This document has been archived and replaced by NSF 10-605
(http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf10605).
Title: Alliances For Graduate Education And The Professoriate
(AGEP)
Date: 04/13/04
Replaced: NSF 01-138
Alliances For Graduate Education And The Professoriate (AGEP)
Program Solicitation
NSF 04-575
Replaces Document 01-138
[NSF Logo] National Science Foundation
Directorate for Education and Human Resources
Division of Human Resource Development
Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required):
May 17, 2004
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
July 26, 2004
REVISIONS AND UPDATES
* Letters of Intent are required in FY 2004.
* Level of funding has increased.
SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
General Information
Program Title:
Alliances For Graduate Education And The Professoriate (AGEP)
Synopsis of Program:
The Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate (AGEP)
program is intended to increase significantly the number of
domestic students receiving doctoral degrees in the sciences,
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), with special
emphasis on those population groups underrepresented in these
fields (i.e., African Americans, Hispanics, American Indians,
Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians or other Pacific Islanders). In
addition, AGEP is particularly interested in increasing the
number of minorities who will enter the professoriate in these
disciplines. Specific objectives of the AGEP program are (1) to
develop and implement innovative models for recruiting,
mentoring, and retaining minority students in STEM doctoral
programs, and (2) to develop effective strategies for identifying
and supporting underrepresented minorities who want to pursue
academic careers.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
* Dr. Roosevelt Johnson, Program Director, Directorate for Education and
Human Resources, Division of Human Resource Development, 4201 Wilson
Blvd., Suite 815, Arlington, VA, 22230, telephone: (703)292-4669, fax:
(703)292-9018, email: ryjohnso@nsf.gov
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
* 47.076 --- Education and Human Resources
Eligibility Information
* Organization Limit: An alliance may hold only one active award at a
time. The alliance must consist of two or more doctoral degree
granting institutions serving STEM graduate education needs. One of
these primary institutions must be designated as the lead institution
for the project. Secondary partner institutions (non doctoral degree
granting) may participate in an alliance as subawardees. An
institution may be a primary member in only one alliance.
* PI Eligibility Limit: Because AGEP is centered on sustainable
institutional changes in graduate education, the Provost or Graduate
Dean of the lead Institution should serve as the Principal
Investigator. A full explanation should be provided for a PI
designation in variance with this requirement. Co-Principal
investigators from partner institutions may be designated as
appropriate for the project.
* Limit on Number of Proposals: Only one proposal may be submitted per
alliance.
Award Information
* Anticipated Type of Award: Cooperative Agreement
* Estimated Number of Awards: 3 to 6 - Awards anticipated in FY 2004.
* Anticipated Funding Amount: $6,000,000 pending availability of funds
in FY 2004.
Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
* Letters of Intent: Submission of Letters of Intent is required. Please
see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
* Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: This solicitation contains
information that deviates from the standard Grant Proposal Guide (GPG)
proposal preparation guidelines. Please see the full text of this
solicitation for further information.
B. Budgetary Information
* Cost Sharing Requirements: Cost Sharing is required (Percentage).
* Cost Sharing Level/Amount: 30%
* Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Not Applicable.
* Other Budgetary Limitations: Other budgetary limitations apply. Please
see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
C. Due Dates
* Letters of Intent (required):
May 17, 2004
* Full Proposal Deadline Date(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
July 26, 2004
Proposal Review Information
* 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 Administration Information
* Award Conditions: Standard NSF award conditions apply.
* Reporting Requirements: Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary of Program Requirements
I. Introduction
II. Program Description
III. Eligibility Information
IV. Award Information
V. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
B. Budgetary Information
C. Due Dates
D. FastLane Requirements
VI. Proposal Review Information
A. NSF Proposal Review Process
B. Review Protocol and Associated Customer Service Standard
VII. Award Administration Information
A. Notification of the Award
B. Award Conditions
C. Reporting Requirements
VIII.Contacts for Additional Information
IX. Other Programs of Interest
I. INTRODUCTION
The U.S. continues to suffer from a long-standing underrepresentation of
minorities (i.e., African Americans, Hispanics, American Indians, Alaska
Natives, Native Hawaiians or other Pacific Islanders)among science,
mathematics and engineering doctorates. This untapped talent has serious
consequences for the nation's ability to compete in a world economy driven
by technological advances, as well as for a large segment of the nation's
citizens who suffer loss of opportunity. This underrepresentation is
evident in all sectors: academe, industry, and government. Over the years,
both government and private sectors have invested significant resources to
increase minority representation in advanced STEM study and careers. While
some exemplary programs exist, limited progress has been made overall.
The Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate (AGEP) program
is intended to increase significantly the number of students receiving
doctoral degrees in the sciences, technology, engineering, and mathematics
(STEM), with special emphasis on those population groups underrepresented
in these fields (i.e., African Americans, Hispanics, American Indians,
Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians or other Pacific Islanders). In addition,
since lack of role models and mentors in the professoriate constitutes a
significant barrier to producing minority STEM graduates, NSF is
particularly interested in increasing the number of minorities who will
enter the professoriate in these disciplines. Specific objectives of the
AGEP program are:
1. to develop and implement innovative models for recruiting, mentoring,
and retaining minority students in STEM doctoral programs and
2. to develop effective strategies for identifying and supporting
underrepresented minorities who want to pursue academic careers.
II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
GOAL
The goal of the AGEP program is to increase the number of underrepresented
minority students pursuing advanced study, obtaining doctoral degrees, and
entering the professoriate in STEM disciplines. Alliances participating in
this program are expected to engage in comprehensive institutional cultural
changes that will lead to sustained increases in the conferral of STEM
doctoral degrees, significantly exceeding historic levels of performance.
ALLIANCES
Alliances consisting of two or more doctoral degree granting institutions
serving the STEM graduate education needs are eligible to submit proposals.
One institution must be designated as the lead institution for the project.
Institutions in the U.S. and its territories having documented success in
translating minority matriculates into degree recipients are strongly
encouraged to participate. A single institution may participate in only one
alliance. Through the alliance, it is anticipated that the strengths of the
respective individual institutions will be maximized to serve the AGEP
program goals. Alliance commitment will be assessed with respect to
willingness and ability of participating institutions to align relevant
financial and operational resources to the goals articulated by this
program. To ensure commitment and the potential for success, the Provost or
Graduate Dean of the lead institution should serve as the Principal
Investigator (PI). A full explanation should be provided for a PI
designation in variance with this agreement.
ACTIVITIES
The purpose of these awards is to catalyze changes in institutional,
departmental, and organizational culture and practices that will result in
significant increases in the recruitment, retention, degree conferral, and
STEM career (especially academic) entry of minority students.The proposal
should clearly describe strategies to ensure effective recruitment,
mentoring, retention, and degree completion of minority students.
Strategies may include, but are not limited to:
1. support for students to attend conferences,
2. coordinated recruitment among partner institutions,
3. proactive use of faculty in student recruitment,
4. development of systemic mentoring and mentor training,
5. faculty and student exchange programs,
6. specific preparation for the professoriate, and
7. more effective career couseling and career placement.
In support of the activities described above, the program provides funding
in a variety of cost categories, including:
1. provision for faculty release time,
2. program coordination and clerical support (partial),
3. special workshop/seminar support costs,
4. faculty/student travel between institutions (e.g., recruitment, joint
research, etc.)
5. peer mentoring stipends, and
6. evaluation and assessment costs (partial).
Under the AGEP program, NSF intends to support a portfolio of projects that
serve as effective models for addressing these issues. Proposals should
clearly describe strategies for increasing minority student admissions; for
creating supportive environments for these students at both the
institutional and departmental levels; as well as for developing student
interest in, and preparation for, academic careers (teaching and other
faculty roles). Relevant strategies may include, for example, developing
partnerships with undergraduate institutions that produce large numbers of
minority STEM majors (e.g., Historically Black Colleges and Universities
(HBCUs), Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), Tribal Colleges); providing
underrepresented minority undergraduates with enriched academic and
research experiences that place strong emphasis on obtaining doctorates and
pursuing academic careers; and/or developing student networks or mentoring
programs at the undergraduate and/or graduate levels. Projects are also
strongly encouraged to develop linkages with the NSF-supported Louis Stokes
Alliances for Minority Participation (LSAMP) projects, which also produce
large numbers of minority STEM graduates. The activities described are
merely illustrative of the broad range of activities that are possible
under the AGEP program. Project strategies that do not specifically
addresss the AGEP goal will not be considered competitive. The AGEP program
stresses the building of a well-documented knowledge base of successful
strategies.
DISCIPLINES
Projects involving any of the STEM fields normally supported by NSF are
eligible. Projects are expected to be comprehensive, broadly covering STEM
departments. All participating departments must be explicitly identified in
the proposal. Multiple STEM departments must be involved at AGEP
institutions, and departments can be transitioned in over the 5 year
cooperative agreement.
PROJECT EVALUATION
It is expected that each AGEP project will complement its efforts with its
own formative evaluation. This evaluation should be the basis for
strengthening implementation over the course of the project and for annual
reporting to NSF that will be used to justify continued investment in the
project. Proposals should provide suggestions of objectives, benchmarks,
and indicators of progress that will inform reviewers of the proposers'
understanding of essential factors for judging accountability, both
quantitative (minority enrollment and Ph.D. production) and qualitative
(the process of change in organizational culture). This evaluation must
show an effective process by which student progress will be assessed on an
annual basis. Indicators of cultural changes include changes in policies,
practices, and programs at the graduate school office or departmental
levels. Changes can occur with student recruitment, admissions, and
selection processes, academic support, and socialization to profession.
PROGRAM EVALUATION
Awardees will be required to participate in a program-level evaluation by
which NSF can assess quantitative gains in relevant measures for
underrepresented minority students and make qualitative assessments of the
process of change. Shortly after awards have been made, project evaluators
will be asked to assist a NSF contractor in developing a program evaluation
that will mutually benefit the agency and project participants. AGEP
projects are expected to have the capability of collecting and analyzing
data derived from program evaluation activities. AGEP projects must set
(and meet) measurable goals and collect evidence (disaggregated by
ethnicity, gender, and discipline) to determine progress toward the AGEP
goal of significantly increasing the number of underrepresented minorities
attaining doctoral degrees in STEM disciplines.
COST SHARING
Cost sharing at a level of 30 percent of the requested total amount of NSF
funds is required. Examples of cost sharing provided by currently funded
AGEP projects include staff salaries (full and partial), provision of
office space, support for student staffing and publication costs.
ALLOWABLE STUDENT SUPPORT
Student support is allowable, but AGEP is not intended to be a fellowship
program. If financial support is requested, proposals must clearly explain
the need being addressed, as well as student recruitment, selection and
accountability criteria. Allowable student support is limited to financial
support for employing team building principles (e.g., collaborative
learning experiences, small group clustering in academic sections,
structured work-study groups), individual skill development (e.g.,
participation in special seminars and colloquia), involvement in research
(e.g., stipends or salary for academic-year or summer research programs,
and related personal career counseling and mentoring), and other activities
designed to enhance student experiences and student/faculty/mentor
interaction. AGEP will also provide direct support to enable students to
attend summer enrichment activities and to participate in other activities
throughout the academic year. Please note that student support can only be
provided to U.S. citizens, nationals, and permanent U.S. residents.
PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION
To aid reviewers in assessing past performance of proposing institutions,
proposals should include the following baseline data over the 1994-present
time period (for U.S. citizens, nationals, and permanent U.S. residents
only):
1. the sum and the average of the numbers of minority STEM Ph.D.
conferrals per year as well as the sum and the averages of minority
STEM graduate enrollments for each STEM department, disaggregated by
population subgroup (e.g., African American, Hispanic, and Native
American),
2. annual total and minority baccalaureate and master's degree conferrals
for STEM departments of the submitting alliance institutions, and
3. annual numbers of underrepresented minority students who have left the
same programs without completing their degrees.
III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
Organizational Limit
An alliance may hold only one active award at a time. The alliance must
consist of two or more doctoral degree granting institutions serving STEM
graduate education needs. One of these primary institutions must be
designated as the lead institution for the project. Secondary partner
institutions (non doctoral degree granting) may participate in an alliance
as subawardees. An institution may be a primary member in only one
alliance.
PI Eligibility Limit
Because AGEP is centered on sustainable institutional changes in graduate
education, the Provost or Graduate Dean of the lead Institution should
serve as the Principal Investigator. A full explanation should be provided
for a PI designation in variance with this requirement. Co-Principal
investigators from partner institutions may be designated as appropriate
for the project.
Limit on Number of Proposals
Only one proposal may be submitted per alliance.
IV. AWARD INFORMATION
AGEP awards are up to five years in duration, and only one AGEP award is
allowable per alliance. Awards will be made up to a level of $2,000,000 per
year depending on numbers of students served, number of participating
institutions, and factors related to the comprehensiveness of the project
design, with the average award about $1,200,000 per year. The purpose of
these awards is to catalyze changes in institutional, departmental, and
organizational culture and practices that will result in significant
increases in the recruitment, retention, degree conferral, and STEM career
(especially academic) entry of minority students.
Anticipated Type of Award: Cooperative Ageement
Estimated Number of Awards: 3 to 6 - Awards anticipated in FY 2004.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $6,000,000 pending availability of funds in FY
2004.
V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
Letters of Intent (required):
Letters of Intent are required in FY 2004, must be submitted by the LEAD
institution, and must include the following:
A. Name of lead institution,
B. Primary contact at the lead institution,
C. Names of ALL participating institutions (Primary and Others), and
D. Initial particpating STEM departments/disciplines.
Letters of Intent may be submitted by the following methods:
A. Mail To: Dr. Roosevelt Y. Johnson, Program Director, Directorate for
Education and Human Resources, Division of Human Resource Development,
Suite 815, Arlington, VA 22230; telephone: (703)292-4669, or
B. Email To: ryjohnso@nsf.gov
Full Proposal Instructions:
Proposals submitted in response to this program announcement/solicitation
should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines
contained in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG). The complete text of the
GPG is available electronically on the NSF Website at:
http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gpg. Paper copies of the GPG may be
obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827
or by e-mail from pubs@nsf.gov.
AGEP Proposal Reqirements:These deviate from the GPG guidelines.
COVER SHEET
The Cover Sheet should specify "AGEP" at the beginning of the title and
list the solicitation number in the appropriate box. Select Alliances for
Graduate Education and the Professoriate (AGEP) as the appropriate NSF
program and Division of Human Resource Development (HRD) as the NSF
division to be entered on the proposal cover sheet.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Proposals should clearly articulate project objectives, planned outcomes
with respect to recruitment, retention, and degree conferral of minority
students; project monitoring guidelines; and how outcomes will be measured.
Proposals should:
a. demonstrate understanding of issues and awareness of, and coordination
with, related programs;
b. describe proposed activities, indicating unique aspects of the project
and logic underlying its development;
c. state plans for institutionalization of these strategies after NSF
support ends;
d. provide baseline statistics and describe anticipated project impact;
e. identify major project participants (alliance partners and key
personnel), clearly articulating their capabilities and roles;
f. describe plans for coordination and management of activities,
including administrative infrastructure at the lead and partner
institutions;
g. describe grantee contributions to the project in terms of support for
activities; and
h. describe indicators and other evaluative information for monitoring
annual progress.
PRIOR NSF SUPPORT
If the prospective PI or Co-PI(s) received support for related NSF
activities within the past five years, a bref description of project(s) and
outcome(s) must be provided in sufficient detail to enable reviewers to
assess the value of results achieved. Projects should be identified by NSF
award number, amount, period of support, title, summary of results, and
list of publications and formal presentations that acknowledge the NSF
award. Descriptions of prior NSF support should be limited to five pages
and must be included as part of the 15-page limit. Alliance institutions
that are award recipients of NSF programs that promote involvement of
minorities in higher education must describe the value-added and
complementarity of these efforts. Such programs include the Louis Stokes
Alliances for Minority Participation (LSAMP), Centers of Research
Excellence in Science and Technology (CREST), Historically Black College
and Universities-Undergraduate Program (HBCU-UP), and Minority Institutions
of Excellence (MIE).
KEY PERSONNEL
Biographical sketches of key project prsonnel (each no more than two pages
in length) should highlight relevant experience in recruiting, academic and
career mentoring, and producing minority STEM Ph.D. recipients and
knowledge of research methodologies, higher education, minority
participation in advanced STEM study and workforce entry, etc. Up to 10
major relevant publications may be listed for each of the key personnel.
TIMELINE
Timeline for major project benchmarks should be uploaded as a file into
Supplementary Docs in FastLane. (1 page maximum)
BUDGET AND ALLOWABLE COSTS
The budget should be prepared using the Budget Form available in FastLane.
Budgets should be prepared for each year of support requested. No funds for
faculty research or faculty salaries may be requested. While provision of
limited student support is allowable, the AGEP program is not intended to
be a fellowship program. Annual budgets and budget justifications should
also be included for each proposed subaward. Sudents receiving support must
be citizens, nationals, or permanent residents of the U.S. Limited funds
intended to partially defray the costs of research by students may be
requested. Annual budgets should include requests for funds to support
annual visits to NSF in Arlington, VA for:
1. the PI and lead representatives from the alliance, and
2. project evaluators.
BUDGET JUSTIFICATION
A brief justification for funds in each budget category should be provided.
This section (three pages maximum) should also include details of
institutional cost-sharing, and of other sources of support.
Proposers are reminded to identify the program announcement/solicitation
number (04-575) in the program announcement/solicitation block on the
proposal Cover Sheet. Compliance with this requirement is critical to
determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit
this information may delay processing.
B. Budgetary Information
Cost Sharing:
Cost sharing at a level of 30 percent of the requested total amount of NSF
funds is required for all proposals submitted in response to this
announcement/solicitation. The proposed cost sharing must be shown on line
M on the proposal budget. Documentation of the availability of cost sharing
must be included in the proposal.
Only items which would be allowable under the applicable cost principles,
if charged to the project, may be included in the awardee's contribution to
cost sharing. Contributions may be made from any non-Federal source,
including non-Federal grants or contracts, and may be cash or in kind (see
OMB Circular A-110, Section 23). It should be noted that contributions
counted as cost sharing toward projects of another Federal agency may not
be counted towards meeting the specific cost sharing requirements of the
NSF award.
All cost sharing amounts are subject to audit. Failure to provide the level
of cost sharing reflected in the approved award budget may result in
termination of the NSF award, disallowance of award costs and/or refund of
award funds to NSF.
Other Budgetary Limitations:
No funds for faculty research or faculty salaries may be requested. Student
support is allowable, but AGEP is not intended to be a fellowship program.
C. Due Dates
Proposals must be submitted by the following date(s):
Letters of Intent (required):
May 17, 2004
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
July 26, 2004
D. FastLane Requirements
Proposers are required to prepare and submit all proposals for this
announcement/solicitation through the FastLane system. Detailed
instructions for proposal preparation and submission via FastLane are
available at: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm. For FastLane
user support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail
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 announcement/solicitation should be referred to the
NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this
announcement/solicitation.
Submission of Electronically Signed Cover Sheets. The Authorized
Organizational Representative (AOR) must electronically sign the proposal
Cover Sheet to submit the required proposal certifications (see Chapter II,
Section C of the Grant Proposal Guide for a listing of the certifications).
The AOR must provide the required electronic certifications within five
working days following the electronic submission of the proposal. Proposers
are no longer required to provide a paper copy of the signed Proposal Cover
Sheet to NSF. Further instructions regarding this process are available on
the FastLane Website at: http://www.fastlane.nsf.gov
VI. PROPOSAL REVIEW INFORMATION
A. NSF Proposal Review Process
Reviews of proposals submitted to NSF are solicited from peers with
expertise in the substantive area of the proposed research or education
project. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with the
oversight of the review process. NSF invites the proposer to suggest, at
the time of submission, the names of appropriate or inappropriate
reviewers. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts with
the proposer. Special efforts are made to recruit reviewers from
non-academic institutions, minority-serving institutions, or adjacent
disciplines to that principally addressed in the proposal.
The National Science Board approved revised criteria for evaluating
proposals at its meeting on March 28, 1997 (NSB 97-72). All NSF proposals
are evaluated through use of the two merit review criteria. In some
instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to
highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.
On July 8, 2002, the NSF Director issued Important Notice 127,
Implementation of new Grant Proposal Guide Requirements Related to the
Broader Impacts Criterion. This Important Notice reinforces the importance
of addressing both criteria in the preparation and review of all proposals
submitted to NSF. NSF continues to strengthen its internal processes to
ensure that both of the merit review criteria are addressed when making
funding decisions.
In an effort to increase compliance with these requirements, the January
2002 issuance of the GPG incorporated revised proposal preparation
guidelines relating to the development of the Project Summary and Project
Description. Chapter II of the GPG specifies that Principal Investigators
(PIs) must address both merit review criteria in separate statements within
the one-page Project Summary. This chapter also reiterates that broader
impacts resulting from the proposed project must be addressed in the
Project Description and described as an integral part of the narrative.
Effective October 1, 2002, NSF will return without review proposals that do
not separately address both merit review criteria within the Project
Summary. It is believed that these changes to NSF proposal preparation and
processing guidelines will more clearly articulate the importance of
broader impacts to NSF-funded projects.
The two National Science Board approved merit review criteria are listed
below (see the Grant Proposal Guide Chapter III.A for further information).
The criteria include considerations that help define them. These
considerations are suggestions and not all will apply to any given
proposal. While proposers must address both merit review criteria,
reviewers will be asked to address only those considerations that are
relevant to the proposal being considered and for which he/she is qualified
to make judgments.
What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?
How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and
understanding within its own field or across different fields? How
well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the
project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of
the prior work.) To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and
explore creative and original concepts? How well conceived and
organized is the proposed activity? Is there sufficient access to
resources?
What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?
How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while
promoting teaching, training, and learning? How well does the proposed
activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g.,
gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent will
it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as
facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? Will the
results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and
technological understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed
activity to society?
NSF staff will give careful consideration to the following in making
funding decisions:
Integration of Research and Education
One of the principal strategies in support of NSF's goals is to foster
integration of research and education through the programs, projects,
and activities it supports at academic and research institutions.
These institutions provide abundant opportunities where individuals
may concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators,
and students and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse
education with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through
the diversity of learning perspectives.
Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities
Broadening opportunities and enabling the participation of all
citizens -- women and men, underrepresented minorities, and persons
with disabilities -- 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.
Additional Review Criteria:
Proposals are expected to demonstrate:
* knowledge of those factors affecting the successful transition of
minority students from undergraduate through graduate study and
academic career entry in STEM fields;
* prior success in dealing with affective (non-academic) components of
graduate education that are necessary to ensure success of minority
students in obtaining STEM doctoral degrees;
* potential for successfully aligning similar existing programs
(NSF-supported or otherwise) within, or outside of, the alliance to
ensure a comprehensive, integrated effort; and,
* ability to provide quality educational and research opportunities that
will prepare students for successful STEM careers (e.g.,
interdisciplinary research, use of information technology,
communications skills).
B. Review Protocol and Associated Customer Service Standard
All proposals are carefully reviewed by at least three other persons
outside NSF who are experts in the particular field represented by the
proposal. Proposals submitted in response to this announcement/solicitation
will be reviewed by Panel Review.
Reviewers will be asked to formulate a recommendation to either support or
decline each proposal. The Program Officer assigned to manage the
proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate
a recommendation.
A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and submitted
by each reviewer. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential
documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the
reviewers, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the
Program Director. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of
the decision to award or decline funding.
In most cases, proposers will be contacted by the Program Officer after his
or her recommendation to award or decline funding has been approved by the
Division Director. This informal notification is not a guarantee of an
eventual award.
NSF is striving to be able to tell proposers whether their proposals have
been declined or recommended for funding within six months. The time
interval begins on the closing date of an announcement/solicitation, or the
date of proposal receipt, whichever is later. The interval ends when the
Division Director accepts the Program Officer's recommendation.
In all cases, after programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals
recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and
Agreements for review of business, financial, and policy implications and
the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are
cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments,
obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of
funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical
or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal
Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments
in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants
and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.
VII. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION
A. Notification of the Award
Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a
Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. Organizations
whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the
cognizant NSF Program Division administering the program. Verbatim copies
of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided
automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See section VI.A. for
additional information on the review process.)
B. Award Conditions
An NSF award consists of: (1) the award letter, which includes any special
provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2)
the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which
NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals
or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in
the award letter; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant
General Conditions (NSF-GC-1); * or Federal Demonstration Partnership (FDP)
Terms and Conditions * and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that
may be incorporated by reference in the award letter. Cooperative agreement
awards also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement
Terms and Conditions (CA-1). Electronic mail notification is the preferred
way to transmit NSF awards to organizations that have electronic mail
capabilities and have requested such notification from the Division of
Grants and Agreements.
*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at
http://www.nsf.gov/home/grants/grants_gac.htm. Paper copies may be obtained
from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by
e-mail from pubs@nsf.gov.
More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions is contained in the
NSF Grant Policy Manual (GPM) Chapter II, available electronically on the
NSF Website at http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gpm. The GPM is also for
sale through the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office
(GPO), Washington, DC 20402. The telephone number at GPO for subscription
information is (202) 512-1800. The GPM may be ordered through the GPO
Website at http://www.gpo.gov.
C. Reporting Requirements
For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants),
the PI must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program
Officer at least 90 days before the end of the current budget period.
Within 90 days after the expiration of an award, the PI also is required to
submit a final project report. Failure to provide final technical reports
delays NSF review and processing of pending proposals for the PI and all
Co-PIs. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance
to assure availability of required data.
PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project reporting system,
available through FastLane, for preparation and submission of annual and
final project reports. This system permits electronic submission and
updating of project reports, including information on project participants
(individual and organizational), activities and findings, publications, and
other specific products and contributions. PIs will not be required to
re-enter information previously provided, either with a proposal or in
earlier updates using the electronic system.
VIII. CONTACTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:
* Dr. Roosevelt Johnson, Program Director, Directorate for Education and
Human Resources, Division of Human Resource Development, 4201 Wilson
Blvd., Suite 815, Arlington, VA, 22230, telephone: (703)292-4669, fax:
(703)292-9018, email: ryjohnso@nsf.gov
For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:
* Victoria A. Smoot, Directorate for Education & Human Resources,
Division of Human Resource Development, 815 N, telephone: (703)
292-4677, fax: (703) 292-9018, email: vsmoot@nsf.gov
IX. OTHER PROGRAMS OF INTEREST
The NSF Guide to Programs is a compilation of funding for research and
education in science, mathematics, and engineering. The NSF Guide to
Programs is available electronically at
http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gp. General descriptions of NSF programs,
research areas, and eligibility information for proposal submission are
provided in each chapter.
Many NSF programs offer announcements or solicitations concerning specific
proposal requirements. To obtain additional information about these
requirements, contact the appropriate NSF program offices. Any changes in
NSF's fiscal year programs occurring after press time for the Guide to
Programs will be announced in the NSF E-Bulletin, which is updated daily on
the NSF Website at http://www.nsf.gov/home/ebulletin, and in individual
program announcements/solicitations. Subscribers can also sign up for NSF's
Custom News Service (http://www.nsf.gov/home/cns/start.htm) to be notified
of new funding opportunities that become available.
The AGEP Program is among those that target underrepresented minorities in
science, engineering, mathematics, and technology and that promote
innovation in education for all students. Other related programs include
the following: Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation (LSAMP),
Centers of Research Excellence in Science and Technology (CREST),
Historically Black Colleges and Universities-Undergraduate Program
(HBCU-UP), Collaborative Integration of Research and Education (CIRE), and
Integrated Graduate Education Research and Training (IGERT).
ABOUT THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
The National Science Foundation (NSF) funds research and education in most
fields of science and engineering. Awardees are wholly responsible for
conducting their project activities and preparing the results for
publication. Thus, the Foundation does not assume responsibility for such
findings or their interpretation.
NSF welcomes proposals from all qualified scientists, engineers and
educators. The Foundation strongly encourages women, minorities and persons
with disabilities to compete fully in its programs. In accordance with
Federal statutes, regulations and NSF policies, no person on grounds of
race, color, age, sex, national origin or disability shall be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to
discrimination under any program or activity receiving financial assistance
from NSF, although some programs may have special requirements that limit
eligibility.
Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED)
provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with
disabilities (investigators and other staff, including student research
assistants) to work on NSF-supported projects. See the GPG Chapter II,
Section D.2 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of
proposals.
The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific
progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and
cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences,
mathematics, and engineering.
To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download
copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the
NSF Website at http://www.nsf.gov
* Location: 4201 Wilson Blvd.
Arlington, VA 22230
* For General Information (703) 292-5111
(NSF Information Center):
* TDD (for the hearing-impaired): (703) 292-5090
* To Order Publications or Forms:
Send an e-mail to: pubs@nsf.gov
or telephone: (703) 292-7827
* To Locate NSF Employees: (703) 292-5111
PRIVACY ACT AND PUBLIC BURDEN STATEMENTS
The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is
solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of
1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in
connection with the selection of qualified proposals; project reports
submitted by awardees will be used for program evaluation and reporting
within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may
be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the
proposal review process; to applicant institutions/grantees to provide or
obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the
administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers
and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to
other government agencies needing information as part of the review process
or in order to coordinate programs; and to another Federal agency, court or
party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is
a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the
Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer
reviewers or advisory committee members. See Systems of Records, NSF-50,
"Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," 63 Federal
Register 267 (January 5, 1998), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and
Associated Records," 63 Federal Register 268 (January 5, 1998). Submission
of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete
information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to an information collection unless it displays a valid OMB control
number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public
reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average
120 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send
comments regarding this burden estimate and any other aspect of this
collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden,
to: Suzanne Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, Division of Administrative
Services, National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA 22230.
OMB control number: 3145-0058.
nsf.gov | About NSF | Funding | Publications | News &
Media | Search | Site Map | Help
[NSF Celebrating 50 Years]The National Science Foundation
4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington,
Virginia 22230, USA Policies
Tel: 703-292-5111, FIRS: 800-877-8339 Contact NSF
| TDD: 800-281-8749 Customize