WHO MAY SUBMIT
Proposals are accepted from U.S. institutions, including colleges and universities that maintain research collections, natural history museums including herbaria, and other collections administered by independent organizations or by state, county, or local governments; non-federal and non-profit research organizations that maintain collections; and botanical gardens, zoological parks, and aquaria that maintain research collections that document biological diversity. Refer to the Grant Policy Guide (GPG), NSF 98-2, Chapter I, Section D. "Voucher" collections, such as those maintained by some academic departments, field stations, and marine laboratories are eligible if it is shown that use profiles of the collections justify the investment and curatorial support is adequate. Supportable projects include those that deal directly with specimens of organisms, parts of organisms, or direct artifacts of organisms (e.g., recorded sounds, fossilized footprints). Also eligible are organism-based collections that maintain associated specimens and data documenting the environmental context of the primary organism (e.g. soil and water samples, temperature and precipitation records, specimen-based geographic information). Projects to computerize card files of observational records or literature sources (that is, the computerization of existing card files of literature sources, observation records, or other library items) are not eligible for support.
Supplements are also provided to underwrite the involvement of undergraduate
and high school students in collections-based research. Applicants are
strongly encouraged to consult with the Program Director prior to preparing a
proposal to the BRC program.
Proposals for Collection Improvement
Research collections that are actively growing and regularly used may require
periodic support for physical and curatorial improvements to keep pace with
this growth and to enhance access and research use. Physical improvements
typically involve rehousing a collection, replacing inadequate resources,
providing new resources for continued growth, or incorporating one or more
collections donated by another institution or individual. Physical rehousing
efforts that incorporate computerization, and thereby eliminate excessive
handling of the specimens, are encouraged. Allowable costs generally include
the purchase and installation of new storage systems (e.g., cases, compactors
or compactorized cases, liquid nitrogen or ultracold freezers), the purchase
of curatorial materials (e.g., acid-free foam or paper, drawers, trays,
boxes), as well as new curatorial and technical assistance
specifically designed to effect the proposed improvements for the duration of
the proposed project.
Proposals for Collection Computerization
Computerization and sharing of collection data promote the broad use of
collections information in research and education throughout the biological,
geological, and environmental sciences, as well as enhancing collection
management. Computerization involves the digital capture of specimen records
in a quality-controlled manner, the networked linking of collection databases
with each other, and the integration of specimen databases with other
electronic information resources. Allowable costs generally include the
equipment (hardware, software) and supplies (storage media), as well as
salary for new personnel specifically required to complete a
scientifically sound and well-circumscribed project. It is expected that
such projects will lead to improved, direct user access to collection data
via standard Internet protocols.
Proposals for Curatorial and Management Techniques Research
Proposals for curatorial research should seek to improve curation methods or
archival practices. Proposals for collection management improvement should
be aimed at increasing efficiency of collection management (e.g. data entry,
verification, and access, accession and de-accession, processing loans,
georeferencing). Both types of proposals should seek to broaden the utility
and accessibility of collection materials and data to the array of scientific
disciplines that might use them. Awards for these purposes are limited to no
more than $50,000 of NSF support per project.
Proposals for Community-Based Development Activities and Small
Grants for Exploratory Research (SGER)
Community-based proposals for conferences, symposia, and workshops are
encouraged by the program, especially when designed to address particularly
forward-looking topics such as standards for curatorial procedures, database
development, data sharing protocols, or other broadly based developmental
issues (see Grant Proposal Guide (GPG), NSF 98-2, Chapter V). The
GPG is available on the NSF OnLine Document System located at the URL
http://www.nsf.gov/.
Small Grants for Exploratory Research (SGER) involving exploratory, high risk
endeavors are also encouraged (see GPG, Chapter II). Although both of
these types of proposals are accepted at any time, investigators are
encouraged to contact the program director for discussion before preparing
and submitting such proposals.
Supplements for Collections Research Experience for Students
Use current guidelines for Research Experiences for Undergraduates
(REU), NSF 96-102 and Research Assistantships for Minority High
School Students (RAMHSS), NSF 89-39 to prepare supplemental
requests. The BRC program must receive these types of supplemental requests
by the first Friday of February of each year. The BRC program director
should be consulted before preparing or submitting the request.
***Special Note***
The BRC program wishes specifically to encourage efforts in all the
categories above, either as separate proposals or as elements of broader
proposals to BRC, aimed at making collections more relevant to and usable by
a wide array of scientists (e.g., ecologists, population biologists,
geneticists, molecular and cell biologists, physiologists, and
paleontologists in addition to systematists) and the general public.
All submitting organizations must demonstrate their commitment to collection
staffing and normal operating support that are adequate for the regular use,
growth, care, and management of the collection. Staffing should be
commensurate with the size and activity level of a collection and normally
comprises at least one curator and one support person (curatorial assistant
or collection manager). Normal collection operations include specimen
acquisition resulting from the research activities of the collection’s
curators and other associated staff or from the acceptance of donated
materials, maintenance of those collections, answering loan and data
requests, pursuing specimen-based research, and accommodating visiting
researchers. Support from the BRC Program may not be requested
to defray these ordinary operating costs.
Support provided by the BRC program is restricted to the personnel,
equipment, supplies and travel associated with collection improvement,
computerization, curatorial research, or community-based developmental
activities that are over and above the financial capabilities of the
collection, based on the normal operating expenses received from the
institution. Projects proposed for BRC support should be clearly focused,
have a strong scientific rationale, and be designed to be completed within
the time-frame proposed. BRC does not support the acquisition of specimens
through purchase, nor does it fund collecting expeditions nor the improvement
of libraries or archives. Building renovation associated with collection
improvement will not be supported by BRC, but may be provided by the
submitting organization as a demonstration of institutional commitment. Only
one proposal may be submitted to any one round of the BRC competition by any
single collection. Institutions that house multiple collections should engage
in planning activities internal to the institution in order to prioritize the
needs of the several collections such that the institution does not submit a
multiplicity of proposals to any one BRC competition.
Project Summary (maximum: one page)
Summarize the proposed collection improvement, computerization, techniques
research, or other activity and its impact on the use of the collection and
its information resources by science and other sectors of society, long-term
management, and public outreach capabilities of the collection.
Project Description (maximum: 15 single-spaced text-pages, inclusive
of tables and illustrations)
1. Results from Prior NSF Support (maximum: 5 of the 15 pages of text):
Summarize the results of the most recent collection improvement award that
the collection has received from NSF in the preceding 5 years, even if the
current Principle Investigator (PI) was not associated with the collection at
that time. If the collection has not received an award in the previous 5
years, then a previous award to the PI within the past 5 years that was not
collection-related but that is most closely allied to the current proposal
should be described.
2. Collection Significance and Use: The need for and impact of the
project may depend, in large part, on the scientific significance of the
particular collection and the extent of its use. Describe the collection's
place relative to other similar collections, and specify the nature and
degree of overlap with those collections. Provide the following supporting
data in concise tabular format:
(a) size, composition, and areas of taxonomic, geographic and/or geologic
concentration;
(b) rate of growth over the past five years;
(c) degree and range of use in research, education and other activities over
the past five years (e.g. number and type of loans, number of visitors, data
requests and other pertinent statistics, arranged according to professional
or student use);
(d) research impact over the past five years (e.g., tabulate the number of
publications or other products, arranged by professional or student, that are
based on specimens in the collection, and provide up to five particularly
significant examples).
3. Normal Collection Operations: Describe the current collection
staff and the percentage of staff time devoted to normal collection
operations (e.g., specimen acquisition, curation and maintenance; loan and
visitor traffic; data requests), using tables as appropriate. These data
should build upon the collection significance and use data presented in the
preceding section. Data must clearly demonstrate that the tasks of the
project are new and beyond what current staff can handle, in order to justify
the personnel requested.
The Program expects that institutional support for collection staff and
materials is adequate to maintain current and projected normal operations.
Each collection should normally have at least one curator and one support
person (curatorial assistant or collection manager) supported by the
institution. If current institutional support does not meet this
expectation, this section should present a plan for bringing the size of the
permanent collection staff into balance with the realistic operating needs of
the collection.
Include relevant letters of commitment from the institution as outlined in
the "Special Information and Supplementary Documentation"section.
4. Need for the Project: Describe the planned project, the particular
part of the collection that would be affected, and the need for the proposed
collection improvement or collection computerization activity. Outline the
potential for lost research opportunities and the deleterious effects on the
collection that stem from current conditions. Also, describe how the current
project is related to past and future collection projects and how it fits
within a long-range plan.
5. Project Design and Management: Describe the rationale, design and
implementation of the project activities, specifying the personnel,
equipment, operations, and timetable for the proposed effort (use tables as
appropriate). If additional personnel are requested, base the justification
on real, timed, discrete task analyses (e.g., preparing a specimen, capturing
or verifying data records, etc.).
Collection improvement projects that intend to move or rehouse entire
collections or install major storage systems should also provide floor plans,
floor loading analyses and appropriate technical drawings in the
"Special Information and Supplementary Documentation" section.
Present evidence that multiple bids were sought for major equipment items and
include the reasons for choosing a particular vendor in the "Budget
Justification" section.
Proposals to integrate a large, donated collection into an existing
collection should demonstrate that the relinquishing institution recognizes
its responsibility to contribute (monetarily or in kind) to the move, and, if
possible, to the future upkeep of the collection. Also, clearly describe a
sound, scientific rationale for incorporating the particular collection,
providing evidence that the addition will strengthen the existing collection
either taxonomically or geographically.
Collection computerization proposals to BRC are for projects to populate a
database with specimen data, and should present strong evidence of awareness
of community information management standards and standard computerization
approaches, current database applications in the discipline, and network
access methods. Describe in the proposal the reasons that a particular
software application (e.g. MUSE, ZOE, OZ, Biota, SMASCH, or other system) has
been chosen, and quantitatively document that the chosen application allows
rapid and efficient data entry. Describe the scientific rationale for
computerizing the particular collection or portion of the collection such
that reviewers can evaluate the contribution that the project would make to
the biological knowledge base (i.e., why this collection and not another?).
The Program expects that all data entered during a BRC-supported project will
expeditiously be made readily and easily available over the World Wide Web
during the course of the project for use by other researchers and the general
public. The only exception to this expectation pertains to sensitive taxa.
In those cases, specifically justify the exceptions in the proposal.
Proposals to develop new database applications or other software tools to
manage or use collections data, and that could serve a broad cross-section of
the community may be most appropriate to the Database Activities Program or
Computational Biology Activities Program, and should conform to those program
guidelines. Descriptions of those programs can be found on the Directorate
for Biological Sciences web site located at
In technique development proposals describe the need for a new curatorial or
management technique or approach, why existing methods are inadequate, and
outline proposed methodologies so that the chances of success can be
evaluated.
In community-based development proposals describe the need for additional
attention in a particular area, the strategies that will be employed during
the sessions or workshop, and the expected product. The Program expects that
a publication (electronic only or electronic and print) that describes
community standards for curation, computerization, or other appropriate topic
will result. Insofar as it is reasonable and applicable, technique and
development proposals should adhere to these content and format
guidelines.
6. Impact of the Project: Describe the anticipated impact of the
proposed project on the use of collections in research, education, and public
service, as well as on the long-term management of the collection. Document
the tangible benefits to the user community, especially new research and
educational opportunities that would ensue from the project. Explain the
impact of a new curatorial technique on collections, and the importance of
the improvement to long-term collections conservation.
7. Dissemination of Results: Describe the plans for advising the
biological research community and the general public of the avenues of access
to a collection and its associated data, publication of a technique, or the
outcome of discipline-wide workshops.
8. Special Information and Supplementary Documentation: Include a
digest of the collection's policies, protocols and user charges or fees that
govern acquisition of specimens, access to and loan of specimens and tissues,
destructive sampling, and access to and dissemination of collection data by
electronic and/or other means. Collection projects should include
documentation (i.e., floor plans, loading analyses, and technical drawings)
as described in item 5, "Project Design and Management," above. The
Program expects that all data from any NSF-supported collection
computerization project will be expeditiously made accessible on the World
Wide Web (with the exception of precise locality data for documentably
sensitive taxa), as data are acquired during the course of the project.
Mail relevant letters of commitment from the institution, floor plans, and
technical drawings, as applicable, directly to the Biological Research
Collections Program. See mailing instructions in the Proposal Submission
section.
Budget Justification
Provide a cost-breakdown and narrative justification for budgeted items. At
least three vendor quotes for items of equipment and supplies that total more
than $10,000 should have been obtained. Justify the vendor choice in this
section. Present discrete task analyses to justify the number, duration and
percent effort of current personnel, and for those additional personnel
specifically required for the duration of the proposed project.
Send the following materials to the Biological Research Collections Program
to be received no later than five (5) business days after the proposal
submission deadline:
Mail the materials to:
Biological Research Collections Program; NSF 98-126
Do not mail copies of the proposal. NSF will make the appropriate
number of copies of the proposal.
If the submitting institution has never received an NSF
award, it is recommended that appropriate administrative officials become
familiar with the policies and procedures in the Grant Policy Manual
that are applicable to most NSF awards. If a proposal is recommended for an
award, the NSF Division of Grants and Agreements will request certain
organizational, management, and financial information. These requirements
are described in Chapter III of the Grant Policy Manual.
High School Students
Institutions that house collections, particularly those located in large
urban centers, have the opportunity to improve science education in all areas
of biology. Organizations with active collection awards are encouraged to
make contact with local high schools and engage one or more biology teachers
as summer curatorial associates and several students as curatorial
assistants. Most of the students chosen should be from minority or at-risk
groups. In addition to being trained and employed in the project's
curatorial and research activities, the students and their teachers may
receive training as docent, curatorial and research assistants in order to
improve their understanding of biological science and foster the students'
interest in collection- based scientific careers. Supplements can be
requested for summer salary support for the students and teachers, their
supplies, training by curatorial staff members, and the equipment to be used.
Applicants should follow the currently applicable guidelines for Research
Assistantships for Minority High School Students, NSF 89-39.
Undergraduate Students
Institutions that house collections have the opportunity to improve
scientific research and education in all areas of biology by recruiting
undergraduate students to work in the collections on BRC-related research
projects. Supplements can be requested for student stipends as described in
the "REU Supplements" section of the currently applicable
Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU), NSF96-102
guidelines.PROPOSAL CATEGORIES
The BRC program provides support in the categories detailed below: collection
improvement, collection computerization, research on curatorial and
collection management techniques, and community-based development activities.
A proposal may request support for a research collection that is
circumscribed taxonomically (e.g., mammals, insects, plants, fungi),
curatorially (e.g., a vertebrate osteology or tissue collection, pollen
slides, collections of bird or frog calls, MR images of dinosaur bones,
alcohol-preserved invertebrates), or in limited cases geographically (e.g.
particularly for site-based voucher collections). In either case, projects
should be designed so that the most reasonable economy of scale and cost- and
time-efficiency can be achieved.PROPOSAL CONTENT
Proposals for collection improvement and collection computerization must
present convincing evidence of the collection's importance for research on a
regional, national, or international scale, the need for and anticipated
impact of the project, and a detailed management plan for timely completion
of the project. All proposals must include a description of the collection's
policies, protocols and user charges or fees that govern acquisitions, loans,
and access to the specimens and the Internet-based availability of the
information associated with them. BUDGETS
Requests for BRC support should not exceed $500,000; average award size is
approximately $150,000. Curatorial and management techniques research awards
will not exceed $50,000. Conference, symposium, and workshop proposals should
not normally exceed $25,000. Small Grants for Exploratory Research (SGER)
may not exceed $100,000. Supplements for student involvement should follow
current guidelines for those activities. Provide justification for requested
items as outlined in the "Budget Justification" section. Address budget
questions directly to the program director. The annual program budget is
approximately $6M pending availability of funds.
PROPOSAL FORMAT
Proposals to BRC require electronic submission via the NSF FastLane
system in accordance with the guidelines provided in the "Instructions
for Proposal Preparation" found in the Grant Proposal Guide
(GPG), NSF 98-2, Chapter II. The GPG is available on the NSF Web
Site at the URL
Division of Biological Infrastructure, Room 615
National Science Foundation
4201 Wilson Boulevard
Arlington, VA 22230
