Partnerships for Enhancing Expertise in Taxonomy
National Science Foundation
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
March 07, 2005
First Monday in March biennially thereafter
Updated to reflect new FastLane functionalities, make clear the biennial nature of the competition (2005 and biennial thereafter), and reflect new Cluster structure in DEB.
Partnerships for Enhancing Expertise in Taxonomy (PEET)
Special Biennial Competition in Systematic Biology
Synopsis of Program:
In partnership with academic institutions, botanical gardens, freshwater and marine institutes, and natural history museums, the National Science Foundation seeks to enhance taxonomic research and help prepare future generations of experts. Through its Special Biennial Competition in Systematic Biology, NSF will support competitively reviewed projects that target groups of poorly known organisms for modern monographic research. Projects must train new taxonomists (two per project minimally) and must translate current expertise into electronic databases and other products with broad accessibility to the scientific community.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
James E. Rodman, Program Director, Directorate for Biological Sciences, Division of Environmental Biology, 635 N, telephone: (703) 292-8481, fax: (703) 292-9064, email: email@example.com
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
Proposals under the PEET Special Competition will be accepted from U.S. academic institutions and non-academic not-for-profit organizations including botanical gardens, freshwater and marine institutes, and natural history museums that are eligible for awards from the National Science Foundation. Non-academic organizations with university-affiliated training programs are especially encouraged to apply. Where appropriate, collaborating scientists in foreign countries can be accommodated through consultant mechanisms administered by the submitting U.S. organization. If groups of investigators from multiple organizations with complementary strengths in taxonomy wish to collaborate, a single organization must be designated to submit the proposal, with off-campus colleagues integrated through consultant or subaward mechanisms where appropriate. Collaborative proposals will not be accepted.
The accelerating loss of biological diversity in the world, through habitat destruction, pollution, and ecosystem fragmentation, has been accompanied by a loss of taxonomic experts who are trained to discover, identify, describe, and classify the world's organismal diversity. Retirement of taxonomic specialists, shifts in academic recruitment and staffing, and reductions in graduate training have conjoined to impede biodiversity research and conservation, particularly on large but poorly known groups such as bacteria, fungi, protists, and numerous marine and terrestrial invertebrates. Vast numbers of species in understudied "invisible" groups constitute critical elements of food chains and ecosystems, both aquatic and terrestrial, but the high proportion of unrecognized species in these groups limits research and progress in many areas of biology and conservation. The problem of diminishing taxonomic expertise was highlighted by the National Science Board in their 1989 report on the "Loss of Biological Diversity: A Global Crisis Requiring International Solutions" (NSB 89-171) which inspired NSF in 1994 to initiate the first PEET Special Competition, to support research on the taxonomy of poorly known groups of organisms, to train new taxonomic experts, and to encourage development and use of web-accessible taxonomic resources and products. The Special Biennial Competition continues NSF support for this activity.
The NSF, in partnership with academic institutions, botanical gardens, freshwater and marine institutes, and natural history museums, seeks to stimulate and enhance taxonomic research on poorly known groups of organisms and help prepare future generations of taxonomic experts. Three major components are required in a project submitted in the PEET Special Competition: 1. Monographic Research; 2. Training; and 3. Computer Infrastructure.
Monographic Research. Applicants must present a plan of research for taxonomic revision or monograph, with emphasis to be given to organisms that are little studied or to groups for which taxonomic expertise is limited or vanishing (for example, microbes, protists, fungi, and invertebrates). Specialists on such groups are encouraged to apply. Also encouraged are investigators currently studying better known groups or other scientists with taxonomic interests who wish to extend analyses to neglected taxa, directly or by mentoring students. Choice of organisms for study must be justified in the proposal and will be evaluated by the merit review process. General guidance is provided in several reports: a 1980 National Academy of Sciences report (Committee on Research Priorities in Tropical Biology, 1980, "Research Priorities in Tropical Biology," National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC); the 1989 National Science Board report cited above (NSB 89-171); a 1992 National Academy report (Panel on Biodiversity Research Priorities, 1992, "Conserving Biodiversity: A Research Agenda for Development Agencies," National Academy Press, Washington, DC); and the 1994 report "Systematics Agenda 2000: Charting the Biosphere, Technical Report," Systematics Agenda 2000 Consortium, New York, NY). The 1980 National Academy report indicated "that a high priority ought to be set on training and support for much larger numbers of systematists oriented toward tropical organisms." Organisms mentioned in that report include fungi, nematodes, mollusks, insects, fishes, and flowering plants. The subsequent reports cited do not specify taxonomic groups but in general emphasize organisms that are poorly known or little studied; these would include bacteria and archaea, protists, fungi, and invertebrates. Potential investigators with questions about which organisms are eligible for study in the PEET special competition should contact the office identified in the Contacts section.
Training. An internship or traineeship is a required element of PEET projects, in which minimally two student taxonomists are trained as experts on the organisms under study. Whatever the training traditions for that particular group of organisms, emphasis should be given to acquiring new skills and tools in the context of a broadly interdisciplinary training program. The anticipated five-year duration of projects is designed to ensure continuous support of project personnel and to enable completion of major taxonomic revisions and monographs. Increased participation of members of groups underrepresented in science is encouraged. Foreign students enrolled at a U.S. institution are also eligible for support. PEET awards are eligible for supplementation through the Research Experiences for Undergraduates program (NSF 04-584; http://www.nsf.gov/pubsys/ods/getpub.cfm?nsf04584 ) and Research Opportunity Awards programs.
Computer Infrastructure. All PEET projects are expected to incorporate computerization of various taxonomic tasks and products; specimen or culture databases, GIS mapping of ranges, artificial intelligence systems for taxon identification, computer-aided image analysis, or interactive identification keys are some examples. Specific activities or products will depend upon the state of the science for that particular taxonomic group; the suitability of proposed computerization activities will be evaluated through the merit review process. Valuable guidance and resources are available from the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS, available at http://www.itis.usda.gov/), a development of the multi-agency National Biological Information Infrastructure program managed by the U.S. Geological Survey. Training in computer activities for principal investigators and students, through workshops or other means, would constitute an eligible expense under PEET awards. Examples of web-accessible taxonomic products from prior PEET awards are available from the PEET website at http://www.nhm.ku.edu/peet.
The categories of proposers identified in the Grant Proposal Guide are eligible to submit proposals under this program announcement. Proposals under the PEET Special Competition will be accepted from U.S. academic institutions and non-academic not-for-profit organizations including botanical gardens, freshwater and marine institutes, and natural history museums that are eligible for awards from the National Science Foundation. Non-academic organizations with university-affiliated training programs are especially encouraged to apply. Where appropriate, collaborating scientists in foreign countries can be accommodated through consultant mechanisms administered by the submitting U.S. organization. If groups of investigators from multiple organizations with complementary strengths in taxonomy wish to collaborate, a single organization must be designated to submit the proposal, with off-campus colleagues integrated through consultant or subaward mechanisms where appropriate. Collaborative proposals will not be accepted.
Projects designed for five years (60 months) of effort are encouraged, with yearly budgets not to exceed $150,000 (direct plus indirect costs), or $750,000 total. NSF anticipates making 8-12 awards, mostly as continuing grants, in this PEET Special Biennial Competition; future competitions will likely adhere to similar outcomes. One-time renewals (submitted in the fourth or fifth year of the initial PEET award and for five additional years) may be considered but will compete with new proposals, and again are contingent upon availability of funds. Funding decisions will be made within six months of the relevant deadline date for submission.
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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
Project Description (maximum 15 pages, including Results from Prior NSF Support for PI and all co-PIs): The proposal should address the following five themes in the Project Description or where otherwise indicated.
Taxonomic Focus. All groups of organisms whether aquatic or terrestrial are eligible for study, but preference will be given to those designated as understudied or critical. If the target group of organisms is delimited geographically and not taxonomically, the Principal Investigator(s) should justify why the particular regional focus has been adopted; otherwise, faunistic or floristic projects (and their microbial and fungal counterparts) should be directed to the Biodiversity Surveys and Inventories Program. Projects may address large, natural genera or groups of phylogenetically related genera or families, and through collaboration with foreign colleagues may involve field work in any part of the world as well as laboratory and museum study. Standard components of taxonomic monography -- species description and diagnosis, geographic or host distribution, scientific nomenclature, identification keys, illustrations -- are expected in all projects. The proposal must include a digest of currently recognized taxonomic entities, a summary of known museum specimens or culture collections (number, quality, accessibility), and a review of pertinent literature. Proposals to study organisms that have a minimal museum (or collections) tradition should indicate this fact, discuss the form that useful collections or cultures would take as well as their impact on future taxonomic practice in the group, and present plans for implementation and curation of such collections, stocks, or cultures.
Methods of Study. Practices will vary according to the organisms proposed for study, but attention should focus on collection and sampling strategies, specimen preparation with computerization of collection data, acquisition of character data in formats retrievable by computer, and explicit protocols for evaluating and synthesizing data. Field collecting may be necessary for some groups; others may be well represented in existing collections. The care of vouchers and other critical collections should be described; specimen cases and other curatorial supplies constitute eligible expenses. Where taxon ranges extend beyond the borders of the U.S.A., attention should be given to collaboration with foreign scientists and students. Prospective investigators wishing to establish collaborations with foreign scientists should review the guidance and opportunities provided through the NSF Office of International Science and Engineering (http://www.nsf.gov/sbe/int/).
Training. A minimum of two collaborating experts-in-training is required for each project, whether undergraduate, graduate, or postgraduate in status. As students graduate or otherwise complete their traineeship during the five-year project, new trainees should be recruited to maintain a minimum of two for each project. Trainees should be full partners in the research, conceptually and operationally. If known at the time of application, a trainee's role and qualifications should be described in a Biographical Sketch, following GPG guidelines; if not known, then recruitment procedures should be described in the Project Description. The submitting institution's rules govern whether trainees (or other participants on the PEET project) can be designated as co-principal investigators on the Cover Sheet.
Conceptual Issues. In the context of a highly competitive merit review, proposals must make a case for substantial impact on progress in taxonomy. The proposal should discuss how improvement in the taxonomy of the targeted organisms relates to issues fundamental to systematics. Phylogeny, character evolution, biogeography, coevolution, or ecological interactions are examples of conceptual domains relevant to taxonomic revisionary and monographic work. For additional ideas, see the report "Systematics Agenda 2000: Charting the Biosphere" cited above; the 1991 report "The Sustainable Biosphere Initiative" from the Ecological Society of America; and the 1997 report "The Microbial World: Foundation of the Biosphere" from the American Academy of Microbiology.
Dissemination of Results. Publication of results in peer-reviewed outlets is expected for all projects. In addition, enhanced or supplemented media such as computer databases accessible on the web, image-based identification aids, or GIS-compatible specimen records are expected. As products come available, linkages are encouraged with the PEET website maintained currently at the University of Kansas Natural History Museum at http://www.nhm.ku.edu/peet.
Proposers are reminded to identify the program announcement/solicitation number (04-606) 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.
Cost sharing is not required in proposals submitted under this Program Solicitation.
Proposals must be submitted by the following date(s):
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
March 07, 2005
First Monday in March biennially thereafter
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: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm. For FastLane user support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail email@example.com. 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 Ad Hoc Review followed 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.
NSF is striving to be able to tell proposers whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. The time interval begins on the closing date of an announcement/solicitation, or the date of proposal receipt, whichever is later. 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 firstname.lastname@example.org.
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 Principal Investigator shall provide a summary, in the "Special Requirements" section of each annual and final project report, of all permits, licenses, or other necessary approvals associated with specimen collection. The information should include the names of all permits/licenses/necessary approvals, the granting authority, date acquired, duration, and the purpose of the permit/license/approval.
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:
James E. Rodman, Program Director, Directorate for Biological Sciences, Division of Environmental Biology, 635 N, telephone: (703) 292-8481, fax: (703) 292-9064, email: email@example.com
For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:
Elaine M. Washington, Program Technology Analyst, Directorate for Biological Sciences, Division of Environmental Biology, 635 N, telephone: (703) 292-8481, fax: (703) 292-9064, email: firstname.lastname@example.org
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.
Biological Research Collections (NSF 04-571)
Biological Databases and Informatics (NSF 02-058)
Assembling the Tree of Life (NSF 05-523)
Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grants in the Directorate for Biological Sciences (NSF 02-173)
Microbial Observatories (MO) and Microbial Interactions and Processes (MIP) (NSF 04-586)
The PEET Special Biennial Competition is designed to complement the Biodiversity Surveys and Inventories Program which focuses on the collection, description, and classification of broad taxonomic resources (for example, all vascular plants, all arthropods, all vertebrates) in a particular geographic area, with a commensurate reduction in detail accorded each species. The PEET activity also complements REVSYS, Revisionary Syntheses in Systematics; this is a subset of self-identified proposals submitted to the regular programs in the Cluster in response to the REVSYS Dear Colleague Letter (NSF 03-007), with emphasis on species-level taxonomic revision utilizing modern information technologies. REVSYS, PEET, and the regular programs in Systematic Biology and in Biodiversity Surveys and Inventories address in a coordinated manner the three major missions described in the "Systematics Agenda 2000" report cited above, in order to discover, understand, and manage systematic knowledge of biological diversity throughout the world.
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