Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement
National Science Foundation
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI)
Educational Materials Development (EMD);
Adaptation and Implementation (A&I);
Assessment of Student Achievement (ASA) Tracks
Synopsis of Program:
The Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI) program seeks to improve the quality of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education for all students, based on educational research and empirical data concerning needs and opportunities in undergraduate education and effective ways to address them. It targets activities affecting learning environments, course content, curricula, and educational practices, with the aim of improving learning contributing to the relevant knowledge base that will support future efforts to enhance STEM education.
The CCLI program has four tracks that emphasize, respectively, the development of new educational materials and practices for a national audience (EMD); the local adaptation and implementation of previously developed exemplary materials and practices, including laboratory experiences and support for instrumentation (A&I); the national dissemination of exemplary materials and/or practices through faculty professional development (ND); and the assessment of student achievement, including research on assessment and the development of assessment tools and practices (ASA). Projects may address the needs of a single discipline or cut across disciplinary boundaries. Abstracts of previously funded projects can be found at http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/pirs_prs_web/search/.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
Proposals are invited from the following types of organizations in the United States, its territories, and its possessions: two-year colleges, four-year colleges, universities, professional societies, consortia, and non-profit and for-profit organizations. See Section III ("ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION") for additional information.
There is no limit on the number of proposals an organization may submit.
Undergraduate science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education prepares students to participate as citizens in a technological society, to enter the workforce after obtaining a two- or four-year degree, to continue their formal education in graduate or professional school, or to further their education later in life in response to new career goals or workplace expectations.
The Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI) program’s major goal is to support efforts in colleges and universities to develop the capacity to meet the learning needs of all undergraduate students in STEM.
The CCLI program strengthens NSF’s goal of ensuring access to a high quality STEM education for all students by focusing on the development, adaptation, implementation, dissemination, and assessment of exemplary educational materials, processes, and models. The focus includes introductory and upper level courses for majors and non-majors and disciplinary and interdisciplinary efforts in established and emerging fields. This program also supports the development of assessment tools and processes and the use of these to characterize undergraduate student learning.
The CCLI program reflects a cycle of discovery, innovation and application (adapted from the Rand Mathematics Study Panel (2002) Mathematical Proficiency for all Students: Towards a Strategic Development Program in Mathematics Education, Rand Corporation MR-1643.0-OERI) that includes:
The components of the CCLI program collectively encourage and nurture innovative improvements in undergraduate education through processes that reflect portions of this cycle of innovation. From the educational research base, innovations are developed, implemented, and evaluated. Outcomes of the CCLI program provide new data, ideas, and challenges to the educational research community to continue the cycle of innovation. Each of the four CCLI tracks contributes to this cycle in various ways.
The development of innovative instructional materials, processes, and models is supported by the Educational Materials Development (EMD) track of CCLI. EMD “Proof-of-Concept” projects test the scientific and educational feasibility of an innovation. Some of these will lead to “Full-Scale” EMD projects to develop final products and practices, to evaluate them in diverse institutions, to disseminate them nationally, and to commercialize these products when appropriate. That development process contributes to our understanding of what works and under what circumstances, so that others can build on this base of knowledge.
Through the Adaptation and Implementation (A&I) track, the CCLI program supports and encourages the use of innovative materials and practices that have been demonstrated to be effective and the acquisition of instrumentation to achieve pedagogical change. Projects supported by this track speed the diffusion of innovation. A&I proposals are expected to provide evidence that the exemplary materials and practices have been effective on other campuses, to explain why they are expected to be effective in this new situation, and to provide a plan to evaluate them in this new environment. Through the subsequent synthesis of evaluation results, NSF seeks to continue building knowledge about effective educational practices and materials (what works under what circumstances), thereby strengthening the cycle of innovation. In addition, the A&I track, through Type II projects, is prepared to support those who have identified a challenge or barrier to curriculum reform and have a plan to explore strategies for overcoming these challenges.
The National Dissemination (ND) track provides STEM faculty with professional development opportunities, and is both a complement and stimulant to the EMD and A&I tracks of the CCLI program. ND projects must be offered at the national level; be open to all faculty; and be focused on sharing knowledge about new courses, educational materials, laboratory practices, instructional methods, and assessment practices and tools, that have been used and evaluated to the point where they are considered to be proven effective in many circumstances. The goal of the ND track is to provide faculty members with enough information about new effective materials and practices so that they can make informed decisions about their own courses and teaching activities and become part of a national network of faculty working to improve student learning. ND projects are encouraged to create and nurture these networks and thus become part of the cycle of innovation.
The Assessment of Student Achievement (ASA) track of the CCLI program invites proposals to develop tools and practices to measure student learning, the ultimate test of the effectiveness of innovations in educational materials and practices. This track contributes to the cycle of innovation by providing formative guidance to EMD, A&I, and ND projects and also by providing an important link to research on learning in the STEM disciplines. The ASA track supports assessment at a variety of levels, ranging from individual classroom assessment to broad program-level assessment.
The opportunity for faculty and their institutions to have a major impact on undergraduate education is greater than ever. Increased national recognition of the importance of STEM education, coupled with rapid growth in new teaching and learning technologies, innovations in preK-12 education, increased understanding of how students learn, and successful interdisciplinary approaches, create new opportunities for improving the undergraduate educational experience. These developments provide the foundation for efforts to achieve excellence in STEM undergraduate education for all students.
The CCLI program aims to support the development, evaluation, and dissemination of educational and assessment materials and processes. These should be based on educational research that documents their effectiveness and impact on enhancing student learning. Thus, the most competitive proposals will be those that refer to existing educational literature or empirical data and provide a credible plan to add to this body of knowledge. One source of information about previously funded NSF Division of Undergraduate Education projects is the Project Information Resource System (PIRS), https://www.ehr.nsf.gov/pirs_prs_web/search/. Many of these previously funded projects are in progress, and proposers may wish to contact the projects' PIs for further information.
There are four subsections in this section, which describes each of the four tracks:
Sections III through IX of this solicitation apply to all four tracks.
The objective of the CCLI-EMD track is to support the development of educational materials that incorporate practices that are effective in improving learning of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics by undergraduates with diverse backgrounds and career aspirations. Projects are expected to address national needs and/or opportunities in undergraduate STEM education and to produce innovative materials of a quality and significance appropriate for national distribution, adoption, adaptation, and implementation. Projects to develop new materials may be particularly appropriate for incorporating technology, global perspectives, research, and innovative pedagogy to enhance learning of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
Because it is the aim of the EMD program track to foster development of materials that have the potential of being used by and impacting the largest number and diversity of students enrolled at different types of institutions, it is recommended that individuals involved in materials development demonstrate a knowledge of the needs and background of such students, and involve faculty, as appropriate, from diverse institutions.
The CCLI-EMD track invites two types of proposals that aim to achieve these goals:
A "proof-of-concept" project is expected to demonstrate the scientific and educational feasibility of an idea.
The outcomes expected of a CCLI-EMD Proof-of-Concept project include all of the following:
The Project Description portion of the proposal should describe the plans to achieve these outcomes.
If development of the prototype proves successful, the project would be expected to move to full-scale development of the materials. In this case, the final report for the proof-of-concept project should include an outline of a plan for the following:
If the team developing a prototype involves collaboration between two-year colleges and four-year colleges/universities see the paragraph about collaborations below for potential budget implications.
A full-scale development project is expected to produce and evaluate significant new educational materials and pedagogical practices, and to promote their dissemination and effective implementation nationally.
The outcomes expected of funded projects include all of the following:
The Project Description portion of the proposal should describe the plans to achieve these outcomes.
Budget Considerations: Full-scale development proposals may include a request for funds to conduct workshops or other forms of faculty development to enhance the impact of materials and products developed by the project. Alternatively, when a project is at a stage where materials are ready for use and their effectiveness has been demonstrated, the project PI may submit a request for a supplement to the grant to fund such activities. The request for the supplement must be justified on the basis of the quality of materials developed and the potential value of the proposed activities. PIs interested in supplemental funds should contact the NSF Program Director assigned to the project.
Collaborations between Two-Year Colleges and Four-Year Colleges/Universities: In addition to individual submissions by colleges and universities, the Educational Materials Development track also encourages proposals from two-year colleges in collaboration with four-year colleges/universities. The goal is to encourage faculty members from different institutions to jointly design, develop, and test innovative educational materials for the lower-division undergraduate courses, particularly those for which students seek transfer credit. It is hoped that meeting this goal will foster sustainable relationships by leveraging the strengths of all involved institutions. These proposals may be submitted by either a two- or a four-year institution but must involve both two- and four-year faculty in the design, development, and testing of materials. If appropriate, activities leading to seamless articulation between two- and four-year institutions may be included. To encourage jointly developed proposals in the "proof-of-concept" category, an additional $25,000 may be requested. NSF also encourages submission of Full-Scale Development proposals developed jointly by two- and four-year institutions that build on either "proof-of-concept" collaborative activities or other prior work.
Additional Proposal Information: Sections III through IX of this solicitation discuss other important aspects of CCLI-EMD proposals.
This track supports the national dissemination of exemplary materials and practices by providing current and future faculty with professional development activities with the ultimate goal of improving undergraduate STEM learning. (Eligible activities are not restricted to the dissemination of results from NSF-funded projects). Proposals are invited from organizations that aim to provide faculty professional development opportunities on a national scale. Such organizations should be able to provide administrative support capable of managing the logistics of these activities at multiple sites. Although it is expected that the primary dissemination mechanism will be workshops or short courses, distance learning opportunities or other innovative means of dissemination are also encouraged.
These professional development opportunities are expected to enable a large diverse group of faculty to 1) introduce new content into undergraduate courses and laboratories and 2) to explore effective educational practices, thereby improving the effectiveness of their teaching. The new content may be scientific and technical knowledge, laboratory practices, or reformatted and synthesized content that supports new modes of learning. It is expected that the format will provide interaction with experts at a level deep enough to promote and achieve significant sustainable gains by participating faculty.
Successful proposals must aim to provide faculty professional development in a variety of disciplines, such as the following: behavioral sciences, biological sciences, chemistry, computer and information sciences, engineering, earth sciences, mathematical sciences, physics and astronomy, or social sciences.
Scientific societies may submit proposals to the national dissemination track. Proposals from scientific societies should clearly identify the value that would be added to the current set of activities sponsored by their organization(s) in support of faculty professional development. Scientific societies in the same discipline are urged to work together rather than separately in developing proposals.
The outcomes expected of funded CCLI-ND projects include all of the following:
The following outcomes, although not required, would represent outstanding achievement:
Additional Proposal Information: Sections III through IX of this solicitation discuss other important aspects of CCLI-ND proposals.
The Adaptation and Implementation (A&I) track of the CCLI program promotes the improvement of STEM education in the funded organization(s) through the adaptation and implementation of specific exemplary materials, laboratory experiences, and/or educational practices that have been developed and proven successful at other institutions. CCLI-A&I projects should effect change within or across departments or other institutional units by having broad faculty and administrative support. The ultimate goal is the improvement of undergraduate STEM learning.
This track invites proposals for two types of projects that aim to achieve these goals: those that intend to undertake direct curriculum improvement (Type I projects), and those that enable a group of faculty to explore strategies for overcoming identified challenges and barriers to educational reform (Type II projects).
Type I Projects
Type I projects are expected to adapt and implement high-quality STEM curricula, materials, and/or techniques in order to achieve specific curricular changes. The acquisition of instrumentation and its integration into the curriculum is appropriate as part of a Type I project. When possible, projects are expected to include students in meaningful ways in the activities so that they are able to provide input to the planning and decisions. Proposers are encouraged to consider including developers of the model(s) being adapted as consultants for the adaptation and evaluation efforts and to include a plan to provide feedback to these developers as the adaptation and implementation evolve.
Projects might include, for example, one or more of the following:
Project scope may range from improvements in an individual course or laboratory to a more comprehensive effort that impacts entire curricula or programs. Funds may be requested in any budget category supported by NSF or may be entirely for equipment or instrumentation.
Proposals must specifically identify the materials and/or practices developed elsewhere that are being adapted, including references to the literature or to other institutions using the materials and/or practices, and must describe the modifications to be effected and the potential value added. Materials and/or practices for adaptation may be drawn from more than one source.
The outcomes expected of funded Type I projects include all of the following:
Type II Projects
Type II projects provide support for a group of faculty who have identified challenges or barriers that are currently preventing curriculum reform, to pursue a plan that details their strategies for overcoming these problems. In order to begin significant curriculum reform, projects are expected to explore exemplary STEM curricula, materials, and/or practices.
The projects also are expected to include students in meaningful ways in the activities so that they are able to provide input to the planning and decisions. Projects might include, for example, one or more of the following:
The proposing group may be an entire department or larger unit, or a logical subset of a department, cross-departmental group, or cross-institutional group. The proposal must provide evidence that the proposed effort is a priority for all of those involved. The proposal must describe the ultimate long-term curricular goals that are to be achieved, the challenges or barriers to be overcome, the steps to be undertaken during the grant period, and the benchmarks that will be used to measure progress as the project moves forward. Funds may be requested in any budget category supported by NSF.
The outcomes expected of funded Type II projects include all of the following:
Additional Information for Both Types of A&I Projects
In the CCLI program, the word "laboratory" includes experiences ranging from those fully integrated within a course to those forming separate components in the curriculum. The setting may involve, for example, a field site, an observatory, a computer room, or an integrated laboratory/classroom, as well as the traditional laboratory, and may involve a redesign of instructional approaches using technology to enhance student learning.
Institutional commitment and plans to build upon the project are critical to the success of CCLI-A&I projects. The CCLI-A&I track discourages proposals that:
Information about the results of projects funded through DUE programs can be obtained through DUE's Project Information Resource System (http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/pirs_prs_web/search/). Many of these previously funded projects are in progress, and proposers may wish to contact the projects' PIs for further information.
Additional Proposal Information: Sections III through IX of this solicitation discuss other important aspects of CCLI-A&I proposals.
Assessment can promote student learning or provide evidence for accountability requirements through an evaluation of a program's strengths and weaknesses. The CCLI–ASA track supports both of these purposes. In broad terms the CCLI-ASA track is intended to serve faculty, departments, administrators, and education officials interested in the measurement of student achievement in courses, curricula, programs of study, and the cumulative undergraduate experience.
Applicants may propose a project that emphasizes one of the following types of activities:
Type I – New Development Projects:
Type I projects will develop new assessment materials (tools) and processes for use in single or multiple undergraduate disciplines. Proposed projects may include:
Proposals should specify explicitly the planned levels of assessment in terms of student achievement (e.g., basic knowledge, deeper comprehension, application skills, the ability to analyze complex ideas) and scope (e.g., within a single course, a course sequence, core STEM general education courses, a STEM major, or an entire degree program). They should also include an explicit statement of the proposed interpretation of the assessment results and a rationale for its use, a plan to evaluate the effectiveness of the materials and practices, and a plan to disseminate information about project results.
Type II – Adaptation Projects:
Type II projects will adapt assessment materials and practices that have been shown to be effective for one setting or student population for use in a new setting or with a different population. Proposals should review what is known about the effectiveness of the assessment materials and practices that are to be adapted. They should also include an explicit statement of the proposed interpretation of the assessment results and a rationale for its use in the new setting or with a different population, a plan to evaluate the success of the adapted materials and practices, and a plan to disseminate information about project results.
Type III – Dissemination Projects:
Type III projects will spread the use of effective assessment practices through workshops or web-based materials that have been validated and that are thoroughly documented with detailed instructions. For example, workshops for faculty may be proposed to deepen their understanding and strengthen their skills in using existing assessment tools and practices in their discipline. A second example is workshops for disciplinary faculty, educational researchers, and employers to define areas where assessment needs and opportunities exist.
Applicants are requested to identify on the project data form (NSF Form 1295) which type (I, II, or III) most closely fits their project.
In order to make the assessment tools and processes credible and portable, they need to be valid and reliable.
The outcomes expected of funded ASA projects include all of the following:
Additional Proposal Information: Sections III through IX of this solicitation discuss other important aspects of CCLI-ASA proposals.
Eligible Fields: Proposals may be submitted for support of projects in any field ordinarily supported by the NSF. You may find more information on the broad program areas that NSF typically supports here: http://www.nsf.gov/home/programs. Specifically excluded are projects that address clinical fields such as medicine, nursing, clinical psychology, and physical education, and those that primarily involve social work, home economics, the arts, and the humanities.
Eligible Organizations and Individuals: Proposals are invited from the following types of organizations in the United States, its territories, and its possessions: two-year colleges, four-year colleges, universities, professional societies, consortia, and non-profit and for-profit organizations. Proposals from a formal consortium should be submitted by the consortium; proposals from an informal consortium or coalition may be submitted by one of the member organizations. Proposed projects may involve a single organization, collaboration with business and industrial partners, or collaboration among several organizations.
An individual may be the lead PI on only one submitted proposal in each track and may also be a co-PI on other proposals. There is no restriction on the number of proposals for which a person may serve as a co-PI.
There is no limit on the number of proposals an organization may submit.
NSF anticipates having $40 million for all four CCLI tracks, pending the availability of funds. The awards will be made as standard or continuing grants. The number and size of awards will depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds. The expected duration and range of total NSF/DUE support over the lifetime of a CCLI project, including indirect costs, are as follows:
Proof-of-Concept: (up to 3 years) with a budget up to $75,000. An additional $25,000 may be requested for projects that involve faculty from two-year institutions collaborating with faculty from four-year institutions, for a total of $100,000.
Full Development: (typically 2-3 years but up to 5 years) with a budget up to $500,000.
ND: (up to 5 years) with a total budget up to of $5,000,000 and an annual budget up to $1,000,000.
Type I projects: (up to 3 years) with a budget up to $100,000 for a single course and $200,000 for comprehensive projects involving more than one course.
Type II projects: (up to 3 years) with a budget up to $75,000.
ASA: (up to 3 years) with a budget up to $500,000.
Estimated Number of Awards: 250 - including 115 EMD, 10 ND, 115 A&I, and 10 ASA awards.
Full Proposal Instructions:
Proposals submitted in response to this program announcement/solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG). The complete text of the GPG is available electronically on the NSF Website at: http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gpg. Paper copies of the GPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from email@example.com.
Except as modified by this solicitation (in particular, EMD Proof of Concept and A&I page limit requirements for the Project Description and the cost sharing requirement for the A&I Track), standard NSF guidelines contained in the GPG apply.
Advice to Proposal Writers: DUE staff often provide informal guidance to proposers about potential projects. The advice most frequently sought about proposal writing in general has been collected in A Guide for Proposal Writing (NSF 04-016). For examples of DUE-funded projects, refer to DUE's Project Information Resource System at http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/pirs_prs_web/search/. See the Supplemental Information for Principal Investigators and Applicants to NSF's Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement Program (NSF 00-117), http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2000/nsf00117/nsf00117.htm, for information that will assist proposers in developing proposals that are responsive to the CCLI program, in describing the objectives of proposed projects, and in managing projects to achieve the objectives and to enable reporting consistent with the program's and NSF's goals.
Competitive CCLI proposals will provide convincing discussion on how the project will achieve the outcomes listed for the selected Track (see Section II) and on how it will satisfy the two National Science Board merit review criteria (see Section VI). In accomplishing this they do the following:
Formal Proposal Preparation
Cover Sheet: The proposal title should include informative key words that indicate, for example, the discipline, the target population, and the nature of the problem or innovative solution. After selecting the CCLI program solicitation number shown at the top of this solicitation, the proposer should also choose the specific CCLI track (i.e., EMD, ND, A&I, or ASA). Correctly identifying the CCLI program and track on the Cover Sheet is important for processing at NSF.
Project Summary: Text in this section should fit on one page and use a standard font no smaller than 10 point. The Project Summary should be a clear, concise, self-contained description of the project. It should be informative to other persons working in the same or related fields, and insofar as possible, be understandable to a scientifically literate reader. The summary should describe:
All Project Summaries must explicitly and clearly address in separate statements the National Science Board approved review criteria of intellectual merit and broader impacts. (These criteria are outlined below in Section VI.A "NSF Proposal Review Process.") The discussion of the intellectual merit of the proposed activity and the broader impacts resulting from the proposed activity must be included in the one-page limit, and should include the phrases "intellectual merit" and "broader impacts." Proposals that do not separately address both merit review criteria within the one-page project summary will be returned without review.
Project Description: Text in this section of the proposal must be no more than 6 lines per 2.5 cm and use no less than 2.5-cm margins and a standard font with size no smaller than 10 point. The following page limits apply:
Proof-of-Concept: 7 pages
Full-Scale Development: 15 pages
ND: 15 pages
A&I: 7 pages
ASA: 15 pages
DUE will not accept proposals in which the Project Description (including Results from Prior NSF Support) exceeds these page limits. Proposals that are not in compliance will not be considered for funding and will be returned without review. Proposers should number the pages in the Project Description.
Write the proposal to demonstrate how the project responds to the track-specific program objectives defined in Section II and how it meets the two National Science Board approved review criteria on intellectual merit and broader impacts described in Section VI.A.
The Project Description should include the following:
References Cited: A list of all references should
be submitted in a separate section with no page limit. The literature
cited in the Project Description should reflect an understanding of
the knowledge base in the field in which the problem or question is
posed. Appropriate literature on research in teaching and learning should
be cited. Any literature cited should be clearly and specifically related
to the proposed project, and the Project Description should make it
clear how information in a reference has played a role in the project
Budget Justification: The text of the Budget Justification is limited to 3 pages. The Budget Justification should indicate the role of all supported personnel and justify amounts listed in the budget. It also should list all individual instruments, computers, software packages, measuring devices, or recording devices by a descriptive name and the probable brand, model, and price. Such selections may be changed to equivalent items after an award.
For a proposal involving multiple organizations, the Budget Justification should describe the involvement or participation of each organization and the amount each will receive from the grant.
Current and Pending Support: All current and pending external support to the PI(s) – including the current proposal – must be listed.
Project Data Form: The information requested on DUE's Project Data Form is used to direct the proposal to appropriate reviewers and to provide statistics on the nature of NSF-supported projects. In FastLane, this form will show up in the list of forms for your proposal only after you have (1) selected the correct Program Announcement/Solicitation No. on the Cover Sheet and (2) saved the Cover Sheet.
Special Information and Supplementary Documents: Appendices are allowed but must be relevant and concise. For materials development proposals, a sample of prior work or work in progress is recommended. Appendices should be uploaded in the "Supplementary Docs" section of the proposal in FastLane.
Proposers are reminded to identify the program announcement/solicitation number (04-565) in the program announcement/solicitation block on the proposal Cover Sheet. Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing.
EMD, ND, and ASA track proposals require no cost sharing. For EMD, ND, and ASA projects, all of the “Equipment” costs should be included on Line D.
Except for certain organizations described below (see the section on Cost Sharing Exemption below), A&I track proposals require a 1:1 match on all equipment.
In the context of an A&I track proposal, “Equipment” is defined as any single instrument, computer, software package, measuring device, or recording device that costs $5000 or more. In the Budget page for A&I Projects, one-half of the total equipment cost should be included on Line D (the “Equipment” category) and the other on Line M (the “Cost Sharing” category). Only the required amount of cost sharing should be listed on Line M. Any instrument, computer, software package, measuring device, or recording device that costs less than $5000 is not considered “Equipment,” and should be included in Line G-1 (the “Materials and Supplies” category) of the Budget. If a proposal requests more than one of a single device (e.g., five computers for a student lab), then the cost of a single item (e.g., one computer) and not the aggregated cost is used to determine if the item is “Equipment.” If a PI proposes to buy a group of different items that will become part of a system and the individual items are designed or marketed to fit together as a single system, then the aggregated cost is used to determine if the item is “Equipment.”
For A&I track budgets that request funds for “Equipment,” the Budget Justification should include a five-column table. The first column should list each piece of equipment supported under the project. The next four columns should show, respectively, the manufacturer’s list price for educational institutions, the standard discounted price for educational institutions, the amount requested from the NSF, and the amount that will come from non-federal sources as matching funds. If the applicant can negotiate a special discount that exceeds the one that is routinely available to educational institutions, the amount by which the special discount exceeds the standard educational discount may be counted as matching funds for equipment.
Cost sharing funds must be used specifically for the equipment listed
in the budget approved for the project.
Cost Sharing Exemption: Consistent with the objectives of Executive Orders 12876, 12900, and 13021, NSF will waive the above cost sharing requirement for Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic Serving Institutions, and Tribal Colleges and Universities that do not offer STEM degrees beyond the master's level, and for Minority Postsecondary Institutions that do not offer STEM degrees beyond the bachelor's level. (For additional information on this exemption, see http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/due/programs/general/msi.asp.) Eligible organizations must mention their eligibility for the waiver in the Budget Justification.
The proposed cost sharing must be shown on Line M on the proposal budget. Documentation of the availability of cost sharing must be included in the proposal. Only items which would be allowable under the applicable cost principles, if charged to the project, may be included as the awardee's contribution to cost sharing. Contributions may be made from any non-Federal source, including non-Federal grants or contracts, and may be cash or in-kind (see OMB Circular A-110, Section 23). It should be noted that contributions counted as cost-sharing toward projects of another Federal agency may not be counted towards meeting the specific cost-sharing requirements of the NSF award. All cost-sharing amounts are subject to audit. Failure to provide the level of cost-sharing reflected in the approved award budget may result in termination of the NSF award, disallowance of award costs and/or refund of award funds to NSF.
Budget Preparation Instructions:
The amounts indicated on the Proposal Budget should include only the amounts requested of NSF and any required cost sharing. NSF funds may not be used to support expenditures that would have been undertaken in the absence of an award, such as cost of activities that are considered part of a faculty member's normal duties.
Ineligible items: In any DUE project, neither NSF funds nor institutional matching funds may be used to purchase:
Multi-organization Projects: Multi-organization proposals may be submitted either as a single proposal from the lead organization that includes subcontracts for the other collaborators or as a formal collaborative proposal by linked, but separate, submission of proposals from each organization. Organizations intending to submit collaborative proposals must follow the instructions for electronic submission specified in GPG, Chapter II, Section D.3.b. The project titles of the linked proposals must be identical and must begin with the words "Collaborative Project." The combined budgets of all proposals should conform to the maximum award sizes specified in Section IV ("AWARD INFORMATION") above. These collaborative proposals will be treated as a single proposal (with a single Project Summary, Project Description, and References Cited) during the review process.
Workshops: In proposals that involve professional development workshops, it is generally expected that the home institutions of the faculty participants will bear at least the cost of travel to and from the workshop unless a compelling reason can be offered to request NSF support for this travel.
The budget request may include participant support costs for subsistence (lodging and meals) during the workshop, except lodging for participants who reside in the local area where the workshop is being held. In addition, funds may be requested for a stipend of up to $60 per workshop day for each workshop participant. Requests for such stipends must be specific to the target audience and fully justified–for example, to assure participation by faculty who have few professional development opportunities or who come from resource-poor institutions. Note that indirect costs may not be charged on participant support costs. The host organization is expected to provide the facilities, equipment, and instrumentation necessary to conduct the workshop; therefore NSF will ordinarily support no permanent facilities, equipment, or instrumentation for such workshops. The host organization is also expected to cover the expenses incurred by its own faculty participants.
Proposals must be submitted by the following date(s):
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
Proposers are strongly urged to prepare and submit their proposals well before the deadline in order to allow for unexpected delays in processing the proposal through their organization and to provide time for correcting errors that may occur in up-loading the proposal in FastLane. Proposals that arrive after the deadline will not be accepted and corrections or changes to a submitted proposal will not be allowed after the deadline.
Proposers are required to prepare and submit all proposals for this announcement/solicitation through the FastLane system. Detailed instructions for proposal preparation and submission via FastLane are available at: http://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm. For FastLane user support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org. The FastLane Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the FastLane system. Specific questions related to this program announcement/solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this announcement/solicitation.
Submission of Electronically Signed Cover Sheets. The Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must electronically sign the proposal Cover Sheet to submit the required proposal certifications (see Chapter II, Section C of the Grant Proposal Guide for a listing of the certifications). The AOR must provide the required electronic certifications within five working days following the electronic submission of the proposal. Proposers are no longer required to provide a paper copy of the signed Proposal Cover Sheet to NSF. Further instructions regarding this process are available on the FastLane Website at: http://www.fastlane.nsf.gov
Reviews of proposals submitted to NSF are solicited from peers with expertise in the substantive area of the proposed research or education project. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with the oversight of the review process. NSF invites the proposer to suggest, at the time of submission, the names of appropriate or inappropriate reviewers. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts with the proposer. Special efforts are made to recruit reviewers from non-academic institutions, minority-serving institutions, or adjacent disciplines to that principally addressed in the proposal.
The National Science Board approved revised criteria for evaluating proposals at its meeting on March 28, 1997 (NSB 97-72). All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.
On July 8, 2002, the NSF Director issued Important Notice 127, Implementation of new Grant Proposal Guide Requirements Related to the Broader Impacts Criterion. This Important Notice reinforces the importance of addressing both criteria in the preparation and review of all proposals submitted to NSF. NSF continues to strengthen its internal processes to ensure that both of the merit review criteria are addressed when making funding decisions.
In an effort to increase compliance with these requirements, the January 2002 issuance of the GPG incorporated revised proposal preparation guidelines relating to the development of the Project Summary and Project Description. Chapter II of the GPG specifies that Principal Investigators (PIs) must address both merit review criteria in separate statements within the one-page Project Summary. This chapter also reiterates that broader impacts resulting from the proposed project must be addressed in the Project Description and described as an integral part of the narrative.
Effective October 1, 2002, NSF will return without review proposals that do not separately address both merit review criteria within the Project Summary. It is believed that these changes to NSF proposal preparation and processing guidelines will more clearly articulate the importance of broader impacts to NSF-funded projects.
The two National Science Board approved merit review criteria are listed below (see the Grant Proposal Guide Chapter III.A for further information). The criteria include considerations that help define them. These considerations are suggestions and not all will apply to any given proposal. While proposers must address both merit review criteria, reviewers will be asked to address only those considerations that are relevant to the proposal being considered and for which he/she is qualified to make judgments.
NSF staff will give careful consideration to the following in making funding decisions:
All proposals are carefully reviewed by at least three other persons outside NSF who are experts in the particular field represented by the proposal. Proposals submitted in response to this announcement/solicitation will be reviewed by Panel Review.
Reviewers will be asked to formulate a recommendation to either support or decline each proposal. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.
A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and submitted by each reviewer. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Director. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.
In most cases, proposers will be contacted by the Program Officer after his or her recommendation to award or decline funding has been approved by the Division Director. This informal notification is not a guarantee of an eventual award.
NSF is striving to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. The time interval begins on the date of receipt. The interval ends when the Division Director accepts the Program Officer's recommendation.
In all cases, 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 and 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. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. 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.
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 Division 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.A. for additional information on the review process.)
An NSF award consists of: (1) the award letter, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award letter; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (NSF-GC-1); * or Federal Demonstration Partnership (FDP) Terms and Conditions * and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award letter. Cooperative agreement awards also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions (CA-1). Electronic mail notification is the preferred way to transmit NSF awards to organizations that have electronic mail capabilities and have requested such notification from the Division of Grants and Agreements.
*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at http://www.nsf.gov/home/grants/grants_gac.htm. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from email@example.com.
More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions is contained in the NSF Grant Policy Manual (GPM) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gpm. The GPM is also for sale through the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office (GPO), Washington, DC 20402. The telephone number at GPO for subscription information is (202) 512-1800. The GPM may be ordered through the GPO Website at http://www.gpo.gov.
For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the PI must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer at least 90 days before the end of the current budget period.
The Division of Undergraduate Education maintains the Project Information Resource System (PIRS), http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/pirs_prs_web/search/, to provide the public with current information about funded projects. Some of the information provided by PIs in interim, annual, and final project reports will be available through PIRS. Proposers are encouraged to review the information that PIRS now provides about projects that NSF has funded in undergraduate education. When preparing a project report in FastLane, PIs are encouraged to make use of PIRS to provide additional descriptive information about their project by accessing the "DUE Information" link in the menu under "Prepare Report" on the "Project System Control Screen." For example, PIs may enter information about the curricular targets of their project (disciplines, subjects, courses), the pedagogical approaches used, and additional funding sources.
PIs of CCLI grants will also be asked to complete a Web-based survey each spring about their project's plans and accomplishments to date. A response to the survey is requested even if the grant has been active for only a short time. This survey asks PIs to indicate the tasks they plan to accomplish during the project (e.g., product development, assessment, dissemination, faculty development) and the progress that has been made in accomplishing these tasks. This information is used by DUE to indicate the success of the CCLI program in meeting its objectives, and is reported in aggregate form to Committees of Visitors, NSF's management, and Congress to meet the requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
The Final Project Report for a Type II CCLI-A&I project must describe a specific plan, including a timeline, for continuing the reform that was initiated at the participating organization(s) as a result of the project.
Within 90 days after the expiration of an award, the PI also is required to submit a final project report. Failure to provide final technical reports delays NSF review and processing of pending proposals for the PI and all Co-PIs. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.
PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project reporting system, available through FastLane, for preparation and submission of annual and final project reports. This system permits electronic submission and updating of project reports, including information on project participants (individual and organizational), activities and findings, publications, and other specific products and contributions. PIs will not be required to re-enter information previously provided, either with a proposal or in earlier updates using the electronic system.
General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:
A Program Director in the appropriate discipline – the names, email addresses, and phone numbers of the Program Directors in each discipline are listed on the web site at http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/ehr/due/staff/pd.asp
For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:
FastLane Help Desk, telephone: 1-800-673-6188, email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Ms. Antoinette Allen, Division of Undergraduate Education, telephone: 703-292-4646, email: email@example.com
The NSF Guide to Programs is a compilation of funding for research and education in science, mathematics, and engineering. The NSF Guide to Programs is available electronically at http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gp. General descriptions of NSF programs, research areas, and eligibility information for proposal submission are provided in each chapter.
Many NSF programs offer announcements or solicitations concerning specific proposal requirements. To obtain additional information about these requirements, contact the appropriate NSF program offices. Any changes in NSF's fiscal year programs occurring after press time for the Guide to Programs will be announced in the NSF E-Bulletin, which is updated daily on the NSF Website at http://www.nsf.gov/home/ebulletin, and in individual program announcements/solicitations. Subscribers can also sign up for NSF's Custom News Service (http://www.nsf.gov/home/cns/start.htm) to be notified of new funding opportunities that become available.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. Awardees are wholly responsible for conducting their project activities and preparing the results for publication. Thus, the Foundation does not assume responsibility for such findings or their interpretation.
NSF welcomes proposals from all qualified scientists, engineers and educators. The Foundation strongly encourages women, minorities and persons with disabilities to compete fully in its programs. In accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and NSF policies, no person on grounds of race, color, age, sex, national origin or disability shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving financial assistance from NSF, although some programs may have special requirements that limit eligibility.
Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities (investigators and other staff, including student research assistants) to work on NSF-supported projects. See the GPG Chapter II, Section D.2 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.
The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering.
To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the NSF Website at http://www.nsf.gov
The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; project reports submitted by awardees will be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to applicant institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies needing information as part of the review process or in order to coordinate programs; and to another Federal agency, court or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See Systems of Records, NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," 63 Federal Register 267 (January 5, 1998), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records," 63 Federal Register 268 (January 5, 1998). Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to an information collection unless it displays a valid OMB control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding this burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Suzanne Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, Division of Administrative Services, National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA 22230.
OMB control number: 3145-0058.
The National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230, USA