WEBVTT

1
00:01:54.630 --> 00:02:08.270
Jeremy Wojdak: Good day, Everyone welcome to the division of environmental biology's virtual office hour for the month. Today's topic is the biodiversity on a changing planet. Solicitation?

2
00:02:08.310 --> 00:02:22.990
Jeremy Wojdak: Um as always, we will host your questions. Please use the question and answer function available to you in Zoom. You set yourself to anonymous and submit your questions. We'll get to them, and

3
00:02:23.000 --> 00:02:36.429
Jeremy Wojdak: a little bit later, and if you see a question that you share, you should see a thumbs up button, and if you hit that button, that question becomes more and more evident to us,

4
00:02:39.660 --> 00:02:40.760
It's

5
00:02:47.120 --> 00:03:01.819
Jeremy Wojdak: all right. So our topic today is ah biodiversity on a changing planet We're joined by a couple of of the program directors who helped manage the program. Matt, would you like to introduce yourself?

6
00:03:02.450 --> 00:03:10.499
Matt Carling (he/him): Sure, thanks, Jeremy, and thanks everyone for joining us today. As Jeremy said, I'm. A one of the program officers

7
00:03:10.510 --> 00:03:23.180
Matt Carling (he/him): that works with the biodiversity on a changing planet. I'm actually a rotating program officer. My home institution is the University of Wyoming, and this is my second year working with the Bocp program

8
00:03:24.500 --> 00:03:26.019
Jeremy Wojdak: and Colette,

9
00:03:26.740 --> 00:03:43.400
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Hi, I'm Colette, St. Mary i'm a permanent program director in Um Ios, and my research areas include evolution and behavior. Um, looking forward to feeling your questions. Thank you.

10
00:03:44.290 --> 00:03:56.199
Jeremy Wojdak: And that leaves me, Jeremy Wojek, a rotating program director in the division of environmental biology, namely, the population and community ecology cluster

11
00:03:56.290 --> 00:04:08.880
Jeremy Wojdak: our virtual office hour. This month is facilitated by Megan Lewis and Christina Washington and Bill Lawson work behind the scenes to make sure everything runs smoothly for us.

12
00:04:11.040 --> 00:04:29.380
Jeremy Wojdak: Just so you know what's coming up in the next couple of months. In February we're going to spend the hour talking about proposal budgeting What's allowed, What's not allowed, How the rules can help shape your project.

13
00:04:29.410 --> 00:04:46.380
Jeremy Wojdak: Um In March we'll talk about um all things policy. So not just budget rules, but any of the rules, the policies and procedures that you need to adhere to, to submit a proposal or administer a an award.

14
00:04:46.400 --> 00:05:05.270
Jeremy Wojdak: And so this is your chance to ask and get answers to all those nitty-gritty questions that can hold you up as you prepare a proposal in April we'll talk about research at primarily undergraduate institutions and opportunities at nsf for that research,

15
00:05:05.280 --> 00:05:06.570
Jeremy Wojdak: and in May

16
00:05:06.580 --> 00:05:19.469
Jeremy Wojdak: a perennial favorite topic, the career solicitation. So if those are of interest to you, you can be sure to register for those. So the second Monday of each month. At this time

17
00:05:22.190 --> 00:05:35.019
Jeremy Wojdak: you found your way here, so I suspect you may have found your way to the deed. Blog. There are topical posts there, but also a tab that

18
00:05:35.290 --> 00:05:38.849
Jeremy Wojdak: delineates the office hours that we're going to have.

19
00:05:38.890 --> 00:05:57.569
Jeremy Wojdak: And so you can see what's coming up next. And then critically, after we're done with the virtual office hours, we post what's called a recap, which is just some highlights of the information, some links, a curated list of questions and answers. And so,

20
00:05:57.680 --> 00:06:14.000
Jeremy Wojdak: if you do have to Miss a virtual office-hour topic, that's a way to sort of catch up, and those are posted from the last couple of years. And so there's lots and lots of information there that can help you as you're working on a proposal one

21
00:06:17.460 --> 00:06:22.850
Jeremy Wojdak: even more broadly. We encourage you to

22
00:06:23.100 --> 00:06:39.079
Jeremy Wojdak: keep track of the dynamic Nsf. Landscape by going to Nsf. Gov. You go to the right all the way to the bottom there is an orange banner sign up for updates. You can sign up, for for example, the the Bio director at Newsletter,

23
00:06:39.090 --> 00:06:44.690
Jeremy Wojdak: but there's lots of choices there, so you can get the kind of information that's relevant to you

24
00:06:44.700 --> 00:06:47.450
Jeremy Wojdak: on a schedule that makes sense for you.

25
00:06:48.040 --> 00:07:04.090
Jeremy Wojdak: Then, as always, the work that we do. Evaluating proposals depends on an active and committed community of reviewers. So if you're not already reviewing or serving on panels for Nsf, and you'd like to participate.

26
00:07:04.120 --> 00:07:15.480
Jeremy Wojdak: You can go to this link and describe your expertise and give us your contact information. You'll be added to the list of people We look to for expert advice,

27
00:07:15.650 --> 00:07:19.090
Jeremy Wojdak: great service to the community, but also a way to learn about

28
00:07:19.100 --> 00:07:23.470
Jeremy Wojdak: the proposal evaluation process.

29
00:07:26.930 --> 00:07:28.290
Jeremy Wojdak: All right.

30
00:07:28.300 --> 00:07:36.750
Jeremy Wojdak: With that introductory material covered, I think we'll hand it off to Matt to introduce us to Bocp.

31
00:07:37.060 --> 00:07:38.900
Matt Carling (he/him): Great. Thank you, Jeremy.

32
00:07:39.450 --> 00:07:55.659
Matt Carling (he/him): All right. So what we're going to try to do over the next few minutes is give you some general information about the Bocp program, and then allow everyone to

33
00:07:55.810 --> 00:07:59.170
Matt Carling (he/him): questions, and we'll do our best to answer those.

34
00:07:59.420 --> 00:08:00.710
Matt Carling (he/him): So

35
00:08:01.040 --> 00:08:13.540
Matt Carling (he/him): the biodiversity on a changing planet program has as its mean focus. It's the connection between functional biodiversity and biodiversity dynamics on our changing planet.

36
00:08:13.680 --> 00:08:22.190
Matt Carling (he/him): So some of you might be wondering, What do we mean by functional biodiversity? It's a pretty inclusive term, at least from our perspective

37
00:08:22.200 --> 00:08:32.309
Matt Carling (he/him): glues can refer to the numerous roles that traits, organisms, species, communities, and ecosystem processes, play in natural systems

38
00:08:32.809 --> 00:08:55.389
Matt Carling (he/him): can include the roles of emergent properties and processes across all levels of biological organization. And so we've tried to take a very sort of inclusive approach with respect to thinking about functional biodiversity. And of course, if you have any questions, you can always reach out to the biodiversity email address that we'll place at the end of this presentation.

39
00:08:55.750 --> 00:09:16.330
Matt Carling (he/him): So then, thinking about biodiversity dynamics that just refers to any shifts or changes in scope structured and interactions of biodiversity on on the planet. So again, trying to take a pretty inclusive approach, and this year a proposal, the proposal. Deadline for the Ocp is March the twenty ninth, two thousand and twenty three

40
00:09:16.670 --> 00:09:18.469
Matt Carling (he/him): next slide, please, Jeremy.

41
00:09:23.540 --> 00:09:42.829
Matt Carling (he/him): And so one of the goals of the biodiversity on the changing planet is to encourage integrative research. And so we've try to craft this solicitation to encourage and welcome all sorts of perspectives and and integrative approaches one.

42
00:09:43.300 --> 00:10:01.980
Matt Carling (he/him): We anticipate that successful biodiversity on changing planet. Proposals will test novel hypotheses about functional biodiversity and its connections to shifting biodiversity. Dynamics. These can consider climactic, geological paleontides, paleontological and biological processes.

43
00:10:03.390 --> 00:10:30.969
Matt Carling (he/him): We believe that integrative research is likely to combine multiple perspectives, and it's going to include organismal species, ecological evolutionary phylogenetic geological and or paleontologic paleontological approaches at various scales. And so you, Don't, have to take all of those perspectives, or all of those approaches, to have a successful vocp uh proposal. So again, we strongly encourage those that contain or combine multiple perspectives

44
00:10:32.150 --> 00:10:52.000
Matt Carling (he/him): and proposals that seek to improve predictive capability about functional biodiversity across both temporal and spatial scales. By considering the linkages between past, present, and future. Biological, primatic, and geological processes are also encouraged. So that's another goal of of this project

45
00:10:52.540 --> 00:10:54.350
Matt Carling (he/him): Next slide, please, Jeremy.

46
00:10:56.580 --> 00:11:26.569
Matt Carling (he/him): And then, you know, just to give you a little bit of a flavor of the Nsf. Programs and divisions that are involved in the diversity of the changing planet program within the biological sciences. Directorate Um, the division of environmental biology as a division of integrated organisms systems and also the division of biological infrastructure are all part of the Ocp. Um. But then we also have really important partners in the Geo sciences

47
00:11:26.580 --> 00:11:35.500
Matt Carling (he/him): to it, including folks from the division of Earth sciences, the office of polar programs, as well as the division of ocean sciences.

48
00:11:35.840 --> 00:11:51.609
Matt Carling (he/him): And then we have three formal international agreements, one with the National Natural Science Foundation of China, one with Fukushesi in Sao, Paulo, Brazil, and then one with the National Research

49
00:11:51.620 --> 00:12:05.909
Matt Carling (he/him): Foundation in South Africa, and it's important to know that while there are these three formal international agreements that does not preclude other sorts of international research projects,

50
00:12:06.440 --> 00:12:12.760
Matt Carling (he/him): if we can talk more about that later. If folks have questions about those partnerships

51
00:12:12.970 --> 00:12:19.029
Matt Carling (he/him): all right, next slide. And I think then Colette is gonna take over for a for a bit.

52
00:12:20.310 --> 00:12:21.390
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Okay,

53
00:12:21.400 --> 00:12:40.589
Colette St. Mary (she/her): I think it's worthwhile saying um in light of the the set of participants, that we are also very excited to see uh projects that use new technology and team science approaches to tackle these complex problems.

54
00:12:40.600 --> 00:12:43.290
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Um, in particular,

55
00:12:44.900 --> 00:12:57.219
Colette St. Mary (she/her): if the project involves methods that characterize biodiversity and its functions in a rapidly changing world.

56
00:12:58.110 --> 00:13:17.469
Colette St. Mary (she/her): These might be new tools. These might be adaptations of existing tools. We're also excited about proposals that build on existing data. Ah! Samples or assignable assets from um Nsf. Supported activities such as neon.

57
00:13:20.390 --> 00:13:25.060
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Although we've been talking extensively about um

58
00:13:25.290 --> 00:13:28.390
Colette St. Mary (she/her): biodiversity itself.

59
00:13:28.670 --> 00:13:38.270
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Keep in mind that these projects can also aid in the development of infrastructure, or the enhancement of existing infrastructure.

60
00:13:39.260 --> 00:13:58.299
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Furthermore, projects that engage the polar and marine sciences may want to also take advantage of their Ah! Support. That, in other words, the either ship time, support, or

61
00:13:58.940 --> 00:14:01.110
Colette St. Mary (she/her): uh logistical support.

62
00:14:01.220 --> 00:14:08.979
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Your project is of that ilk. Please do reach out to a program officer

63
00:14:09.010 --> 00:14:21.240
Colette St. Mary (she/her): associated with the Ocp. Who has a connection to those programs, so that you can discuss those needs and how to proceed with them in your proposal

64
00:14:21.470 --> 00:14:23.220
Colette St. Mary (she/her): next slide, please.

65
00:14:27.670 --> 00:14:31.520
Colette St. Mary (she/her): So this solicitation encompasses

66
00:14:32.150 --> 00:14:35.170
Colette St. Mary (she/her): a wide diversity of types of proposals.

67
00:14:35.410 --> 00:14:39.180
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Uh these proposals might be uh

68
00:14:39.280 --> 00:14:41.710
Colette St. Mary (she/her): us-only proposals

69
00:14:42.150 --> 00:14:57.000
Colette St. Mary (she/her): funded entirely by the nsf um as you heard from Matt. We do expect even those proposals likely involve a fairly extensive collaboration amongst scientists with different expertise.

70
00:14:58.110 --> 00:15:15.539
Colette St. Mary (she/her): They might also involve international collaborations with collaborators who are or are not affiliated with those international partners that we've named.

71
00:15:15.550 --> 00:15:28.049
Colette St. Mary (she/her): And if you're wondering about how to include those international collaborations, that's another reason to reach out to us and discuss how that is best done.

72
00:15:29.530 --> 00:15:36.489
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Finally, with respect to collaboration, we have engaged partners in the

73
00:15:36.500 --> 00:15:53.589
Colette St. Mary (she/her): China South Africa and Brazil to co-font activities between our scientific communities. So if that is the type of project that you envision, be aware that you will be submitting the project

74
00:15:53.600 --> 00:15:55.780
Colette St. Mary (she/her): both in

75
00:15:55.950 --> 00:16:01.340
Colette St. Mary (she/her): the Us. To the Nsf. But also to our partner in the respective country. The

76
00:16:02.140 --> 00:16:15.799
Colette St. Mary (she/her): furthermore, we are supporting two different tracts of proposals. With this solicitation a design track. These are smaller proposals

77
00:16:16.140 --> 00:16:34.780
Colette St. Mary (she/her): over operating over three years with a maximum budget of five hundred thousand, and they're really intended for teams to build collaboration and bring about a proposal at the next scale.

78
00:16:34.790 --> 00:16:49.359
Colette St. Mary (she/her): They are intended to ah develop the creative research and technical approaches that the team will engage in to address key questions in Um biodiversity sciences

79
00:16:50.170 --> 00:16:54.759
Colette St. Mary (she/her): in general these will be brought together

80
00:16:54.920 --> 00:16:57.210
Colette St. Mary (she/her): by teams. The Hef.

81
00:16:57.570 --> 00:17:01.190
Colette St. Mary (she/her): No, or very little prior collaboration.

82
00:17:03.090 --> 00:17:22.219
Colette St. Mary (she/her): The second track is the implementation track um, And these projects are larger scale. Obviously, um. These teams are ready to implement a a large scale and long-term longer-term project

83
00:17:22.230 --> 00:17:29.990
Colette St. Mary (she/her): with substantial research efforts that advance our understanding of functional biodiversity on a changing planet.

84
00:17:30.000 --> 00:17:39.100
Colette St. Mary (she/her): They have a maximum duration of five years, and up to two point five million in budget over that timeframe.

85
00:17:39.260 --> 00:17:41.099
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Next slide, please.

86
00:17:48.740 --> 00:17:50.780
Colette St. Mary (she/her): There are two

87
00:17:51.910 --> 00:18:01.609
Colette St. Mary (she/her): required documents that you must submit in the supplemental documents for each of these proposal types.

88
00:18:01.870 --> 00:18:04.169
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Ah, the first

89
00:18:05.350 --> 00:18:22.840
Colette St. Mary (she/her): you so required only if you're proposing to conduct field work that is, off-campus or off-site research, um, perhaps on vessels or or an aircraft or at fields

90
00:18:22.870 --> 00:18:28.839
Colette St. Mary (she/her): stations in particular. If your project involves

91
00:18:29.070 --> 00:18:44.719
Colette St. Mary (she/her): this off-site research, you'll be required to submit a plan, for safe and inclusive working environment. And these plans are a maximum two pages,

92
00:18:44.730 --> 00:18:58.089
Colette St. Mary (she/her): and the solicitation itself is pretty specific about what should be included in that plan and overall. Of course, the goal of these plans is to ensure

93
00:18:58.100 --> 00:19:07.390
Colette St. Mary (she/her): a safe and inclusive work environment for all participants in off-campus or off-site research.

94
00:19:08.630 --> 00:19:24.990
Colette St. Mary (she/her): This is, in addition to the requirement for certification required of all proposers submitting to the and Msf. Um, in which case there is off-campus or off-site research

95
00:19:25.000 --> 00:19:37.450
Colette St. Mary (she/her): that certification comprises a tick box on the cover page And what we're asking for is a two-page document, which is a specific plan,

96
00:19:37.910 --> 00:19:41.309
Colette St. Mary (she/her): a proposed to the research being proposed

97
00:19:42.130 --> 00:19:51.369
Colette St. Mary (she/her): also required, and in this case required of all projects is a project management plan also to pages the

98
00:19:52.050 --> 00:19:55.480
Colette St. Mary (she/her): This project management plan

99
00:19:56.000 --> 00:19:59.260
Colette St. Mary (she/her): is, uh should include

100
00:19:59.790 --> 00:20:05.579
Colette St. Mary (she/her): the uh description of the the research team,

101
00:20:05.910 --> 00:20:09.450
Colette St. Mary (she/her): and in effect, that includes

102
00:20:09.800 --> 00:20:25.289
Colette St. Mary (she/her): the names, the roles, and intellectual contributions of all the members of the team, Pis Kopii, senior personnel.

103
00:20:26.260 --> 00:20:38.199
Colette St. Mary (she/her): It should specify their specific expertise relevant to the project's scope, and it should describe the specific tasks. Each member of the research team is expected to oversee

104
00:20:38.320 --> 00:20:39.540
Colette St. Mary (she/her): um.

105
00:20:41.150 --> 00:20:57.269
Colette St. Mary (she/her): We expect to see sort of significant experience in the the team and expertise. Um. And so the plan also needs to articulate how individuals in the team will work together

106
00:20:57.530 --> 00:21:01.560
Colette St. Mary (she/her): to achieve the goals of the project.

107
00:21:01.730 --> 00:21:08.690
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Thus should also include a project timeline that specifies milestones for completion.

108
00:21:08.800 --> 00:21:11.840
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Completion of project deliverables

109
00:21:14.710 --> 00:21:16.360
Colette St. Mary (she/her): next slide, please.

110
00:21:20.830 --> 00:21:26.859
Colette St. Mary (she/her): These projects, like all projects at the Msf. Are subject to.

111
00:21:26.950 --> 00:21:28.510
Colette St. Mary (she/her): That's that's

112
00:21:28.820 --> 00:21:34.789
Colette St. Mary (she/her): to review criteria. Um! My cat is joining us

113
00:21:34.800 --> 00:21:36.480
Colette St. Mary (she/her): intellectual merit.

114
00:21:36.490 --> 00:21:54.190
Colette St. Mary (she/her): What is the potential of the project to advance knowledge and broader impacts. What is the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific desired societal outcomes? Clearly these projects are all

115
00:21:54.200 --> 00:21:56.240
Colette St. Mary (she/her): relevant to

116
00:21:57.800 --> 00:22:12.060
Colette St. Mary (she/her): to concern sources of today's society. Um, but more specifically under the broader impacts criterion. We will be looking at these plans for safe and inclusive Ah, field work

117
00:22:12.070 --> 00:22:18.519
Colette St. Mary (she/her): and asking whether those plans do indeed promise to protect

118
00:22:19.640 --> 00:22:22.530
Colette St. Mary (she/her): inclusive and and

119
00:22:22.780 --> 00:22:26.379
Colette St. Mary (she/her): effective team work, work, environment

120
00:22:26.830 --> 00:22:35.329
Colette St. Mary (she/her): also evaluated under that criteria, as all of you, I know are familiar is the Post-doc mentorship plan.

121
00:22:35.690 --> 00:22:38.969
Colette St. Mary (she/her): And now I think I'm. Turning it back to Math.

122
00:22:40.830 --> 00:22:42.690
Matt Carling (he/him): Yep, Thanks, Colette.

123
00:22:42.700 --> 00:22:57.699
Matt Carling (he/him): So, in addition to the two general or standard parent review criteria that Colette just mentioned. There are three solicitation-specific review criteria for the Bocp program

124
00:22:58.000 --> 00:23:16.610
Matt Carling (he/him): before I forget I just want to mention that if you've been looking at the new live solicitation that was posted about a week or so ago, you may have noticed that there are five listed solicitation-specific review criteria.

125
00:23:16.620 --> 00:23:24.160
Matt Carling (he/him): That is a mistake. Those are a hold over from last year we are in the process of changing that

126
00:23:24.170 --> 00:23:38.310
Matt Carling (he/him): to reflect the three solicitation-specific review criteria that are listed here. So again, these are the three for this year. The solicitation online will be updated as soon as we can.

127
00:23:39.280 --> 00:23:55.440
Matt Carling (he/him): So those those three solicitation-specific review criteria that all reviewers are asked to think about and evaluate include. How does the proposal describe a collaborative, comprehensive and integrative approach to significantly advancing our understanding of biodiversity on a changing planet

128
00:23:55.450 --> 00:23:56.730
Matt Carling (he/him): basically like

129
00:23:56.760 --> 00:24:02.939
Matt Carling (he/him): because the proposal do a good job of articulating why it's appropriate for this call.

130
00:24:03.430 --> 00:24:31.500
Matt Carling (he/him): And then, second, to what degree does the project management plan and gender confidence that the research team will effectively coordinate activities and achieve the goals of the proposed project. But we really want you to to think deeply and carefully about the project management plan and use that as an opportunity to articulate to the program, and also to the reviewers. How you how you're putting together this team, how you're going to effectively carry out those proposed activities.

131
00:24:32.100 --> 00:24:47.149
Matt Carling (he/him): And then, if you are submitting a proposal under a sort of umbrella of one of those specific international partnerships. So for the Us. China, Us. Sao, Paulo, or Us South Africa

132
00:24:47.160 --> 00:24:57.940
Matt Carling (he/him): multilateral collaborative research projects. To what extent do they demonstrate substantial collaboration between the Us. And China, Us. South Hollo and or the Us. And South African partners,

133
00:24:58.090 --> 00:25:07.829
Matt Carling (he/him): so the most comparative proposals will be those in which the international collaboration brings substantial additional value to the project. And so

134
00:25:07.840 --> 00:25:26.309
Matt Carling (he/him): the goal, I mean the goal in all collaborative endeavors, but particularly here is to encourage those in depth for endeavors in which the partners are are true partners; that that the product is made substantially better by the inclusion, by the inclusion of the folks in those collaborative efforts.

135
00:25:27.580 --> 00:25:29.209
Matt Carling (he/him): I think that's

136
00:25:30.190 --> 00:25:44.090
Matt Carling (he/him): and for the solicitation, specific review criteria. I believe Jeremy is going to give us a couple of overview or some overview information, and then we'll get to questions. So Jeremy,

137
00:25:44.100 --> 00:25:54.070
Jeremy Wojdak: Yeah, thanks, Matt. Just to give you a moment or two to form your questions and submit them. We can highlight the

138
00:25:54.480 --> 00:26:14.410
Jeremy Wojdak: upcoming, funding opportunities. First and foremost, a reminder that most solicitations in biology. The core programs no longer have deadlines or submission limits, but there are some programs with with deadlines.

139
00:26:14.420 --> 00:26:28.950
Jeremy Wojdak: So, for example, ethical and responsible research has a target date in a week and a half. The mid-career advancement program has a target window between February and March.

140
00:26:28.960 --> 00:26:38.140
Jeremy Wojdak: As you heard earlier, our our program of the day biodiversity on a changing planet has a deadline for proposal submission of March, twenty ninth

141
00:26:38.480 --> 00:26:46.310
Jeremy Wojdak: using rules of life to address societal challenges as a deadline in mid-february.

142
00:26:46.380 --> 00:26:49.890
Jeremy Wojdak: So this is just a a reminder to

143
00:26:50.430 --> 00:26:51.770
Jeremy Wojdak: ah

144
00:26:51.780 --> 00:26:58.960
Jeremy Wojdak: maintain your awareness of what opportunities are out, there but also which ones have open submission windows, and which ones have deadlines.

145
00:27:00.720 --> 00:27:13.200
Jeremy Wojdak: There are a couple of Dcl's that may be of interest to you. There's one on catalyzing innovation in wild plan fire, science.

146
00:27:13.530 --> 00:27:27.150
Jeremy Wojdak: So if you are studying Wildfire, you should certainly check that out for people with current awards. There are career-life balance supplements. That may be an opportunity. We're thinking about

147
00:27:27.260 --> 00:27:34.049
Jeremy Wojdak: again, as always, Nsf. Is continually recruiting

148
00:27:34.290 --> 00:27:52.390
Jeremy Wojdak: members of the community to come to Nsf. And serve as rotating program directors. And so if that's of particular interest to you. There's a link there, but you can also reach out to your program directors and initiate that conversation

149
00:27:52.720 --> 00:27:57.300
Jeremy Wojdak: right? So that being said, we can move to

150
00:27:57.930 --> 00:28:00.029
Jeremy Wojdak: question and answer time.

151
00:28:00.950 --> 00:28:17.020
Jeremy Wojdak: Um, as always, general questions are fantastic for this format. If you have something that's more specifically about your project ideas that's best left to a private conversation with a program director.

152
00:28:17.030 --> 00:28:21.119
Jeremy Wojdak: You can reach out to biodiversity at Nsf. Gov:

153
00:28:21.680 --> 00:28:23.280
Jeremy Wojdak: All right.

154
00:28:23.820 --> 00:28:34.899
Jeremy Wojdak: So a very common question coming up. Is, Whether or not international agreements or collaborations are a vital component of competitive

155
00:28:35.160 --> 00:28:40.840
Jeremy Wojdak: implementation track projects, are solely us-based projects

156
00:28:41.000 --> 00:28:45.180
Jeremy Wojdak: at any kind of disadvantage, What do you think, Matt?

157
00:28:46.670 --> 00:28:50.920
Matt Carling (he/him): The short answer is, No, um. I mean

158
00:28:52.930 --> 00:29:07.220
Matt Carling (he/him): because of these Internet? These formal international ah partnerships. We obviously want proposals from folks that are taking an advantage of those international partnerships. But there's but but proposals that

159
00:29:07.230 --> 00:29:17.589
Matt Carling (he/him): are focused on questions or areas that aren't amenable to those types of formal international collaborations are at no disadvantage.

160
00:29:17.600 --> 00:29:18.459
The last

161
00:29:24.010 --> 00:29:25.030
Jeremy Wojdak: All right.

162
00:29:25.080 --> 00:29:29.170
Jeremy Wojdak: Oh, excellent question.

163
00:29:29.380 --> 00:29:30.440
Jeremy Wojdak: Whoo

164
00:29:32.880 --> 00:29:39.409
Jeremy Wojdak: would proposals that include conservation or the study of human impacts be better aligned

165
00:29:39.870 --> 00:29:46.930
Jeremy Wojdak: the B Ocp. Solicitation. Then a normal, regular core. Nsf program.

166
00:29:47.340 --> 00:29:49.649
Jeremy Wojdak: Colette, What do you think

167
00:29:52.370 --> 00:29:59.280
Colette St. Mary (she/her): for this solicitation? You have to appreciate that the call is extremely wide and diverse.

168
00:29:59.490 --> 00:30:06.339
Colette St. Mary (she/her): You know there are so many different ways in which people might attempt to address

169
00:30:06.640 --> 00:30:12.519
Colette St. Mary (she/her): this call. I don't think that there's any particular

170
00:30:12.950 --> 00:30:17.330
Colette St. Mary (she/her): requirement or strength or weakness or focus

171
00:30:17.800 --> 00:30:20.890
Colette St. Mary (she/her): that will be more advantageous,

172
00:30:20.900 --> 00:30:23.770
Colette St. Mary (she/her): clearly integrative projects

173
00:30:23.970 --> 00:30:36.270
Colette St. Mary (she/her): required. But beyond that I don't think that there is a topic, area or particular focus of complementary parts that we're

174
00:30:39.800 --> 00:30:40.980
Colette St. Mary (she/her): now.

175
00:30:41.280 --> 00:30:42.640
Jeremy Wojdak: I can't see it

176
00:30:45.210 --> 00:30:50.780
Jeremy Wojdak: all right. Oh, excellent question

177
00:30:51.390 --> 00:30:59.900
Jeremy Wojdak: for the design track. How will you evaluate the collaborative, comprehensive, integrative criterion.

178
00:31:00.180 --> 00:31:03.600
Jeremy Wojdak: If the team has no prior collaboration.

179
00:31:05.230 --> 00:31:08.040
Matt Carling (he/him): Yeah, that's a great question. Um,

180
00:31:08.450 --> 00:31:10.230
Matt Carling (he/him): I would say that

181
00:31:10.270 --> 00:31:11.450
Matt Carling (he/him): the

182
00:31:11.850 --> 00:31:22.809
Matt Carling (he/him): the onus is really on the team of pis to articulate what they are doing to build that new collaborative team. And

183
00:31:22.870 --> 00:31:34.059
Matt Carling (he/him): there's sort of multiple approaches or multiple ways that you can do that one. Remember that all proposals are required to include

184
00:31:34.070 --> 00:31:43.069
Matt Carling (he/him): project management plan, so you can certainly use those two pages in that supplemental document to

185
00:31:43.080 --> 00:31:55.149
Matt Carling (he/him): articulate how you're going to build this new team, and what each of the team members is bringing, and what you hope to achieve by bringing these folks together.

186
00:31:55.360 --> 00:31:57.939
Matt Carling (he/him): But there is also, you know,

187
00:31:59.080 --> 00:32:14.010
Matt Carling (he/him): I would also encourage folks to think strongly about spending some of the project description as well, particularly for those design proposals to make sure you can convince the reviewers that

188
00:32:15.800 --> 00:32:28.190
Matt Carling (he/him): the reasons behind creating this new team the reasons that you're interested in putting together these new partnerships really are clear, and and that the reviewers can really understand

189
00:32:28.250 --> 00:32:35.599
Matt Carling (he/him): sort of benefits that will come from the from the design or from the building of this new new team.

190
00:32:39.210 --> 00:32:50.039
Jeremy Wojdak: All right. Thanks, Matt. Sort of a follow up question. What criteria can be used to determine design versus implementation teams in terms of how well developed the team is,

191
00:32:50.390 --> 00:32:53.789
Jeremy Wojdak: and to extend the question, maybe the scope of the project.

192
00:32:53.930 --> 00:32:55.619
Jeremy Wojdak: Colette, what do you think?

193
00:32:57.060 --> 00:33:03.289
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Yeah, Remember you, the pi are applying to one or the other.

194
00:33:03.460 --> 00:33:19.390
Colette St. Mary (she/her): And so I think the onus is on you to decide if you are ready with the project and your collaborators to pursue an implementation award,

195
00:33:19.400 --> 00:33:34.650
Colette St. Mary (she/her): and if you're not ready to do that, if you do not think you can ah effectively make those plans, then it seems that a design proposal makes more sense for you. Perhaps this is related to

196
00:33:34.860 --> 00:33:42.949
Colette St. Mary (she/her): how how much collaboration is no collaboration. Um! And certainly,

197
00:33:43.370 --> 00:33:46.739
Colette St. Mary (she/her): if you are a a team

198
00:33:47.070 --> 00:33:48.759
Colette St. Mary (she/her): at the moment

199
00:33:48.770 --> 00:33:52.120
Colette St. Mary (she/her): who has collaborated some together,

200
00:33:52.130 --> 00:34:08.559
Colette St. Mary (she/her): and yet are not ready for the next stage. You might consider whether you want to engage some new and different components to the team to enhance your ability to

201
00:34:08.659 --> 00:34:12.690
Colette St. Mary (she/her): pursue an implementation proposal in the future.

202
00:34:12.900 --> 00:34:18.339
Colette St. Mary (she/her): I'm not sure if that's really quite an answer, but something to think about.

203
00:34:23.760 --> 00:34:38.090
Jeremy Wojdak: Okay, Um. Another question is whether a team can include Federal employees, for example, from the Forest Service. Is it possible to include funding towards their part of the project

204
00:34:38.100 --> 00:34:39.089
Jeremy Wojdak: that

205
00:34:39.100 --> 00:34:40.089
what do you think

206
00:34:40.100 --> 00:34:55.279
Matt Carling (he/him): it's? Another great question. So the first part about whether or not it's possible to include Federal scientists or Federal employees? Of course that is certainly an option. The second part about funding towards their involvement

207
00:34:55.909 --> 00:35:23.610
Matt Carling (he/him): that's can get a little bit more nuanced, and I would suggest, you know there are some. There are some situations in which it might work in other situations in which it might be a little bit more challenging. And so that's a question that it might be worth reaching out to the team at biodiversity. That Nsf. Becka, where you can explain a little bit more about your particular situation, and we can provide you a little bit more specific advice about um how to approach that situation, because there is,

208
00:35:23.820 --> 00:35:30.189
Matt Carling (he/him): there are some additional restrictions, and there may be sort of some nuance and context That's that's important there.

209
00:35:30.200 --> 00:35:37.499
Matt Carling (he/him): But of course they can be involved. The trickier issue comes to the funding part of that question.

210
00:35:39.820 --> 00:35:41.179
Jeremy Wojdak: All right, Thanks, Matt.

211
00:35:42.600 --> 00:35:57.199
Jeremy Wojdak: Another question about international collaborations. If the collaboration involves international partners beyond the three named that have formal

212
00:35:57.910 --> 00:36:09.700
Jeremy Wojdak: memorandum, Brazil, China and South Africa. Are there any other budget restrictions for those projects or things to consider for those international projects? Matt:

213
00:36:09.850 --> 00:36:13.119
Matt Carling (he/him): Another great question. So um

214
00:36:14.490 --> 00:36:15.509
Matt Carling (he/him): is

215
00:36:15.520 --> 00:36:39.240
Matt Carling (he/him): it depends. So if you want to, let's just say you have a project idea that involves you doing field work in Mexico. It's pretty straightforward and pretty easy to include funding for that field work for us-based scientists, us-based researchers to go to Mexico to do that field work.

216
00:36:39.670 --> 00:36:51.020
Matt Carling (he/him): What can be a little bit trickier. And again, if this is your situation, and I encourage you to to reach out to biodiversity at Nsf. Gov. And explain your specific situation.

217
00:36:51.890 --> 00:37:11.790
Matt Carling (he/him): If there be. There are more restrictions on sending money directly to foreign entities or foreign organizations. And so, if you wanted to pay a you know a a consultant in a foreign country for their involvement,

218
00:37:12.840 --> 00:37:21.929
Matt Carling (he/him): that there's some more information that may be required, some more documentation, some more explanation. So again, if you

219
00:37:21.970 --> 00:37:41.209
Matt Carling (he/him): we are planning on submitting proposals that have international components. And you're wondering about what sort of funding restrictions there may be. I encourage you to to reach out, And so we can give you the the best possible information about your specific situation.

220
00:37:41.330 --> 00:37:46.790
Matt Carling (he/him): Now, I mean Collette or Jeremy feel free to jump in to these at any point.

221
00:37:49.090 --> 00:37:52.469
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Yeah, there is another similar question, indeed. And

222
00:37:52.590 --> 00:37:54.290
Colette St. Mary (she/her): I do you think that

223
00:37:54.380 --> 00:37:59.659
Colette St. Mary (she/her): that's point which is to actually reach out to us and discuss with us

224
00:37:59.740 --> 00:38:03.249
Colette St. Mary (she/her): how you would go about doing it. What you

225
00:38:04.690 --> 00:38:09.390
Colette St. Mary (she/her): what budget items might be of concern versus not

226
00:38:09.400 --> 00:38:14.550
Colette St. Mary (she/her): that's That's just the only way to go. Do reach out the sooner the better.

227
00:38:18.660 --> 00:38:20.189
Jeremy Wojdak: All right.

228
00:38:20.700 --> 00:38:33.389
Jeremy Wojdak: Um: yeah. I've been waiting to to ask this question. Can you describe the overlap between and differences between biodiversity on a changing planet and organisable response.

229
00:38:34.760 --> 00:38:37.010
A change.

230
00:38:37.760 --> 00:38:41.019
Matt Carling (he/him): Oh, i'll take it stab at that.

231
00:38:41.110 --> 00:38:45.300
Jeremy Wojdak: But i'm expecting some input from Collette as well.

232
00:38:45.730 --> 00:38:55.890
Matt Carling (he/him): So obviously there are some similarities in the two programs, you know. I don't think we would get that question if they're completely non overlapping,

233
00:38:56.100 --> 00:39:00.349
Matt Carling (he/him): but I do think there are some differences as well.

234
00:39:01.110 --> 00:39:25.229
Matt Carling (he/him): First of all, it may seem a subtle difference, but organism, in response to climate change is really focused on climate change. Bsp, I would say, takes a little bit of a broader view to what changing planet means, and so that, I think is one difference. Another difference is,

235
00:39:26.000 --> 00:39:33.609
Matt Carling (he/him): I think, our Cc. Organismal response to to climate change is

236
00:39:33.740 --> 00:39:53.729
Matt Carling (he/him): a little bit more amenable or a little bit more encouraging proposals that are really strongly interested in sort of organismal responses from an adaptive framework, or from an adaptive standpoint which isn't necessary in the the Ocp framework. Certainly,

237
00:39:53.740 --> 00:40:12.159
Matt Carling (he/him): if you think about functional biodiversity, and and you think that to you that includes you know how organisms are adapting. Then that would be appropriate to to submit to be Ocp. Um. But I think there there is a little bit of a different focus on sort of our our

238
00:40:12.830 --> 00:40:25.989
Matt Carling (he/him): broadly inclusive definitions of of functional diversity and sort of biodiversity dynamics that are that are a little bit different from of our Cc.

239
00:40:26.000 --> 00:40:40.299
Matt Carling (he/him): But again i'll be curious. I'd love to hear Colett's perspectives, and then you know whoever asked that question you can. I certainly encourage you to reach out to the ah orcc folks if you're trying to find the best place for your for your work.

240
00:40:42.020 --> 00:40:46.360
Colette St. Mary (she/her): So I would add that I think

241
00:40:47.480 --> 00:40:50.939
Colette St. Mary (she/her): the Orc program is substantially

242
00:40:52.430 --> 00:41:00.399
Colette St. Mary (she/her): more narrowly focused than this one. It is primarily interested in

243
00:41:00.680 --> 00:41:02.750
Colette St. Mary (she/her): mechanisms,

244
00:41:02.980 --> 00:41:14.050
Colette St. Mary (she/her): the organism, a level that play out and and have implications at the population, community, or landscape level,

245
00:41:14.060 --> 00:41:22.070
Colette St. Mary (she/her): and in particular, taking those mechanisms to their next logical conclusion. At other levels.

246
00:41:22.490 --> 00:41:25.250
Colette St. Mary (she/her): It's further more interested in

247
00:41:25.980 --> 00:41:35.889
Colette St. Mary (she/her): what that might tell us about how we might mediate uh climate change induced challenges that organisms are facing.

248
00:41:36.300 --> 00:41:38.089
Colette St. Mary (she/her): I think it's

249
00:41:38.100 --> 00:41:55.120
Colette St. Mary (she/her): quite a bit more narrow in terms of its timescale, and especially in not having the sort of broad evolutionary context and historical context that this felicitation Ah engages

250
00:41:55.360 --> 00:42:07.420
Colette St. Mary (she/her): in addition to what Matt articulated about the broader view of ah biodiversity functional biodiversity that this this program is focused on.

251
00:42:11.100 --> 00:42:12.749
Jeremy Wojdak: Thanks to you both.

252
00:42:13.240 --> 00:42:15.790
Jeremy Wojdak: Um.

253
00:42:15.800 --> 00:42:16.950
Jeremy Wojdak: Let's see,

254
00:42:18.030 --> 00:42:27.069
Jeremy Wojdak: since be Ocp is a broad program, Is it likely to be more competitive than a regular or core

255
00:42:27.200 --> 00:42:29.959
Jeremy Wojdak: bio-solicitation?

256
00:42:32.620 --> 00:42:33.990
Colette St. Mary (she/her): It's just different.

257
00:42:34.000 --> 00:42:42.300
Colette St. Mary (she/her): I mean, you call that? Yeah, we don't know, because we don't know what what will be the interest in the solicitation.

258
00:42:42.600 --> 00:42:50.140
Colette St. Mary (she/her): It all comes down to. How many applications are received.

259
00:42:50.180 --> 00:42:58.549
Colette St. Mary (she/her): My advice to you in general is to always submit to the program that has the best fit

260
00:42:58.880 --> 00:43:03.089
Colette St. Mary (she/her): to the project. You want to propose.

261
00:43:03.100 --> 00:43:08.560
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Um rather than trying to, you know. Bend your project to fit

262
00:43:09.240 --> 00:43:16.519
Colette St. Mary (she/her): look for the program, or corp or core opportunity that fits the project. You want to do

263
00:43:19.150 --> 00:43:21.540
Jeremy Wojdak: always good advice

264
00:43:21.750 --> 00:43:23.819
Jeremy Wojdak: absolutely.

265
00:43:23.830 --> 00:43:43.629
Jeremy Wojdak: Um. We have a question because there's this supplementary project management plan. Our panels. Reviewers still going to expect direct information about things like project timelines, and how the team is going to work together in this project description, Or can

266
00:43:43.790 --> 00:43:49.129
Jeremy Wojdak: those be safely placed in that supplementary document

267
00:43:49.380 --> 00:43:50.460
Jeremy Wojdak: go out?

268
00:43:51.640 --> 00:43:54.889
Colette St. Mary (she/her): The solicitation, specific

269
00:43:54.900 --> 00:44:14.479
Colette St. Mary (she/her): review criteria really charged reviewers to look at those documents alongside the project description, so I do not think it makes sense to be duplicating that information across both.

270
00:44:14.490 --> 00:44:24.770
Colette St. Mary (she/her): On the other hand, you might call their attention to the fact that that material is in that supplement, so that they are reminded,

271
00:44:24.970 --> 00:44:32.870
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Look for it there, and and not have the reaction of I don't see this where i'm expecting it, which you know

272
00:44:33.050 --> 00:44:35.729
Colette St. Mary (she/her): is only just annoying

273
00:44:38.710 --> 00:44:40.990
Jeremy Wojdak: excellent advice.

274
00:44:41.000 --> 00:44:57.160
Jeremy Wojdak: Um! A couple of more questions about international collaborations from a budgeting perspective. How can genuine collaborations with international partners, particularly from

275
00:44:57.170 --> 00:45:09.220
Jeremy Wojdak: countries other than uh those with formal partnerships um be supported. And I think the question is getting at what what are allowable costs and unallowable costs in those circumstances.

276
00:45:10.140 --> 00:45:12.339
Matt Carling (he/him): Yeah, again, um

277
00:45:14.120 --> 00:45:31.329
Matt Carling (he/him): funding for us-based scientists and researchers to do work internationally is typically very straightforward, not really to any things to think about or worry about or be concerned about.

278
00:45:31.340 --> 00:45:49.820
Matt Carling (he/him): It does get harder. As I said before, it gets a little bit more challenging. If the hope or the goal is to send Nsf. Money directly to entities or individuals. Ah! Outside of the United States that's not to say it can't be done but that it's a

279
00:45:49.950 --> 00:46:09.490
Matt Carling (he/him): you know it's sort of a little bit more involved. And again, I would encourage you to please reach out to the biodiversity at Msf. Dot dot email address with details about your specific situation, and we can give you for the best possible information and tell you the the best way to proceed.

280
00:46:11.510 --> 00:46:14.319
Colette St. Mary (she/her): I'd like to add that this was um

281
00:46:14.380 --> 00:46:16.849
Colette St. Mary (she/her): a of a recent.

282
00:46:17.790 --> 00:46:24.500
Colette St. Mary (she/her): Maybe I can't put it in the chat. I'll put it in the chat, and somebody else will try and put it.

283
00:46:25.550 --> 00:46:31.030
Colette St. Mary (she/her): This was the topic of a recent ios blog

284
00:46:31.430 --> 00:46:49.729
Colette St. Mary (she/her): in, and so you can go and see a little bit more about this overall issue, which, of course, is relevant to any solicitation where you're interested in in supporting an international collaboration. So it talks a little bit about um

285
00:46:50.830 --> 00:46:54.729
Colette St. Mary (she/her): our philosophy, but also how do you go about doing it,

286
00:46:55.140 --> 00:46:56.549
Colette St. Mary (she/her): and um

287
00:46:57.010 --> 00:47:11.690
Matt Carling (he/him): thanks, call it Jeremy. I know you're doing a lot here. But can you the link that Colette posted? Um. Colette and I are not given the authority to post things, so everyone can see them. But I believe, as co-host, you may be able to do that

288
00:47:11.700 --> 00:47:14.689
Jeremy Wojdak: as it should be.

289
00:47:14.700 --> 00:47:16.990
Jeremy Wojdak: I think I have. There we go. Excellent! Thank you.

290
00:47:17.000 --> 00:47:18.149
Jeremy Wojdak: Yes, absolutely.

291
00:47:18.160 --> 00:47:18.890
So it like,

292
00:47:18.900 --> 00:47:20.169
Matt Carling (he/him): Yeah.

293
00:47:20.230 --> 00:47:21.319
Matt Carling (he/him): So

294
00:47:21.780 --> 00:47:31.200
Matt Carling (he/him): now, in the chat available to everyone is the link that Colette was referring to with some more information about this issue. So thank you to both of you.

295
00:47:31.990 --> 00:47:33.259
Jeremy Wojdak: Excellent

296
00:47:33.310 --> 00:47:34.569
Jeremy Wojdak: Um!

297
00:47:35.530 --> 00:47:43.439
Jeremy Wojdak: Here's a question. Are pis at primarily undergraduate institutions encouraged to apply.

298
00:47:44.460 --> 00:47:45.609
Matt Carling (he/him): Yes,

299
00:47:45.620 --> 00:47:46.720
Matt Carling (he/him): please do

300
00:47:49.060 --> 00:47:50.290
Jeremy Wojdak: get back

301
00:47:50.300 --> 00:47:52.330
Jeremy Wojdak: enthusiastically.

302
00:47:53.000 --> 00:47:54.470
Jeremy Wojdak: Absolutely.

303
00:47:57.690 --> 00:47:58.959
Jeremy Wojdak: Um.

304
00:47:59.390 --> 00:48:09.029
Jeremy Wojdak: So here's a question. The solicitation is in some ways very broad and open to a wide range of disciplines which is great.

305
00:48:09.250 --> 00:48:17.540
Jeremy Wojdak: Are there? Could you describe examples of topics that would be non-compliant or non-responsive?

306
00:48:17.750 --> 00:48:26.069
Jeremy Wojdak: This is a pi trying to get a sense. For what are the must haves or the criterion that makes something a Bocp versus

307
00:48:26.260 --> 00:48:27.950
Jeremy Wojdak: a core proposal?

308
00:48:28.230 --> 00:48:29.259
Jeremy Wojdak: Just

309
00:48:29.690 --> 00:48:32.129
not an easy question to answer

310
00:48:32.630 --> 00:48:34.319
Jeremy Wojdak: with certainty.

311
00:48:38.550 --> 00:48:48.130
Matt Carling (he/him): So I think there's a couple of different ways to respond to this question one. Are there relatively straightforward issues? Why, something would be non-compliant, and that is,

312
00:48:48.140 --> 00:49:03.310
Matt Carling (he/him): you know the failure to submit some a required document, for instance, if if there was not a project management plan, if that did not get submitted, that would be a reason why our proposal could be deemed non-compliance.

313
00:49:03.390 --> 00:49:11.430
Matt Carling (he/him): But then, you know, I think the the real question or the perhaps more nuanced and important question is

314
00:49:12.140 --> 00:49:26.940
Matt Carling (he/him): sort of topic, area, bit and sort of proposal goal fit. And I think there's a couple of different answers or a couple of different ways that I think we can answer that question. But first of all is, if your proposal,

315
00:49:27.490 --> 00:49:44.839
Matt Carling (he/him): it deals with functional biodiversity in on a genuine planet. Then it's appropriate. We've tried to define all of those phrases and all those words very broadly, and we want different perspectives. We don't want this to just

316
00:49:44.850 --> 00:50:02.100
Matt Carling (he/him): represent sort of one narrow slice of functional biodiversity. We really want to encourage a diverse set of proposals that bring a lot of perspectives and different experiences and different thoughts to bear on on these important and growing questions.

317
00:50:03.000 --> 00:50:10.990
Matt Carling (he/him): But I recognize that for just one more thing calling me then it would be awesome for you to jump. In. The other thing that I would encourage you to do is

318
00:50:11.430 --> 00:50:39.929
Matt Carling (he/him): put together a one to two page. Please no more than two-page summary on your ideas and send it to the biodiversity at and Nsf. Gov. Email, address, and the team will review it, and the team will provide feedback and say, Yeah, this is exactly the type of thing that you know we want to encourage, or, you know. Look, this part, I think, is is on the right track. But perhaps you're you're missing this important function, or I just want to think more. And most this important piece.

319
00:50:40.370 --> 00:50:50.189
Matt Carling (he/him): So we we welcome Pis to send a summary one of the two pages, and we will provide feedback on whether or not it's a good fit to the program.

320
00:50:50.200 --> 00:50:55.299
Matt Carling (he/him): So you're always. You can always do that, and please call it I'm. Sure you have other great ideas.

321
00:50:55.630 --> 00:51:04.420
Colette St. Mary (she/her): I was just going to add that for any special solicitation that you think your project is appropriate, for

322
00:51:04.630 --> 00:51:11.749
Colette St. Mary (she/her): it is also appropriate in the project description itself. To explain why you think it's appropriate,

323
00:51:11.940 --> 00:51:19.309
Colette St. Mary (she/her): You tell us while why the project fits the program. It can't hurt,

324
00:51:19.510 --> 00:51:21.529
Colette St. Mary (she/her): and it's likely going to help.

325
00:51:24.490 --> 00:51:25.969
Matt Carling (he/him): Yeah, Great?

326
00:51:28.920 --> 00:51:30.640
Jeremy Wojdak: All right. I'm going to hit

327
00:51:30.980 --> 00:51:42.730
Jeremy Wojdak: Smoosh two questions together, because we have so many open questions. Is there a preference for projects focused on longer geological time scales, and or

328
00:51:42.740 --> 00:51:49.419
Jeremy Wojdak: those that generate new data versus use existing data like neon or other

329
00:51:49.510 --> 00:51:51.509
Jeremy Wojdak: sources.

330
00:51:53.230 --> 00:52:00.549
Colette St. Mary (she/her): I think there is not a preference for any particular timeframe at all. Um!

331
00:52:00.750 --> 00:52:03.609
Colette St. Mary (she/her): And I think

332
00:52:04.150 --> 00:52:22.300
Colette St. Mary (she/her): projects that propose new data collection, you know, in a valuable way are equally competitive with those that are using existing data. Of course, we always love it when scientists make use of existing data in new ways. So

333
00:52:22.310 --> 00:52:27.400
Colette St. Mary (she/her): yeah, I think that that can only be advantageous fundamentally,

334
00:52:34.730 --> 00:52:35.939
Jeremy Wojdak: all right.

335
00:52:36.600 --> 00:52:44.390
Jeremy Wojdak: Oh, let's see screening for new questions.

336
00:52:57.250 --> 00:53:14.020
Jeremy Wojdak: Oh, it it sort of revisits something we talked about before. But um, you know it's easy to imagine projects responsive to this solicitation where the the lessons learned, the insights gained might be immediately useful

337
00:53:14.030 --> 00:53:28.449
Jeremy Wojdak: for applied reasons, and and apply research or management under future climate scenarios. And so I think the question is, how applied can the project be, or how close to that action

338
00:53:29.910 --> 00:53:31.609
Jeremy Wojdak: can the project be?

339
00:53:36.970 --> 00:53:39.100
Colette St. Mary (she/her): I think, Um,

340
00:53:40.910 --> 00:53:51.750
Colette St. Mary (she/her): as long as you you and your project are pursuing fundamental questions, advancing our understanding

341
00:53:52.270 --> 00:53:55.169
Colette St. Mary (she/her): of biodiversity, dynamics, and

342
00:53:55.330 --> 00:53:58.880
Colette St. Mary (she/her): and the processes that contribute to them.

343
00:53:59.450 --> 00:54:02.870
Colette St. Mary (she/her): The other things you are including in the project,

344
00:54:03.690 --> 00:54:13.630
Colette St. Mary (she/her): are also good in the sense that we we are always simultaneously interested in intellectual merit and broader impacts.

345
00:54:16.030 --> 00:54:19.819
Matt Carling (he/him): Yeah, I agree with Carla. But I I think it's important that the

346
00:54:21.370 --> 00:54:32.880
Matt Carling (he/him): as call I mentioned that intellectual merit be there. I think it means there needs to be a strong basic research motivation or a question or thread

347
00:54:33.160 --> 00:54:39.570
Matt Carling (he/him): without that. You know again, as I mentioned that the intellectual merit may not be as strong.

348
00:54:45.800 --> 00:54:47.700
Jeremy Wojdak: Excellent! Thank you both.

349
00:54:48.590 --> 00:54:56.419
Jeremy Wojdak: Here's a little bit more of a detailed question in the design track. How is no prior collaboration defined?

350
00:54:56.480 --> 00:54:59.369
Jeremy Wojdak: You know, if Pis have published or worked together,

351
00:54:59.390 --> 00:55:03.719
Jeremy Wojdak: But maybe on a previous grant or a different topic, does that count,

352
00:55:04.180 --> 00:55:08.330
Jeremy Wojdak: basically What does this criterion look like? What do you think, Colette?

353
00:55:09.880 --> 00:55:21.560
Colette St. Mary (she/her): I think it's very rare for a team who have never done anything together to be able to bring together a Grant proposal, and I don't think we're expecting

354
00:55:22.390 --> 00:55:28.869
Colette St. Mary (she/her): quite that. But certainly what we're looking for is that

355
00:55:30.790 --> 00:55:33.859
Colette St. Mary (she/her): the broader team of participants

356
00:55:34.070 --> 00:55:40.609
Colette St. Mary (she/her): does not include people who have already worked together

357
00:55:41.150 --> 00:55:52.799
Colette St. Mary (she/her): extensively, for instance, to publish papers. So, while there may have been prior collaboration of one or two members

358
00:55:53.830 --> 00:55:55.600
Colette St. Mary (she/her): with the P. I

359
00:55:55.900 --> 00:56:03.069
Colette St. Mary (she/her): I would expect to see that new people have been brought on board. That the team has expanded from

360
00:56:03.170 --> 00:56:04.719
Colette St. Mary (she/her): prior work

361
00:56:08.820 --> 00:56:12.830
Jeremy Wojdak: makes sense. I appreciate that.

362
00:56:12.840 --> 00:56:14.279
Jeremy Wojdak: Um:

363
00:56:15.450 --> 00:56:33.439
Jeremy Wojdak: yeah, here's an interesting question. So there there are these for this program. There's three formal relationships with foreign entities. And the question is, What does that review process look like? So for an example of the Brazil? So, Apollo,

364
00:56:33.640 --> 00:56:39.400
Jeremy Wojdak: what does you know? Is it reviewed just here just in Brazil? What are the

365
00:56:39.570 --> 00:56:43.989
Jeremy Wojdak: the priorities and the opinions of the Brazilian scientific community? How did they get

366
00:56:44.190 --> 00:56:46.499
Jeremy Wojdak: brought into that process?

367
00:56:48.160 --> 00:56:52.120
Matt Carling (he/him): Yeah, that's a great question. So

368
00:56:52.990 --> 00:56:56.139
Matt Carling (he/him): I guess. Yeah. Sort of in a nutshell.

369
00:56:56.690 --> 00:56:58.390
Matt Carling (he/him): Those

370
00:56:59.620 --> 00:57:14.850
Matt Carling (he/him): the representatives from those entities are involved in the review process. And so folks from Sao Paulo folks from China folks from South Africa

371
00:57:14.860 --> 00:57:22.890
Matt Carling (he/him): help review proposals just like panelists from the United States, do you?

372
00:57:22.900 --> 00:57:24.860
Matt Carling (he/him): And then um

373
00:57:26.230 --> 00:57:28.000
Matt Carling (he/him): nsf like

374
00:57:28.060 --> 00:57:35.340
Matt Carling (he/him): like happens, you know, in in many nsf programs. We, you know, we

375
00:57:35.380 --> 00:57:48.100
Matt Carling (he/him): once proposals are ranked by a panelists. We have conversations with representatives from those entities as well, and those conversations are part of the decision-making process when we're deciding to

376
00:57:48.290 --> 00:57:51.810
Matt Carling (he/him): which proposals to to recommend.

377
00:57:52.520 --> 00:57:54.079
Matt Carling (he/him): So i'm not sure

378
00:57:54.740 --> 00:57:56.750
Matt Carling (he/him): I know. Uh,

379
00:57:57.340 --> 00:58:04.320
Matt Carling (he/him): yeah, i'm not sure if you have any general comments to add Colette. But I can assure you that

380
00:58:05.520 --> 00:58:22.080
Matt Carling (he/him): folks from China, South Africa, and Sao Paulo um participate in the review process, and it's a It's a partnership between Nsf. And those those organizations to come to decisions on proposals to recommend

381
00:58:28.270 --> 00:58:29.589
Jeremy Wojdak: Thanks, Matt:

382
00:58:32.960 --> 00:58:37.850
Um. Let's see what questions haven't we addressed.

383
00:58:40.310 --> 00:58:46.750
Jeremy Wojdak: There are numerous sort of small procedural questions. Do you think we should go ahead and write answers to those?

384
00:58:47.080 --> 00:58:54.459
Jeremy Wojdak: Yeah, we've got three minutes, so we could do sort of a lightning round of,

385
00:58:55.170 --> 00:58:57.769
Jeremy Wojdak: but I think

386
00:58:57.960 --> 00:59:14.290
Jeremy Wojdak: there's there was a question down here that I think is particularly weighty. Um, you know. So these proposals will integrate across lots of perspectives and disciplines. And so the question is about basically the reviewers right?

387
00:59:14.300 --> 00:59:28.490
Jeremy Wojdak: You might get specialists from different fields. And And how are those weighed and integrated When a proposal is covering a lot of ground, thinking about how to write that who the audience is and what they're looking for

388
00:59:28.640 --> 00:59:30.990
Jeremy Wojdak: it becomes critical.

389
00:59:31.100 --> 00:59:35.700
Jeremy Wojdak: No easy answers there, but as any pearls of wisdom.

390
00:59:36.780 --> 00:59:52.139
Matt Carling (he/him): Well, I think that we we put a lot of effort into putting together a panel that we think can evaluate the breadth and depth of the proposals that come in. And so we're trying to make sure that we have folks that can

391
00:59:52.150 --> 00:59:58.770
Matt Carling (he/him): fully and thoroughly evaluate everything that comes in to to be Ocp. And so

392
00:59:58.930 --> 01:00:11.270
Matt Carling (he/him): you know, I want to encourage you just to to write that best proposal that you can to do what you want to do, and we will do our very best to ensure that it is accurately and and fairly and thoroughly reviewed,

393
01:00:14.690 --> 01:00:21.990
Jeremy Wojdak: and just a General Grant writing advice. It's a classic example where Friendly review,

394
01:00:22.060 --> 01:00:35.870
Jeremy Wojdak: friendly read from colleagues outside of your area can be really helpful, because, just like the reviewers or panelists, might be from a different sub-discipline. Your colleagues

395
01:00:35.880 --> 01:00:54.360
Jeremy Wojdak: you know, may find parts of a paragraph cryptic that that make a lot of sense to you or Ah may find areas of of unneeded detail. And so, Um, taking advantage of of colleagues to to help make sure that your proposal resonates for a general audience

396
01:00:54.370 --> 01:00:56.790
Jeremy Wojdak: and satisfies the specialists

397
01:00:58.010 --> 01:01:15.999
Jeremy Wojdak: it. It's always good advice. Um. Unfortunately, that brings us to the top of the hour because of the number of participants and questions we haven't gotten to them all. If you do have pressing, lingering questions again, as always, reach out to program directors and

398
01:01:16.010 --> 01:01:28.489
Jeremy Wojdak: tune in to the recap that will be posted in about a week's time, and we try to answer as many questions and curate concise answers as best we can. So thanks a

399
01:01:28.500 --> 01:01:40.840
Jeremy Wojdak: everyone for attending, and thanks Matt and Colette, for visiting us and sharing your wisdom and insights about the program, and we will see everyone in one month's time.

400
01:01:40.950 --> 01:01:43.000
Jeremy Wojdak: Take care, Thanks, Everyone.