This document has been archived and replaced by NSF 16-503. National Science Foundation Research Traineeship (NRT) Program Program Solicitation
|
![]() |
National Science Foundation |
Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (optional) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
March 25, 2015
Applies to both tracks
December 22, 2015
Applies to both tracks
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
May 06, 2015
Applies to both tracks
February 22, 2016
Applies to both tracks
This solicitation extends and broadens the scope of the NSF Research Traineeship (NRT) program launched in 2014. Proposals are invited in two tracks: the Traineeship Track (maximum 5 years, $3.0 million), dedicated to the education of STEM graduate students through an innovative, evidence-based traineeship approach in high-priority interdisciplinary research areas; and the Innovations in Graduate Education (IGE) Track (2–3 years, up to $300,000–$500,000) dedicated solely to piloting, testing, and evaluating bold, new graduate-education approaches, models, and activities and to generate the knowledge required for their customization, implementation, and scaling. This solicitation is active for two years, and future NRT solicitations are anticipated.
A letter of intent is recommended for both tracks.
Important Information
Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the revised NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 15-1), which is effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after December 26, 2014. The PAPPG is consistent with, and, implements the new Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) (2 CFR § 200).
Program Title:
National Science Foundation Research Traineeship Program (NRT)
Synopsis of Program:
The NSF Research Traineeship (NRT) program is designed to encourage the development and implementation of bold, new, potentially transformative, and scalable models for STEM graduate education training. The NRT program seeks proposals that ensure that graduate students in research-based masters and doctoral degree programs develop the skills, knowledge, and competencies needed to pursue a range of STEM careers. The NRT program includes two tracks: the Traineeship Track and the Innovations in Graduate Education (IGE) Track. The Traineeship Track is dedicated to effective training of STEM graduate students in high priority interdisciplinary research areas, through the use of a comprehensive traineeship model that is innovative, evidence-based, aligned with changing workforce and research needs, and scalable. For this solicitation the Traineeship Track has one priority interdisciplinary research theme Data-Enabled Science and Engineering (DESE); proposals are encouraged also on any non-DESE interdisciplinary research theme that is a national priority. The IGE Track is dedicated solely to piloting, testing, and evaluating novel, innovative, and potentially transformative approaches to graduate education, both disciplinary and interdisciplinary, to generate the knowledge required for their customization, implementation, and broader adoption. Whereas the Traineeship Track promotes building on the current knowledge base to more effectively train STEM graduate students, the IGE Track supports test-bed projects with high potential to enrich, improve, and extend the knowledge base with attention to transferability and innovation. For both tracks, strategic collaborations with the private sector, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), government agencies, national laboratories, field stations, teaching and learning centers, museums, and academic partners are encouraged.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.
Richard Boone, telephone: (703) 292-4344, email: rboone@nsf.gov
Claire Hemingway, telephone: (703) 292-7135, email: chemingw@nsf.gov
Richard Tankersley, telephone: (703) 292-8696, email: rtankers@nsf.gov
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant
Estimated Number of Awards: 24 to 30
Anticipated Funding Amount: $37,880,793
The estimated number of awards under this solicitation is pending availability of FY 2015 and 2016 funds.
NRT Traineeship Track Awards (10 anticipated) are expected to be up to five years in duration with a budget up to $3,000,000.
NRT IGE Track Awards (14-20 anticipated) are expected to be up to 2-3 years in duration with a budget between $300,000 and $500,000.
Who May Submit Proposals:
Proposals may only be submitted by the following:
Organizational Limit:
Proposals may be submitted only by the following:
- Universities and Colleges – Universities and colleges accredited in, and having a campus located in, the U.S. acting on behalf of their faculty members and that award a research-based master’s degree and/or a doctoral degree in a STEM discipline supported by the National Science Foundation may submit to the Traineeship Track.
- For the Innovations in Graduate Education Track, the categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the Grant Proposal Guide, Chapter 1, Section E.
Who May Serve as PI:
The PI of a Traineeship Track proposal must be on the faculty of the submitting institution.
Innovations in Graduate Education Track: There are no restrictions or limits.
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 3
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 2 for the Traineeship Track, 1 for the Innovations in Graduate Education Track
Each institution may submit two Traineeship Track proposals and one Innovations in Graduate Education Track proposals. If an institution submits only one Traineeship Track proposal, it can be on either DESE or another theme. If an institution submits two Traineeship Track proposals, at least one must be a DESE proposal. In either case (DESE or non-DESE), the traineeship theme of a Traineeship Track proposal must be interdisciplinary.
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: 1
An individual may serve as Lead Principal Investigator (PI) or Co-PI on only one proposal submitted to the NRT program.
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
B. Budgetary Information
C. Due Dates
March 25, 2015
Applies to both tracks
December 22, 2015
Applies to both tracks
May 06, 2015
Applies to both tracks
February 22, 2016
Applies to both tracks
Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review considerations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Award Conditions: Standard NSF award conditions apply.
Reporting Requirements: Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.
Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) graduate education is poised to undergo a major transformation. The drivers for change include recent major national reports that have examined the state of STEM graduate education[1], the accelerating pace of science and engineering discoveries and technological innovations, national STEM workforce trends, the growing internationalization of science and engineering, and the unrealized potential to align graduate education practices and models with increasing understanding of how people learn. In addition there is increasing recognition that addressing the grand challenges in science and engineering requires interdisciplinary and broader professional training that is atypical for most graduate programs. These realities and the increasing calls for new approaches to STEM graduate education, which are from all sectors and stakeholders, represent an extraordinary opportunity. Accordingly, this NRT solicitation encourages proposals in two tracks the Traineeship Track and Innovations in Graduate Education Track to test, develop, and implement innovative and effective STEM graduate education models, promote interdisciplinary and broad professional training of graduate students, and foster fundamental research advances in support of national priorities.
[1] The Path Forward: The Future of Graduate Education, Commission on the Future of Graduate Education in the United States, 2010; Advancing Graduate Education in the Chemical Sciences, American Chemical Society, 2012; Biomedical Research Workforce Working Group Report, National Institutes of Health, 2012; Pathways through Graduate School and Into Careers, Council of Graduate Schools, 2012; Science and Engineering Indicators, National Science Board, 2014.
A. Traineeship Track
The Traineeship Track is dedicated to highly effective training of STEM graduate students in an interdisciplinary research area through a comprehensive traineeship approach that comprises elements that are innovative, evidence-based, aligned with changing workforce and research needs, and scalable. The Traineeship Track is distinguished from other NSF graduate training initiatives by the identification of changing priority research themes, inclusion of both master’s and doctoral students, broader definition of trainees, greater budgetary and programmatic flexibility, strong emphasis on the development of transferable professional skills, and explicit preparation for both research and research-related careers. Goals of the Traineeship Track program are to:
Creation of sustainable programmatic capacity at institutions is an expected outcome. Proposals, accordingly, should describe mechanisms to institutionalize effective training elements after award closure.
An NRT traineeship is dedicated to the comprehensive development of graduate students as versatile STEM professionals for a range of research and research-related careers within and outside academia. Proposals submitted to the Traineeship Track, accordingly, should focus on and demonstrate strong commitment to technical and professional training of STEM graduate students that emphasizes research training but extends well beyond it. In addition to research training, NRT projects are expected to develop trainees’ technical skills broadly, including facility and/or familiarity with the techniques, languages, and cultures of fields integral to the interdisciplinary research theme; foster the development of transferable professional skills; and provide trainees with mentoring and vocational counseling from professionals both internal and external to the NRT institution(s), who have the backgrounds, experience, and skills to advise trainees on how to prepare for a variety of STEM career pathways, including the competencies required and the nature of the professions.
NRT is intended to benefit a population of STEM graduate students larger than just those who receive an NRT stipend; NRT trainees do not have to receive an NRT stipend. An NRT trainee, accordingly, is defined as a STEM graduate student, irrespective of funding source, who is accepted into an institution’s NRT program and completes the required NRT elements (e.g., courses, workshops, projects, and other training activities specific to the NRT experience) set by the institution. In order to further maximize the number of students who benefit from NRT, proposers are expected to make available (within capacity and budget limitations) any NRT program elements to STEM graduate students who are not NRT trainees.
NRT trainees must be master’s and/or doctoral STEM students in a research-based degree program that requires a thesis or dissertation. If an institution’s NRT program includes both master’s and doctoral students, the proposal should identify any differences in NRT program requirements, as well as mechanisms to foster the development of a collective NRT graduate student community. NRT stipends and support for customary costs of education (tuition and required fees) are limited to U.S. citizens and permanent residents. However, international students can be non-stipend-supported NRT trainees, or as non-trainees can engage in any elements of an institution’s NRT project.
The NRT program has priority interdisciplinary research themes that change periodically. In this solicitation the Traineeship Track has one priority theme — Data-Enabled Science and Engineering (DESE); proposals are also encouraged on any non-DESE interdisciplinary research theme that is a national priority. In either case, proposals should describe the integration of training and research elements and the need for bold and innovative approaches to train graduate students in the targeted thematic area.
a) Data-Enabled Science and Engineering (DESE)
Across all areas of science and engineering, challenging computational problems and data of massive scale and complexity are being generated through experimental methods, observational studies, scientific instruments, administrative records, and computational simulations, leading to a growing need for new interdisciplinary advances in mathematical, computational, and statistical algorithms, prediction techniques, and modeling methodologies, as well as new approaches to data collection, data analysis and visualization, data integration and interoperability, and data stewardship. At the same time, computational models, methods, and algorithms, in the form of rich new software and computing systems, are playing a critical role in the solution of complex computational and data-based problems spanning the science and engineering communities. In light of these advances, NSF recognizes the need to address fundamental challenges advancing computational and data-enabled science and engineering, including educating and supporting a next generation of researchers in this space.
Of particular interest for this priority theme are focused interdisciplinary efforts that include, but are not limited to, the following:
In keeping with the broader goals of the NRT program, proposals responsive to this priority theme should demonstrate significant impact on new curricula and career-focused training approaches for data-enabled science and engineering.
DESE proposals must clearly articulate an overarching interdisciplinary research theme and how the emphasis on computational and data-enabled science and engineering, including the methods and theories of computational and data science, will foster high-return, interdisciplinary synergies.
b) Other crosscutting, interdisciplinary theme
A theme other than DESE should align with NSF or other national STEM research priority areas and have high potential for development of novel, innovative practices in graduate education. Proposers should describe the importance of the NRT project’s thematic focus to the nation and the particular need to train students for a variety of careers in that thematic area, whether within or outside academia.
B. Innovations in Graduate Education (IGE) Track
The IGE Track will extend the impact of the NRT Traineeship approach to generate other potentially transformative models for improvements in graduate education that prepare STEM graduate students for the full range of possible STEM career paths, as well as prepare the next generation of scientists and engineers who will advance the nation’s STEM enterprise. The IGE Track is dedicated solely to piloting, testing, and evaluating innovative, new approaches to graduate education and to generate the knowledge required for the customization, implementation, and scaling of the most successful, transformative ones. Master’s students or doctoral students or both can be the target population. The IGE Track will not focus on foundational research examining how graduate students learn (see EHR Core Research Solicitation 13-555), but rather will promote pilot efforts that are informed by evidence, including findings from learning-sciences research, and that serve as a bridge to broader implementation and scale up. Activities proposed may include, but are not limited to, faculty training, student training, inventive partnerships, virtual networks, student professional development, mentoring, or bridges from undergraduate education to graduate education.
Goals of the IGE Track are to:
The IGE Track calls for proposals to:
Leadership teams (PI/Co-PIs) comprising professional expertise in the learning sciences and pedagogy, as well as in the principal science domain(s), are strongly encouraged.
The estimated number of awards under this solicitation is pending availability of FY 2015 and 2016 funds.
NRT Traineeship Track Awards (10 anticipated) are expected to be up to five years in duration with a budget up to $3,000,000.
NRT IGE Track Awards (14-20 anticipated) are expected to be up to 2-3 years in duration with a budget between $300,000 and$500,000.
Who May Submit Proposals:
Proposals may only be submitted by the following:
Organizational Limit:
Proposals may be submitted only by the following:
- Universities and Colleges – Universities and colleges accredited in, and having a campus located in, the U.S. acting on behalf of their faculty members and that award a research-based master’s degree and/or a doctoral degree in a STEM discipline supported by the National Science Foundation may submit to the Traineeship Track.
- For the Innovations in Graduate Education Track, the categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the Grant Proposal Guide, Chapter 1, Section E.
Who May Serve as PI:
The PI of a Traineeship Track proposal must be on the faculty of the submitting institution.
Innovations in Graduate Education Track: There are no restrictions or limits.
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 3
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 2 for the Traineeship Track, 1 for the Innovations in Graduate Education Track
Each institution may submit two Traineeship Track proposals and one Innovations in Graduate Education Track proposals. If an institution submits only one Traineeship Track proposal, it can be on either DESE or another theme. If an institution submits two Traineeship Track proposals, at least one must be a DESE proposal. In either case (DESE or non-DESE), the traineeship theme of a Traineeship Track proposal must be interdisciplinary.
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: 1
An individual may serve as Lead Principal Investigator (PI) or Co-PI on only one proposal submitted to the NRT program.
Letters of Intent (optional):
A one-page Letter of Intent (LOI) submitted by the lead institution is recommended for proposal submissions planned for either NRT track. Letters of Intent are not reviewed but are used to gauge review requirements. They are not used as pre-approval mechanisms for the submission of proposals, and no feedback is provided to the submitters.
Submit a one-page LOI through FastLane with the following information:
Letter of Intent Preparation Instructions:
When submitting a Letter of Intent through FastLane in response to this Program Solicitation please note the conditions outlined below:
Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Grants.gov or via the NSF FastLane system.
In determining which method to utilize in the electronic preparation and submission of the proposal, please note the following:
Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from multiple organizations must be submitted via the NSF FastLane system. Chapter II, Section D.5 of the Grant Proposal Guide provides additional information on collaborative proposals.
See Chapter II.C.2 of the GPG for guidance on the required sections of a full research proposal submitted to NSF. Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the GPG instructions.
FULL PROPOSAL CONTENT: TRAINEESHIP TRACK
The full proposal must include only the main documents and supplementary documents described in Sections 1-10 below. The page limit for the Project Description is 20 pages. Proposals that are missing required sections and/or exceed the 20-page limit for the Project Description will be returned without review.
The proposal should describe the STEM graduate population that will be served. Accordingly, the proposal should specify the anticipated numbers of NRT trainees supported with NRT stipends and those NRT trainees not supported with NRT stipends and should provide an estimate of the number of other STEM graduate students expected to take one or more of the NRT project’s elements.
Projects must articulate explicit approaches to provide trainees with training and vocational counseling for both research and research-related careers, within and outside academia; preparation and structured used of individual development plans (e.g., myIDP) for trainees is highly recommended. Projects must provide explicit training in:
Communication training should include minimum competencies and rubrics for measuring proficiency and progress, and mechanisms for regular, structured feedback to trainees. The communications training should prepare trainees to identify and explain the potential benefits and broader impacts of their research discoveries to a range of stakeholders, including policy makers and the general public.
Collaborations with non-academic partners (e.g., industry, NGOs, government agencies, independent laboratories; research, education, and outreach centers; and museums) are encouraged to promote the trainees’ professional development. Internships and international experiences are encouraged if they provide marked added value, including authentic mentorship by hosts. If internships are included, proposers should describe pre-internship orientation for trainees and hosts, duration, and expected outcomes. The proposed NRT should foster development of a global perspective, through experiences abroad and/or activities at the home institution(s).
An expectation is that NRT training will span the duration of a student’s master’s or doctoral program; provide a timeline of logically phased, progressive training elements over the degree program(s). Training should be integrated with degree program requirements so that the anticipated time to degree is not extended.
If a collaborative project is proposed, describe the role of the non-lead institution(s) and its (their) participating personnel, the organizational structure(s), and the mechanisms for project communication. A collaborative proposal should be submitted only if the partner institution(s) has (have) a significant role and substantially enhance the training program. Collaborative projects involving trainees at more than a single lead institution should describe practices to ensure that trainees at the participating institution(s) are equal partners, with strong mentorship and comparable access to training activities.
Institutions are strongly encouraged to secure the services of a professional evaluator unaffiliated with the lead or collaborating institution(s). If an individual or team from the lead or collaborating institution(s) conducts the evaluation, an external evaluator should be employed to provide formal periodic assessments of the ongoing evaluation. The intent is to ensure that the project benefits from an external perspective. Proposals should include plans for communicating assessment results, both within the NRT community and more broadly through publications and professional meetings. A biographical sketch for the evaluator is required.
An independent advisory committee is required to provide guidance on a regular basis. The committee should provide advice to the leadership team based on the evaluator’s findings and other formal and informal information obtained from the leadership team, other participants, trainees, and administrators.
Budget Justification (3-page limit): The Budget Justification must clearly explain how funds will be used in direct support of trainees and the traineeship program. For proposals with any subawards, each subaward must include a separate budget justification of no more than three pages.
In addition to the letter from the senior university administrator, up to eight other supporting letters, each one page long, may be provided from partner organizations, including international ones, describing their specific contributions (e.g., internships, mentorship, and laboratory access) to the traineeship.
All proposals are required to include a Data Management Plan of up to two pages; it should be included as a separate Supplementary Document with Data Management Plan as the heading. The Data Management Plan should describe how the project would conform to the NSF policy on dissemination and sharing of research results as well as any educational products (e.g., curricular materials). This plan will be reviewed as part of the intellectual merit and broader impacts of the proposal. Data management requirements and plans relevant to specific Directorates, Offices, Divisions, Programs or other NSF units are available on the NSF website at https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/dmp.jsp. The PI should follow the data management requirements and plans for the Directorate, Office, Division, Program, or other NSF unit most closely aligned with the research theme of the NRT traineeship. See Chapter II.C.2 of the GPG for further information about the implementation of this requirement.
A Postdoctoral Mentoring Plan is required if postdoctoral fellows receive NRT support, which is allowed only if they participate in an instructional or other training capacity.
FULL PROPOSAL CONTENT: INNOVATIONS IN GRADUATE EDUCATION (IGE) TRACK
The full proposal must include only the main documents and supplementary documents described in Sections 1-10 below. The page limit for the Project Description is 15 pages. Proposals that are missing required sections and/or exceed the 15-page limit for the Project Description will be returned without review.
The proposal should describe institutional plans that address facilitation of the pilot and, equally importantly, how successful approaches, practices, and models will be shared across the institution and nationally.
If a collaborative proposal is proposed, describe the role of the non-lead institution(s) and the participating personnel roles, and the mechanisms for project communication. A collaborative proposal should be submitted only if the partner institution(s) has (have) a significant role and substantially enhance the education model or components tested.
Budget Justification (3-page limit): The Budget Justification must clearly explain how funds will be used in the proposed project. For proposals with any subawards, each subaward must include a separate budget justification of no more than three pages.
One letter, up to two pages in length and submitted as a Supplementary Document, from the appropriate senior institutional administrator is required and should describe institutional support for the pilot or proof of concept to be tested.
Additionally, up to eight other supporting letters, each one page long, may be provided from partner organizations, including international ones, describing their contributions (e.g., internships, mentorship, and workshops) to the project.
All proposals are required to include a Data Management Plan of up to two pages; it should be included as a separate Supplementary Document with Data Management Plan as the heading. The Data Management Plan should describe how the project would conform to the NSF policy on dissemination and sharing of research results as well as any educational products (e.g., curricular materials). This plan will be reviewed as part of the intellectual merit and broader impacts of the proposal. Data management requirements and plans relevant to specific Directorates, Offices, Divisions, Programs or other NSF units are available on the NSF website at https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/dmp.jsp. The PI should follow the data management requirements and plans for the Directorate, Office, Division, Program, or other NSF unit most closely aligned with the research theme of the IGE project. See Chapter II.C.2 of the GPG for further information about the implementation of this requirement.
A Postdoctoral Mentoring Plan is required if postdoctoral fellows receive NRT support.
Cost Sharing: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.
March 25, 2015
Applies to both tracks
December 22, 2015
Applies to both tracks
May 06, 2015
Applies to both tracks
February 22, 2016
Applies to both tracks
For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane:
To prepare and submit a proposal via FastLane, see detailed technical instructions 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 fastlane@nsf.gov. The FastLane Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the FastLane system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.
For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:
Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources webpage: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants.html. In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide (see link in Section V.A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: support@grants.gov. The Grants.gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation.
Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The completed application will be transferred to the NSF FastLane system for further processing.
Proposers that submitted via FastLane are strongly encouraged to use FastLane to verify the status of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted via Grants.gov, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on Grants.gov. After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research.gov should be used to check the status of an application.
Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in the GPG as Exhibit III-1.
A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: http://nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/.
Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Investing in Science, Engineering, and Education for the Nation's Future: NSF Strategic Plan for 2014-2018. These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.
One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF’s mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U.S. technology-based economy. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation’s most creative scientists and engineers. NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.
NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.
The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.
1. Merit Review Principles
These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:
With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities.
These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.
2. Merit Review Criteria
All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.
The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (GPG Chapter II.C.2.d.i. contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal.) Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including GPG Chapter II.C.2.d.i., prior to the review of a proposal.
When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:
The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:
Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.
Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.
Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria
Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria for the Traineeship Track
Does the proposal address training needs that are not currently available at the institution(s) and/or in disciplines, and are there clear and compelling connections between the training elements and the interdisciplinary research theme?
What is the degree of interdisciplinarity and the potential for high impact synergies among the disciplines?
What is the breadth and quality of the plan to provide NRT trainees with professional development training for a range of research and research-related career pathways, both within and outside academia?
What is the quality of the recruiting and mentoring plans to broaden participation?
Does the evaluation plan include outcomes, performance measures, benchmarks, and an evaluation timetable, as well as how formative evaluation will improve practice?
Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria for NRT Innovations in Graduate Education (IGE) Track
Is there a well-conceived plan, including tangible metrics, to evaluate the outcomes of the proposed project?
To what extent would the project fulfill STEM education, disciplinary, interdisciplinary, and workforce needs?
To what extent would the project generate the knowledge needed to inform implementation, adaptability, and scalability of potentially transformative improvements to graduate education?
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Panel Review.
Reviewers will be asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and submitted by each reviewer. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.
After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF strives to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new awardees may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation.
After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. 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.
Once an award or declination decision has been made, Principal Investigators are provided feedback about their proposals. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying information, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.
Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process).
An NSF award consists of: (1) the award notice, 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 notice; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1)*; or Research Terms and Conditions* and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award notice. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.
*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov.
More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.
For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer at least 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). Within 90 days following expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.
Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports, or the project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.
PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through Research.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final project reports. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.
More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.
Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.
General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:
Richard Boone, telephone: (703) 292-4344, email: rboone@nsf.gov
Claire Hemingway, telephone: (703) 292-7135, email: chemingw@nsf.gov
Richard Tankersley, telephone: (703) 292-8696, email: rtankers@nsf.gov
For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:
For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:
The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences. Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website at https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USNSF/subscriber/new?topic_id=USNSF_179.
Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at http://www.grants.gov.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."
NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.
NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.
Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See Grant Proposal Guide Chapter II, Section D.2 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.
The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.
The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.
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 https://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; and 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 proposer 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 or other entities needing information regarding applicants or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; 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," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004). 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 Office of Management and Budget (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 the burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:
Suzanne H. Plimpton
Reports Clearance Officer
Office of the General Counsel
National Science Foundation
Arlington, VA 22230
![]()
|
||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() |
||||||||||||||||||
The National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230, USA |
|
|||||||||||||||||
![]() |