct shared imaginative and prescient in departmental change tasks [5,6]. Particularly, RED tasks ought to search to actively embrace school in any respect ranges all through the challenge improvement lifecycle and to discover tips on how to higher assist these school making change [7]. Tasks are anticipated to incorporate an underlying concept of change to tell the actions and anticipated outcomes [8-10]. RED tasks ought to create a seamless academic expertise for college kids of their disciplinary diploma applications, bridging the foundational science and engineering programs and capstone tasks. The consequence might be college students who’re ready to be professionals of their chosen paths after commencement. Proposals from IHEs with documented success (or a transparent plan to have the ability to exhibit success) in awarding levels to college students from teams underrepresented in engineering are strongly inspired.

Particular actions supported by the RED solicitation could embrace, however aren’t restricted to:

Establishing convergent technical {and professional} threads that should be woven throughout the 4 years, particularly in core technical programs of the center two years, in internship alternatives within the non-public and public sectors, and in analysis alternatives with school;
Exploring methods for institutional, systemic, and cultural change, together with new approaches to school governance or division constructions and to restructuring school incentive or reward techniques;
Exploring collaborative preparations with business and different stakeholders who’re mutually concerned about creating the absolute best skilled formation setting and alternatives for college kids;
Exploring methods to bridge the engineering schooling research-to-practice hole, primarily by way of school improvement and adoption of finest practices within the skilled formation of engineers; and
Exploring revolutionary technique of recruiting and retaining college students and college reflective of the trendy and swiftly altering demographics of the USA.
Exploring new modes of delivering content material (or facilitating studying) that reply to the educational wants of a various pupil physique, making engineering extra accessible.

RED Planning (Monitor 1): The RED Planning observe helps efforts crucial to construct capability and set up collaborations endeavoring to deal with the broader targets of the RED program. Planning grants are designed to foster and facilitate the engineering neighborhood into excited about tips on how to kind convergent analysis that helps the targets of the RED program. Planning grants should be led by IHEs that meet a number of of the next standards (a) two-year establishments that assist switch college students [11], (b) establishments in EPSCoR jurisdictions, (c) Primarily Undergraduate Establishments (PUIs), or (d) Minority Serving Establishment (MSIs).

Planning grants funded by way of this solicitation are anticipated to domesticate potential RED analysis groups and to develop aggressive RED proposals for future submissions. Because of planning grant actions, potential RED groups ought to be higher geared up to hold out the actions related to a observe 2, 3, or 4 RED grant. Proposers supported by way of this mechanism could use the funding to arrange actions that assist stimulate the formation of RED groups (when it comes to PI, co-PI, Senior/Key Personnel, and group sort) and to crystalize the concepts and analysis plans to be introduced in a possible RED proposal.

Examples of planning grant actions can embrace, however aren’t restricted to:

Given the complexity of a RED proposal, NSF acknowledges that many groups will determine vital analysis priorities however could not have the complete complement of abilities wanted to successfully tackle the problem. The planning grant can be utilized to assist crew formation actions that create alternatives for the event of partnerships between researchers and establishments which are bi-directional and mutually useful, thus participating a wide selection of views and scientific expertise to deal with the nationwide wants and grand challenges introduced within the RED solicitation. The Nationwide Institutes of Well being Collaboration Staff Science Subject Information can present a place to begin for crew formation actions. Planning grants are anticipated to have not less than one particular person who was a PI, co-PI, or Senior/Key Personnel on an awarded RED challenge concerned within the planning grant in an advisory, mentorship, or management place.

RED Planning (Monitor 1) proposals ought to be ready in accordance with the steering for the Planning sort of proposal contained in PAPPG Chapter II.F.1 and the solicitation particular directions in Part V.A., beneath.

RED Adaptation & Implementation (Monitor 2)

The RED A&I observe assist tasks that use evidence-based and evidence-generating change technique approaches and actions which are tailored to the native context. The aim of this observe is to:

Generate new information associated to the difference of confirmed change methods and actions in a brand new context.

Methods ought to be developed with affect on the scholar as the main focus. Proposed efforts should be grounded in sound academic concept and work to allow a steady development {of professional} formation by way of the four-year expertise. Efforts ought to tackle 21stCentury T-shaped abilities [13] (i.e., cross-disciplinary breadth), and they need to be aligned with stakeholder expectations. This observe encourages proposals from two-year or four-year establishments which are concerned about adopting change methods at a single establishment.

RED Innovation (Monitor 3):

The RED Innovation observe helps tasks that contain radically, all of a sudden, or fully new approaches and motion; producing basic, structural change; and that go outdoors of or past current norms and ideas. Improvements in related departments throughout a number of establishments is especially inspired. This observe has two targets:

Generate new information on finest practices for meaningfully and thoughtfully incorporating into the center two years and technical core of the engineering curriculum oft-neglected “skilled abilities” (i.e. twenty first Century abilities, design, communication, teamwork, historic and modern social context, lifelong studying, and ethics). Adjustments within the center two years should be built-in with freshman and senior experiences to be able to kind an unbroken sequenced thread by way of the curriculum in order that the method {of professional} formation deepens and strengthens as college students transfer by way of engineering applications.

Generate new information on tips on how to remodel the departmental cultures to be environments which are inclusive, modern, equitable and supportive of college, school improvement to assist cultural or structural change, and construct new division constructions and cultures by way of modern practices and insurance policies that assist important holistic skilled formation.

Methods ought to be developed with affect on the scholar as the main focus. Proposed efforts should be grounded in sound academic concept and work to allow a steady development {of professional} formation by way of the four-year expertise. Efforts ought to tackle 21stCentury T-shaped abilities (i.e., cross-disciplinary breadth), and they need to be aligned with stakeholder expectations.

RED Innovation Partnerships (Monitor 4): The RED Innovation Partnerships observe holds an identical targets to the RED Innovation (Monitor 3) observe but additionally acknowledges that creating revolutionary adjustments able to spanning a number of contexts provides extra complexity and will due to this fact require extra assets and assist. Along with the Monitor 3 targets, tasks in Monitor 4 have a further aim to:

Generate new information on finest practices and the assist constructions crucial for meaningfully and thoughtfully leveraging or managing cross-institutional partnerships in ways in which allow transferability and interoperability of analysis findings.

Collaborative partnerships that embrace IHEs which are (a) two-year establishments that assist switch college students, (b) establishments in EPSCoR jurisdictions, (c) PUIs, and/or (d) MSIs are strongly inspired.

References:

[4] Lord, S.M. and Chen, J.C. (2014) Curriculum Design within the Center Years. Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Schooling Analysis, Johri and Olds, eds. New York: Cambridge College Press.

[5] Doten-Snitker, Ok., Margherio, C., Litzler, E., Ingram, E., & Williams, J. (2021). Growing a shared imaginative and prescient for change: Transferring towards inclusive empowerment. Analysis in Larger Schooling, 62, 206-229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-020-09594-9

[6] Margherio, C., Doten-Snitker, Ok., Williams, J., Litzler, E., Andrijcic, E., & Mohan, S. (2020). Cultivating strategic partnerships to remodel STEM schooling. Reworking Establishments: Accelerating Systemic Change in Larger Schooling.

[7] Cutler, S., & Robust, A. C. (2023). The Neglected Influence of College on Engineering Schooling. Worldwide Handbook of Engineering Schooling Analysis, 286.

[8] Reinholz, D. L., & Andrews, T. C. (2020). Change concept and concept of change: what’s the distinction anyway?. Worldwide Journal of STEM Schooling, 7, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-0202-3

[9] Reinholz, D. L., White, I., & Andrews, T. (2021). Change concept in STEM larger schooling: a scientific evaluation. Worldwide Journal of STEM Schooling, 8(1), 37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00291-2

[10] Connolly, M. R., & Seymour, E. (2015). Why Theories of Change Matter. WCER Working Paper No. 2015-2. Wisconsin Middle for Schooling Analysis. Retrieved from the College of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Middle for Schooling Analysis web site: https://wcer.wisc.edu/publications/summary/wcer-working-paper-no.-2015-02

[11] Sislin, J., & Mattis, M. C. (Eds.). (2006). Enhancing the neighborhood school pathway to engineering careers. Nationwide Academies Press.

[12] Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: a essential evaluation. Regional research, 39(1), 61-74.

[13] Tranquillo, J. (2017). The t-shaped engineer. Journal of Engineering Schooling Transformations, 30(4), 12-24.

Potential PIs are inspired to contemplate the IUSE: EDU program for tasks which are outdoors the scope of RED (see https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=505082). Particularly, the IUSE:EDU Institutional and Group Transformation (ICT) observe promotes modern approaches to utilizing analysis to catalyze change that addresses challenges throughout and inside establishments (institutional transformation), in addition to inside and throughout particular disciplines (neighborhood transformation). As well as, IUSE: Innovation in Two-12 months School STEM Schooling (ITYC) represents NSF’s intentional funding in two-year establishments and helps the event and implementation of evidence-based practices that enhance STEM schooling at two-year establishments of upper schooling (see https://new.nsf.gov/funding/alternatives/iuse-innovation-two-year-college-stem-education). Potential PIs aren’t allowed to submit an identical or substantively related proposals to a number of NSF applications.

III. Award Info

Anticipated Kind of Award: Normal Grant or Persevering with Grant

Estimated Variety of Awards: This system estimates making 10-13 awards for tasks in Monitor 1. This system estimates making a complete of 3-6 awards for tasks in Tracks 2, 3, & 4.

The finances for Planning (Monitor 1) proposals is as much as $75,000 per yr for a period of as much as 2 years.

The finances for Adaptation & Innovation (Monitor 2) proposals is a most of $1,000,000 for a period of as much as 5 years.

The finances for Innovation (Monitor 3) proposals is between $1,000,000 and $2,000,000 for a period of as much as 5 years.

The finances for Innovation Partnerships (Monitor 4) proposals is between $1,500,000 and $2,500,000 for collaborations throughout a number of establishments for a period of as much as 5 years.

Anticipated Funding Quantity: $7,000,000 – $8,000,000

Anticipated Funding Quantity and variety of awards are topic to the provision of funds.

IV. Eligibility Info

Who Might Submit Proposals:

Proposals could solely be submitted by the next:

Establishments of Larger Schooling (IHEs) – Two- and four-year IHEs (together with neighborhood faculties) accredited in, and having a campus situated within the US, performing
on behalf of their school members.Particular Directions for Worldwide Department Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal contains funding to be supplied to an
worldwide department campus of a US establishment of upper schooling (together with by way of use of subawards and marketing consultant preparations), the proposer should clarify
the profit(s) to the challenge of efficiency on the worldwide department campus, and justify why the challenge actions can’t be carried out on the US campus.

Who Might Function PI:

For all tracks, the Principal Investigator (PI) should be a Division Chair/Head (or equal) of a division for whom a big share of scholars will graduate or switch to a program with a bachelor’s diploma in engineering or engineering know-how. The PI should be empowered to supply management for the proposed change course of. In instances the place the institutional obligations of a Division Chair/Head don’t allow them to assist the diploma of change being sought, a Dean, Provost, or different senior chief could function PI, supplied they are going to be liable for the energetic management of the RED challenge. The {qualifications} of the PI will be justified within the required letter from senior institutional management.

It’s endorsed that tasks take into account together with people with experience in (a) engineering schooling analysis and (b) organizational change on the management crew.

Restrict on Variety of Proposals per Group:

There are not any restrictions or limits.

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

There are not any restrictions or limits.

Extra Eligibility Data:

RED Planning (Monitor 1) proposals could solely be submitted by IHEs that meet a number of of the next standards:

Two-year establishments that assist switch college students
Establishments in EPSCoR jurisdictions
Primarily Undergraduate Establishments (PUIs)
Minority Serving Establishments (MSIs)

V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Directions

A. Proposal Preparation Directions

Full Proposal Preparation Directions: Proposers could decide 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 ought to be ready and submitted in accordance with the overall pointers 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) 292-7827 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 ought to be ready and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Software Information: A Information for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Functions 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 Varieties Package deal, click on on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov website, then click on on the Apply Step 1: Obtain a Grant Software Package deal and Software Directions hyperlink and enter the funding alternative quantity, (this system solicitation quantity with out the NSF prefix) and press the Obtain Package deal button. Paper copies of the Grants.gov Software Information additionally could also be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, phone (703) 292-7827 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 word 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 extra data on collaborative proposals.

See PAPPG Chapter II.D.2 for steering on the required sections of a full analysis proposal submitted to NSF. Please word that the proposal preparation directions supplied on this program solicitation could deviate from the PAPPG directions.

Proposers are inspired to arrange their proposals with consideration for the aim, justification, design options, and anticipated outcomes of Foundational Analysis and/or Early-stage or Exploratory Analysis as outlined within the Widespread Tips for Schooling Analysis and Improvement (NSF 13-126).

The next directions complement the steering within the PAPPG:

RED Planning (Monitor 1):

The proposal ought to conform to the PAPPG steering for “Planning Proposal” present in PAPPG Chapter II.F.1 besides the place this solicitation supersedes that steering.

Idea outlines ought to be emailed to a cognizant program officer not less than 30 days previous to the proposal deadline. Idea outlines ought to be a most of two pages addressing the next:

The supposed period and approximate finances for the challenge.
A high-level overview of the Mental Benefit and Broader Impacts of a RED Monitor 2, 3, or 4 challenge that this planning challenge may allow.
How this planning challenge will present the preliminary helps crucial for improvement of a bigger proposal.

The title of the proposal should start with: Planning: IUSE/PFE:RED Planning

Along with the steering within the PAPPG, together with the requirement for a separate part labeled “Broader Impacts”, the Venture Description should embrace:

Imaginative and prescient for Revolutionizing the Engineering Division– Clarify what you hope to attain in pursuing a Monitor 2, 3, or 4 RED grant. Whereas the concept might not be absolutely developed at this stage, describe the situations or state of affairs that necessitates revolutionary change and broadly what you hope to attain by way of the RED program. Present a concise reply to the query, “What might be completely different?”

Want for Planning Help – The aim of the planning grant is to supply the assist wanted to develop a aggressive proposal aimed on the imaginative and prescient specified above. What makes the planning grant a priceless assist mechanism in creating that proposal? Present a concise reply to the query, “What can this planning grant present that can’t be achieved utilizing current institutional assets?”

Venture Plan –Knowledgeable by the division’s imaginative and prescient and wish for assist, present:

Targets and Aims: Planning grant targets and goals ought to tackle the particular wants from the planning grant. The targets and goals ought to present the outcomes and targets that can transfer the division towards having the capability to pursue the imaginative and prescient.
Particular Actions: Describe the actions that can enable achievement of the targets and goals. The place acceptable, actions ought to cite related literature to assist the particular actions. You’re inspired to evaluation prior RED tasks and the outcomes of these tasks.
Boundaries: Establish the anticipated obstacles in finishing up the planning course of and pursuing the event of a RED challenge. Describe how these obstacles might be addressed and any contingency plans that can enable achievement of the imaginative and prescient within the face of those obstacles.
Present or Former RED Recipient Advisor: Planning grants are anticipated to incorporate not less than one present or former RED grant management crew member (PI, co-PI, or Senior/Key Personnel) in an advisory board, mentorship, or challenge management place as acceptable to your challenge wants. Briefly summarize the RED grant they had been a part of, their contribution to their challenge, and the way they may assist you within the improvement of your individual RED grant.

RED Adaptation & Implementation (Monitor 2), RED Innovation (Monitor 3), and RED Innovation Partnership (Monitor 4):

(Monitor 2 solely) The title of the proposal should start with: IUSE/PFE:RED A&I

(Monitor 3 solely) The title of the proposal should start with: IUSE/PFE:RED Innovation

(Monitor 4 solely) The title of the proposal should start with: IUSE/PFE:RED Partnership

Along with the steering within the PAPPG, together with the requirement for a separate part labeled “Broader Impacts” the proposal ought to embrace the next data within the Venture Description.

Imaginative and prescient and Rationale for Revolutionizing the Engineering Division– Clarify why change is required within the present division and the actual approaches on which the challenge is basing the change. Describe the division and the scholar skilled formation expertise “after the revolution”. Present a concise reply to the query, “What might be completely different?”

(Monitor 2 solely) Examine the contexts of the beforehand awarded implementation and the PI’s proposed context, describing how the unique implementation is being tailored to suit the present Division or College.

Venture Plan –Knowledgeable by the division’s imaginative and prescient for revolution, present:

Targets and Aims: Venture targets and goals ought to tackle the cultural, organizational, structural, and pedagogical adjustments wanted to attain the acknowledged imaginative and prescient. The targets and goals ought to present the outcomes and targets that can transfer the division towards the imaginative and prescient.

Particular Actions: Describe the actions that can enable achievement of the targets and goals. Actions ought to be primarily based on proof from the literature that helps their use within the division’s context. Actions must also be aligned with a concept of change that reveals why and the way these particular actions are anticipated to consequence within the desired change.

Boundaries: Establish the anticipated obstacles in finishing up the challenge plans and attaining the imaginative and prescient. Describe how these obstacles might be addressed and any contingency plans that can enable achievement of the imaginative and prescient within the face of those obstacles.

Advisory Board: There should be an advisory board comprised of exterior stakeholders (i.e., information consultants acceptable for the challenge, business representatives, and many others.) and management on the establishment(s), who can present steering on the conduct and route of the challenge. Present a transparent description of who might be included, what they convey to the challenge, and the way they may contribute.

Analysis Plan (Monitor 2 solely):Whereas the analysis expectations for Monitor 2 tasks are substantively smaller than these for Monitor 3 and Monitor 4, there’s nonetheless an expectation that Monitor 2 tasks contribute new information to the self-discipline. Tasks ought to have a analysis plan that can add to the information base about adapting and implementing change in new contexts. The analysis plan ought to have clear analysis questions knowledgeable by acceptable academic, behavioral, psychological, or sociological concept and acceptable analysis methodology. These measures will be qualitative or quantitative as acceptable to the query and theoretical orientation.

Analysis Plan (Monitor 3 & Monitor 4 solely): RED Innovation (Monitor 3) and RED Innovation Partnership (Monitor 4) tasks will need to have a analysis plan that can add to the information base about creating change on the division stage. The analysis plan ought to have clear analysis questions knowledgeable by acceptable academic, behavioral, psychological, or sociological concept and a analysis design that features sampling, information assortment, and information evaluation strategies. These measures will be qualitative or quantitative as acceptable to the query and theoretical orientation.

Analysis Plan: All proposals will need to have an impartial challenge analysis plan that matches the scope of the proposed work. Analysis refers to monitoring of the actions to make sure that the challenge stays on observe and that the specified outputs and impacts are achieved. The analysis plan ought to be designed to supply steering to the challenge and contribute to the literature on which adjustments labored, why, and in what contexts. The analysis plan ought to embrace each formative and summative elements. An evaluator exterior to the PIs’ group just isn’t required, however the evaluator shouldn’t be a person who’s concerned within the different actions of the challenge. Present a logic mannequin that hyperlinks inputs and actions to particular outputs and short-, medium-, and long-term outcomes that can permit you to decide if the challenge has an affect. Based mostly on the idea of change and the fascinating outcomes of the proposed revolution, enumerate acceptable indicators of success associated to undertaking the targets and goals and a timeframe to hunt measurable change. Describe the information assortment and evaluation plan that can enable the success of the challenge to be evaluated. The information administration plan ought to tackle each the information collected to attain the challenge goals and the information collected to judge the challenge.

Mentoring Plans: Clarify how school had been concerned within the improvement of the proposal; clarify how school might be mentored over the course of this challenge; what school improvement alternatives might be supplied; and the way they are going to be incentivized. Clarify how graduate and undergraduate college students (together with educating assistants) might be concerned within the challenge and the way they are going to be mentored as a part of the proposed departmental imaginative and prescient for revolution. Be aware that if funds are requested to assist graduate college students or postdoctoral researcher(s), per the PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.i.(i), a separate Mentoring Plan should be uploaded as a supplementary doc.

Dissemination Plan: Present a plan for actively disseminating the brand new information generated from this challenge to different departments and establishments, together with challenges and techniques to adoption within the challenge’s context. Dissemination plans ought to embrace contributions to the literature and must transcend conventional approaches to make sure long-term, broad affect.

Sustainability, Scaling and Adaptation Plan: Proposals ought to take into account sustainability of efforts after the completion of funding. RED tasks ought to search to maintain their very own efforts and to actively affect different departments, each inside the division’s establishment and at different establishments. Describe a roadmap for the way this challenge will make a sustainable affect each regionally and regionally/nationally by supporting revolutionary change in different departments.

Venture Management: Describe the challenge management crew, their roles, and their expertise. State any related {qualifications} that can’t be readily recognized by way of their biographical sketch. What does every member of the crew contribute?

College Help: Describe prior efforts at change and departmental readiness for change. How are school who aren’t members of the challenge management crew being included within the planning and execution of the challenge? How will school in any respect ranges be engaged all through the challenge?

Succession Plan: Proposals ought to tackle personnel adjustments that can happen all through the implementation. How will new people be onboarded to the challenge, together with challenge management, school members, and pupil analysis assistants? How will information integrity and safety be maintained as people are off-boarded? How will challenge continuity be maintained?

Partnership Dynamics (Monitor 4 solely): Innovation Partnerships are designed for each establishments to implement revolutionary change collectively. Implementing RED concepts throughout a number of contexts will necessitate extra consideration for the way these contexts every play a novel position within the adoption of change. How will the partnership be organized to make sure wholesome communication and consideration for these distinctive contexts?

Supplementary Documentation (All Tracks)

Checklist of challenge members: Every RED proposal should embrace, as an “Different Supplementary Doc”, a listing of the identify, institutional affiliation, and position of all challenge personnel together with the PI, co-PI(s), and senior personnel. This contains challenge employees, advisory board members, challenge evaluators, consultants, collaborators, and another people collaborating within the challenge. The listing mustn’t embrace graduate or undergraduate college students, or people but to be named. This listing doesn’t substitute the personnel descriptions that could be acceptable for the challenge description. This itemizing ought to be the primary doc uploaded into the “Different Supplementary Paperwork” part of the proposal in order that it seems as the primary web page of this part.

Supplementary Documentation (Monitor 2, 3, and 4)

Letter(s) from Institutional Management

Present letters of dedication from the Dean, Provost, and/or President (as acceptable for the challenge) to make sure assist and feasibility within the brief and long run. The letter ought to tackle how the PI is an appropriately empowered particular person to steer the change being sought. As departmental management (and by extension, RED PIs) can typically change all through the lifetime of a RED challenge, letters must also tackle how RED will inform the collection of new departmental management and the way the challenge might be managed throughout interim adjustments in management. The letter(s) ought to be not more than 2 pages in size, and it should embrace the person’s identify and title beneath the signature. Be aware that this steering on letters of dedication deviates from the necessities of the PAPPG.

Letter(s) from Different Companions

Present letters of collaboration from different companions as acceptable. The letter(s) ought to be not more than 1 web page in size, and will embrace a transparent description of how the associate will take part within the challenge. Basic letters of assist aren’t allowed and the proposal could also be returned with out evaluation if such letters are included.

Solely the supplementary paperwork listed above, the required Information Administration and Sharing Plan, and the required Mentoring Plan (if relevant) could also be included as Supplementary Paperwork. Any extra data wanted to judge the proposal should be a part of the Venture Description.

B. Budgetary Info

Price Sharing:

Inclusion of voluntary dedicated price sharing is prohibited.

Different Budgetary Limitations:

10-13 RED Planning (Monitor 1) budgets are as much as $75,000 per yr for a period of as much as 2 years.

The finances for Adaptation & Innovation (Monitor 2) proposals is a most of $1,000,000 for a period of as much as 5 years. The finances for Innovation (Monitor 3) proposals is between $1,000,000 and $2,000,000 for a period of as much as 5 years. The finances for Innovation Partnerships (Monitor 4) proposals is between $1,500,000 and $2,500,000 for collaborations throughout a number of establishments for a period of as much as 5 years. Proposals that fall outdoors these limits might be returned with out evaluation.

Finances Preparation Directions:

A Finances Justification ready in accordance with the steering within the PAPPG should be included. PI Assembly Attendance: Embrace journey funds within the finances for (required) crew attendance at an annual PI assembly within the Nationwide Capital Area. The complete challenge management crew is predicted to attend these conferences and supply an replace concerning challenge actions throughout the poster session.

C. Due Dates

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

     September 10, 2024

Planning (Monitor 1), Adaptation & Implementation (Monitor 2), Innovation (Monitor 3), and Innovation Partnerships (Monitor 4) proposals

     April 08, 2025

     Second Tuesday in April, Yearly Thereafter

Planning (Monitor 1) proposals

     September 09, 2025

     Second Tuesday in September, Yearly Thereafter

Planning (Monitor 1), Adaptation & Implementation (Monitor 2), Innovation (Monitor 3), and Innovation Partnerships (Monitor 4) proposals

D. Analysis.gov/Grants.gov Necessities

For Proposals Submitted By way of Analysis.gov:

To organize and submit a proposal by way of Analysis.gov, see detailed technical directions out there at: https://www.analysis.gov/research-portal/appmanager/base/desktop?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=research_node_display&_nodePath=/researchGov/Service/Desktop/ProposalPreparationandSubmission.html. For Analysis.gov consumer assist, name the Analysis.gov Assist Desk at 1-800-381-1532 or e-mail [email protected]. The Analysis.gov Assist Desk solutions basic technical questions associated to using the Analysis.gov system. Particular questions associated to this program solicitation ought to 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/net/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 assist, contact the Grants.gov Contact Middle at 1-800-518-4726 or by electronic mail: [email protected]. The Grants.gov Contact Middle solutions basic technical questions associated to using Grants.gov. Particular questions associated to this program solicitation ought to 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 might be transferred to Analysis.gov for additional processing.

The NSF Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Analysis.gov informational web page supplies submission steering to candidates and hyperlinks to useful assets together with the NSF Grants.gov Software Information, Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Analysis.gov how-to information, and Grants.gov Submitted Proposals Regularly Requested Questions. Grants.gov proposals should go all NSF pre-check and post-check validations to be able to be accepted by Analysis.gov at NSF.

When submitting by way of Grants.gov, NSF strongly recommends candidates provoke proposal submission not less than 5 enterprise days prematurely of a deadline to permit enough time to deal with NSF compliance errors and resubmissions by 5:00 p.m. submitting group’s native time on the deadline. Please word 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 by way of Analysis.gov could use Analysis.gov to confirm the standing of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted by way of Grants.gov, till an software has been acquired and validated by NSF, the Approved Organizational Consultant could test the standing of an software on Grants.gov. After proposers have acquired an e-mail notification from NSF, Analysis.gov ought to be used to test the standing of an software.

VI. NSF Proposal Processing And Evaluation Procedures

Proposals acquired by NSF are assigned to the suitable NSF program for acknowledgement and, in the event that they meet NSF necessities, for evaluation. All proposals are fastidiously reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and normally by three to 10 different individuals outdoors NSF both as advert hoc reviewers, panelists, or each, who’re consultants within the explicit fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are chosen by Program Officers charged with oversight of the evaluation course of. Proposers are invited to recommend names of individuals they consider are particularly effectively certified to evaluation the proposal and/or individuals they would favor not evaluation the proposal. These options could function one supply within the reviewer choice course of on the Program Officer’s discretion. Submission of such names, nevertheless, is optionally available. Care is taken to make sure that reviewers haven’t any conflicts of curiosity with the proposal. As well as, Program Officers could receive feedback from website visits earlier than recommending remaining motion on proposals. Senior NSF employees additional evaluation 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 evaluation course of is offered 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 achievement 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 evaluation is one half. NSF’s mission is especially well-implemented by way of the combination of analysis and schooling and broadening participation in NSF applications, tasks, and actions.

One of many strategic goals in assist of NSF’s mission is to foster integration of analysis and schooling by way of the applications, tasks, and actions it helps at educational and analysis establishments. These establishments should recruit, practice, and put together a various STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and take part within the U.S. technology-based economic system. NSF’s contribution to the nationwide innovation ecosystem is to supply cutting-edge analysis underneath the steering of the Nation’s most artistic scientists and engineers. NSF additionally helps improvement of a powerful 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 variety and deems it central to the applications, tasks, and actions it considers and helps.

A. Benefit Evaluation Rules and Standards

The Nationwide Science Basis strives to spend money on a strong and various portfolio of tasks that creates new information and allows breakthroughs in understanding throughout all areas of science and engineering analysis and schooling. To determine which tasks to assist, NSF depends on a benefit evaluation course of that includes consideration of each the technical facets of a proposed challenge and its potential to contribute extra broadly to advancing NSF’s mission “to advertise the progress of science; to advance the nationwide well being, prosperity, and welfare; to safe the nationwide protection; and for different functions.” NSF makes each effort to conduct a good, aggressive, clear benefit evaluation course of for the collection of tasks.

1. Benefit Evaluation Rules

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 employees when figuring out whether or not or to not advocate proposals for funding and whereas overseeing awards. On condition that NSF is the first federal company charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in fundamental analysis and schooling, the next three ideas apply:

All NSF tasks ought to be of the best high quality and have the potential to advance, if not remodel, the frontiers of information.
NSF tasks, within the mixture, ought to contribute extra broadly to attaining societal targets. These “Broader Impacts” could also be completed by way of the analysis itself, by way of actions which are instantly associated to particular analysis tasks, or by way of actions which are supported by, however are complementary to, the challenge. The challenge actions could also be primarily based on beforehand established and/or modern strategies and approaches, however in both case should be effectively justified.
Significant evaluation and analysis of NSF funded tasks ought to be primarily based on acceptable metrics, preserving in thoughts the probably correlation between the impact of broader impacts and the assets supplied to implement tasks. If the scale of the exercise is proscribed, analysis of that exercise in isolation just isn’t more likely to be significant. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of those actions could finest be accomplished at the next, extra aggregated, stage than the person challenge.

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 challenge. Thus, particular person tasks ought to embrace clearly acknowledged targets, particular descriptions of the actions that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to doc the outputs of these actions.

These three benefit evaluation ideas present the premise for the benefit evaluation 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 way of use of the 2 Nationwide Science Board authorised benefit evaluation standards. In some situations, nevertheless, NSF will make use of extra standards as required to spotlight the particular goals of sure applications and actions.

The 2 benefit evaluation standards are listed beneath. Each standards are to be given full consideration throughout the evaluation and decision-making processes; every criterion is important however neither, by itself, is enough. Subsequently, proposers should absolutely tackle each standards. (PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i). comprises extra data to be used by proposers in improvement of the Venture Description part of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly inspired to evaluation the standards, together with PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i), previous to the evaluation of a proposal.

When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers might be requested to contemplate what the proposers wish to do, why they wish to do it, how they plan to do it, how they may know in the event that they succeed, and what advantages may accrue if the challenge is profitable. These points apply each to the technical facets of the proposal and the best way during which the challenge could make broader contributions. To that finish, reviewers might be requested to judge all proposals in opposition to two standards:

Mental Benefit: The Mental Benefit 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 parts ought to be thought-about within the evaluation for each standards:

What’s the potential for the proposed exercise to

Advance information 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 artistic, authentic, or probably transformative ideas?
Is the plan for finishing up the proposed actions well-reasoned, well-organized, and primarily based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to evaluate success?
How effectively certified is the person, crew, or group to conduct the proposed actions?
Are there enough assets out there to the PI (both on the dwelling group or by way of collaborations) to hold out the proposed actions?

Broader impacts could also be completed by way of the analysis itself, by way of the actions which are instantly associated to particular analysis tasks, or by way of actions which are supported by, however are complementary to, the challenge. NSF values the development of scientific information and actions that contribute to achievement of societally related outcomes. Such outcomes embrace, however aren’t restricted to: full participation of ladies, individuals with disabilities, and different underrepresented teams in science, know-how, engineering, and arithmetic (STEM); improved STEM schooling and educator improvement at any stage; elevated public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and know-how; improved well-being of people in society; improvement of a various, globally aggressive STEM workforce; elevated partnerships between academia, business, and others; improved nationwide safety; elevated financial competitiveness of the USA; and enhanced infrastructure for analysis and schooling.

Proposers are reminded that reviewers can even be requested to evaluation the Information Administration and Sharing Plan and the Mentoring Plan, as acceptable.

Extra Solicitation Particular Evaluation Standards

Extra Solicitation Particular Evaluation Standards (Monitor 1):

There are not any Extra Solicitation Particular Evaluation Standards for Planning (Monitor 1) proposals

Extra Solicitation Particular Evaluation Standards (Monitor 2, 3, & 4):

College Improvement: Is school improvement, reminiscent of by way of the Mentoring Plan or College Help sections of the challenge description, effectively deliberate and correctly incentivized to construct division cultures that assist the holistic skilled formation of engineers?
Potential for Success, Sustainability, and Scaling: How probably is the challenge to be operationalized in a manner that it’ll proceed after the RED challenge is full? How ready is the challenge for adjustments in management all through the lifetime of the challenge?

B. Evaluation and Choice Course of

Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation might be reviewed by
Advert hoc Evaluation and/or Panel Evaluation, or Inner NSF Evaluation.

Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation are reviewed by benefit evaluation panels, advert hoc reviewers, or each. Proposals might be reviewed utilizing the NSF Benefit Evaluation Standards of Mental Benefit and Broader Impacts.

Contingent on the variety of proposals acquired, Planning (Monitor 1) proposals could bear exterior benefit evaluation.

Reviewers might be requested to judge proposals utilizing two Nationwide Science Board authorised benefit evaluation standards and, if relevant, extra program particular standards. A abstract ranking and accompanying narrative will usually be accomplished and submitted by every reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to handle the proposal’s evaluation will take into account the recommendation of reviewers and can formulate a advice.

After scientific, technical and programmatic evaluation and consideration of acceptable elements, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether or not the proposal ought to be declined or advisable for award. NSF strives to have the ability to inform proposers whether or not their proposals have been declined or advisable for funding inside six months. Giant or significantly advanced proposals or proposals from new recipients could require extra evaluation and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or goal date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer’s advice.

After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals advisable for funding might be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements or the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Help for evaluation of enterprise, monetary, and coverage implications. After an administrative evaluation has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers carry out the processing and issuance of a grant or different settlement. Proposers are cautioned that solely a Grants and Agreements Officer could make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No dedication on the a part of NSF ought to be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or group that makes monetary or personnel commitments within the absence of a grant or cooperative settlement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their very own 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 data, 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 Info

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 attainable by the cognizant NSF Program administering this system. Verbatim copies of critiques, not together with the id of the reviewer, might be supplied robotically to the Principal Investigator. (See Part VI.B. for extra data on the evaluation 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 finances, which signifies the quantities, by classes of expense, on which NSF has primarily based its assist (or in any other case communicates any particular approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced within the award discover; (4) the relevant award situations, reminiscent of Grant Basic Circumstances (GC-1)*; or Analysis Phrases and Circumstances* and (5) any announcement or different NSF issuance that could be integrated by reference within the award discover. Cooperative agreements are also administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Settlement Monetary and Administrative Phrases and Circumstances (CA-FATC) and the relevant Programmatic Phrases and Circumstances. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the group by way of e-mail.

*These paperwork could also be accessed electronically on NSF’s Web site at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper copies could also be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, phone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected].

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

Administrative and Nationwide Coverage Necessities

Construct America, Purchase America

As expressed in Government Order 14005, Making certain the Future is Made in All of America by All of America’s Employees (86 FR 7475), it’s the coverage of the chief department to make use of phrases and situations of Federal monetary help awards to maximise, per legislation, using items, merchandise, and supplies produced in, and companies supplied in, the USA.

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 out there by way of this funding alternative could also be obligated for an award except all iron, metal, manufactured merchandise, and development supplies used within the challenge are produced in the USA. For extra data, go to NSF’s Construct America, Purchase America webpage.

C. Reporting Necessities

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

Failure to supply the required annual or remaining annual challenge experiences, or the challenge outcomes report, will delay NSF evaluation and processing of any future funding increments in addition to any pending proposals for all recognized PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs ought to study the codecs of the required experiences prematurely to guarantee availability of required information.

PIs are required to make use of NSF’s digital project-reporting system, out there by way of Analysis.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and remaining annual challenge experiences. Such experiences present data on accomplishments, challenge members (particular person and organizational), publications, and different particular merchandise and impacts of the challenge. 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 challenge 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 challenge. This report might be posted on the NSF web site precisely as it’s submitted by the PI.

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

Extra Reporting

As a part of the annual report, PIs must also embrace dialogue of division dynamics and obstacles or progress in establishing a tradition supportive of holistic skilled formation of engineers. Recipients are required to work together and take part with the RED program’s evaluative actions. Website visits may be performed throughout the second yr of the challenge.

VIII. Company Contacts

Please word 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 ought to be made to:

Matthew A. Verleger,
ENG/EEC,

phone:
(703) 292-2961,

electronic mail: [email protected]

Christine Delahanty,
EDU/DUE,

phone:
(703) 292-8492,

electronic mail: [email protected]

For questions associated to using NSF techniques contact:

NSF Assist Desk: 1-800-381-1532


Analysis.gov Assist Desk e-mail: [email protected]

For questions referring to Grants.gov contact:

Grants.gov Contact Middle: If the Approved Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not acquired 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. Different Info

The NSF web site supplies essentially the most complete supply of knowledge 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 adjustments in proposal and award insurance policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences. Subscribers are knowledgeable by way of e-mail or the consumer’s Internet 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 Nationwide Science Basis

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 schooling in all fields of science and engineering.”

NSF funds analysis and schooling in most fields of science and engineering. It does this by way of grants and cooperative agreements to greater than 2,000 faculties, universities, Ok-12 college techniques, companies, casual science organizations and different analysis organizations all through the US. The Basis accounts for about one-fourth of Federal assist to educational establishments for fundamental analysis.

NSF receives roughly 55,000 proposals annually for analysis, schooling and coaching tasks, 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 assist 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 educational stage.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) present funding for particular help or tools 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 concerning preparation of a majority of these proposals.

The Nationwide Science Basis has Telephonic System for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Info Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that allow people with listening to impairments to speak with the Basis about NSF applications, employment or basic data. TDD could also be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.

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

The Nationwide Science Basis promotes and advances scientific progress in the USA by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for analysis and schooling within the sciences, arithmetic, and engineering.

To get the newest details about program deadlines, to obtain copies of NSF publications, and to entry abstracts of awards, go to the NSF Web site at https://www.nsf.gov

2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314

For Basic Info
(NSF Info Middle):

(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

Privateness Act And Public Burden Statements

The data requested on proposal kinds and challenge experiences is solicited underneath the authority of the Nationwide Science Basis Act of 1950, as amended. The data on proposal kinds might be utilized in reference to the collection of certified proposals; and challenge experiences 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 employees assistants as a part of the proposal evaluation course of; to proposer establishments/grantees to supply or receive information concerning the proposal evaluation course of, award choices, or the administration of awards; to authorities contractors, consultants, volunteers and researchers and educators as crucial to finish assigned work; to different authorities businesses or different entities needing data concerning proposers or nominees as a part of a joint software evaluation course of, or to be able to coordinate applications or coverage; and to a different Federal company, court docket, or get together in a court docket or Federal administrative continuing if the federal government is a celebration. Details about Principal Investigators could also be added to the Reviewer file and used to pick potential candidates to function peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See System of Report Notices, NSF-50, “Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Related Information,” and NSF-51, “Reviewer/Proposal File and Related Information.” Submission of the knowledge is voluntary. Failure to supply full and full data, nevertheless, could cut back the opportunity of receiving an award.

An company could not conduct or sponsor, and an individual just isn’t 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 knowledge is estimated to common 120 hours per response, together with the time for reviewing directions. Ship feedback concerning the burden estimate and another facet of this assortment of knowledge, together with options for decreasing this burden, to:

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