To help determine the appropriateness of the project for NSF and identify the disciplinary or interdisciplinary program to which it should be submitted, proposers are urged to refer to the NSF Guide to Programs. Some examples are: incorporating research activities into undergraduate courses; teaching a graduate seminar on the topic of the research; designing innovative courses or curricula; providing mentored international research experiences for U. Education activities may also include designing new or adapting and implementing effective educational materials and practices.
Such activities should be consistent with research and best practices in curriculum, pedagogy, and evaluation. Proposers may build on, or otherwise meaningfully participate in, existing NSF-supported activities or other educational projects ongoing on campus.
Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives — NSF recognizes that disciplinary boundaries evolve with time and that inter-, multi-, trans-disciplinary approaches are often needed to push the frontiers of research and education. We invite proposals from early-career investigators who wish to pursue research and education activities that cross disciplinary boundaries.
We encourage investigators to seek research and education collaborations with partners in other areas of academia as well as from other sectors for example, partnerships with industry, national laboratories, schools and school districts, or museums.
Investigators have the option of including the associated costs in the budget line items of the proposal, or in subawards to another institution for all necessary research and educational activities for example, hiring an external evaluator, or securing time at a shared research facility.
Because the CAREER program is designed to foster individual career development, partners or collaborators may not be listed as co-principal investigators on the cover page.
If critical for a given project, support for collaborators may be requested in the senior personnel or consultant services budget line items of the proposal, or in subawards to another institution. Proposals submitted with co-principal investigators will be returned without review.
Cross-Sector Perspectives — NSF recognizes that individual investigators may have disciplinary and career interests that enhance their research and education plans through an additional activity such as entrepreneurship, industry partnerships, or policy.
We invite proposals from early-career investigators who wish to enhance their research and education activities along these lines.
If critical for a given project, investigators have the option of including the associated costs in the budget line items of the proposal or in subawards to another institution. Scientific Software Development — Proposed research activities may involve development of innovative scientific software, along with related studies of reproducibility, provenance, usability, security, adoption, and sustainability of the software, as well as its adaptability to emerging technologies and requirements.
If software artifacts are anticipated in a given project, investigators should state and justify which software license s will be used for the released software. If applicable, the proposal should clearly state how the research and education activities will be enhanced by international engagements, and should describe the benefits to participants in the U.
Proposals Requiring Seagoing Facilities — For guidance on submitting proposals that require use of sea-going facilities such as ships including those participating in the University National Oceanographic Laboratory System [UNOLS], foreign vessels under charter or other arrangements, submersibles, remotely operated vehicles, autonomous underwater vehicles, etc.
Scan the signed original s of the following document s and upload the scans as a PDF file into the Supplementary Documents section of the proposal. Do not send paper copies to NSF. All documents must be submitted with the proposal in Fastlane, Research. The Departmental Letter should be no more than 2 pages in length and include the department head's name and title below the signature. The letter should contain the following elements:.
Specifics about the need for and nature of collaborations, such as intellectual contributions to the project, permission to access a site, an instrument, or a facility, offer of samples and materials for research, logistical support to the research and education program, or mentoring of U.
Requests for letters of collaboration should be made by the PI well in advance of the proposal submission deadline, because they must be included at the time of submission. Please note that letters of recommendation for the PI or other letters of support for the project are not permitted. In addition, proposals that are non-compliant with the CAREER solicitation for the following reasons will be returned without review:.
Program Officers will be instructed to return without review any CAREER proposal that arrives after the deadline, unless there was a technical problem with the proposal submission through either Fastlane, Research. A possible slowdown of Fastlane, Research. The above list is not an all-inclusive list of reasons that proposals are returned without review. For PIs that are new no NSF ID or have not logged into our systems for a long time, we encourage starting at least three weeks in advance to resolve any account issues.
As soon as the proposal is submitted via Fastlane, Research. It is your responsibility, and that of your sponsored projects office, to ascertain that all of the proposal contents are there and that the proposal is compliant with the PAPPG and the CAREER solicitation. You should thoroughly review your submitted proposal document in order to identify any PDF conversion or printing problems, leaving enough time to correct any problems prior to the deadline.
This is particularly critical for those submitting via Grants. Proposers should also review the list of recent CAREER awards made in their discipline for guidance on average award size. Support for other senior personnel i.
Allowable costs include funds for postdoctoral fellows, graduate students, undergraduate students, PI salary, education or outreach activities, support for an evaluator, travel and subsistence expenses for the PI and U. In some cases, it may be appropriate to include academic year salary support for the PI on a CAREER budget for example, PIs who have heavy teaching responsibilities or who must conduct field work during the academic year.
Proposers should talk to the cognizant Program Officers about their individual cases. To prepare and submit a proposal via Research. For FastLane or Research. The FastLane and Research. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact s listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.
Before using Grants. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.
Comprehensive information about using Grants. In addition, the NSF Grants. A provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants. For Grants. The Grants. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact s listed in Section VIII of this solicitation.
The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants. Proposers that submitted via FastLane or Research. For proposers that submitted via Grants. After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal.
These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. NSF program officers are requested to identify potentially transformative research proposals for funding in all programs. NSF program officers are also expected to provide guidance to panelists and ad hoc reviewers to identify potentially transformative research proposals in their review.
In addition to encouraging the submission of proposals for transformative research through all NSF programs, NSF supports specific investment areas, special mechanisms, and new methodologies of identifying and funding potentially transformative research.
NSF encourages potentially transformative research proposals in specific Investment Areas. The Annual NSF Budget to Congress identifies investment areas that are notable for being interdisciplinary, supported by numerous NSF directorates, and intended to have transformative impact across science and engineering fields. The investment areas may result in a single program, for example, Cyber-enabled Discovery and Innovation CDI or may provide a theme for support in numerous programs for example, Climate Research and the National Nanotechnology Initiative.
NSF has several special mechanisms to promote and support potentially transformative research. Proposers that submitted via FastLane may use Research. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process.
These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards.
These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.
One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions.
These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation's most creative scientists and engineers.
NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics STEM workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning. NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering.
NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports. The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes.
These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:.
With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project.
Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities. These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.
In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities. The two merit review criteria are listed below.
Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions.
To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:. Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project.
NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and other underrepresented groups in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics STEM ; improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.
Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as appropriate. For the ATE program, questions such as the following are often relevant to evaluating proposals in terms of NSF's merit review criteria.
Reviewers will be asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria.
The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation. After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF strives to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new awardees may require additional review and processing time.
The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation. After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement.
Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.
Once an award or declination decision has been made, Principal Investigators are provided feedback about their proposals. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding. Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements.
Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program.
Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. See Section VI. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone or by e-mail from nsfpubs nsf.
For all multi-year grants including both standard and continuing grants , the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer no later than 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period.
Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports. No later than days following expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public. Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports, or the project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award.
PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants individual and organizational , publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project.
Submission of the report via Research. The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using Research. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. There are two special ATE requirements. All PIs must respond annually to this survey that requests information about the number and characteristics of students and educators that have been affected by the project; the retention, graduation, and placement rates for students; the project's impact on workforce needs; awards and other measures of the quality of the project's products and activities; and other indicators of the project's effect on the quality and quantity of technicians being educated for the high-tech workplace.
For the second requirement, to support project and center sustainability and data management planning and help ensure that the valuable deliverables created through ATE funding remain available after funding ends, ATE projects and centers are required to work with ATE Central to ensure those resources are archived. Specifically, projects and centers that create resources that exist at all in digital form e.
Projects and centers are encouraged to work with ATE Central early in their funding period to develop a plan for preparing and migrating copies of their materials for archiving. Additionally, it is suggested that the developer of new materials license all work except for computer software source code, discussed below created with the support of the grant under either the 3.
These licenses allow subsequent users to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the copyrighted work and requires such users to attribute the work in the manner specified by the grantee. Notice of the specific license used would be affixed to the work, and displayed clearly when the work is made available online.
It is expected that computer software source code developed or created with ATE grant funds be released under an intellectual property license that allows others to use and build upon the work. Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing.
For questions about specific areas of technology or disciplines proposers are encouraged to contact a Program Officer from the list below. The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates including contact information , programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences.
Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this mechanism. Further information on Grants. The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering. NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering.
It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2, colleges, universities, K school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research. Advancing Diversity. Education Level. Graduate students 15 Undergraduate students 11 Post-Doctoral fellows 9 K educators 5. Continuing Grant. View Guidelines Posted January 12, Full Proposal Deadline:.
Posted January 11, Additional Upcoming Deadlines. Standard Grant. In , President Franklin D. Soils form over hundreds of years, and yet can be destroyed in a single event. They are an Posted January 10, Dear Colleague Letter. The NSF Convergence Accelerator comprises three phases: topic ideation, followed by convergence-research phases NSF Posted January 4, See letter for details. To translate advances in synthetic and engineering biology into products Posted January 3, Posted December 27, Posted December 23, Funding will support basic
0コメント