This document has been archived and replaced by NSF 17-582 (https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf17582). Title: Paleo Perspectives on Climate Change (P2C2)(nsf13576) | NSF - National Science Foundation Date: 02/09/2016 Replaces: NSF 10-574 Paleo Perspectives on Climate Change (P2C2) [1]Program Solicitation NSF 13-576 Replaces Document(s): NSF 10-574 NSF Logo National Science Foundation Directorate for Geosciences Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences Division of Earth Sciences Division of Ocean Sciences Division of Polar Programs Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time): October 15, 2013 October 15, Annually Thereafter IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND REVISION NOTES Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the revised NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) ([2]NSF 16-1), which is effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after January 25, 2016. SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS Program Title: Paleo Perspectives on Climate Change (P2C2) Synopsis of Program: The goal of research funded under the interdisciplinary P2C2 solicitation is to utilize key geological, chemical, atmospheric (gas in ice cores), and biological records of climate system variability to provide insights into the mechanisms and rate of change that characterized Earth's past climate variability, the sensitivity of Earth's climate system to changes in forcing, and the response of key components of the Earth system to these changes. Important scientific objectives of P2C2 are to: 1) provide comprehensive paleoclimate data sets that can serve as model test data sets analogous to instrumental observations; and 2) enable transformative syntheses of paleoclimate data and modeling outcomes to understand the response of the longer-term and higher magnitude variability of the climate system that is observed in the geological and cryospheric records. 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. * David J. Verardo, Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-8527, email: [3]dverardo@nsf.gov * Candace O. Major, Division of Ocean Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-7597, email: [4]cmajor@nsf.gov * Justin Lawrence, telephone: (703) 262-2425, email: [5]jlawrenc@nsf.gov * William J. Wiseman, Division of Polar Programs, telephone: (703) 292-4750, email: [6]wwiseman@nsf.gov * Julie M. Palais, Division of Polar Programs, telephone: (703) 292-8033, email: [7]jpalais@nsf.gov Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): * 47.050 --- Geosciences Award Information Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant Estimated Number of Awards: 35 - Approximately 35 new awards per year will be made with a typical award duration of three years. Anticipated Funding Amount: $11,000,000 $11 million per year pending availability of funds Eligibility Information Who May Submit Proposals: The categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the Grant Proposal Guide, Chapter I, Section E. Who May Serve as PI: There are no restrictions or limits. Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: There are no restrictions or limits. Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: There are no restrictions or limits. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions A. Proposal Preparation Instructions * Letters of Intent: Not required * Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required * Full Proposals: + Full Proposals submitted via FastLane: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide, Part I: Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) Guidelines apply. The complete text of the GPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: [8]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg. + Full Proposals submitted via Grants.gov: NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov Guidelines apply (Note: The NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: [9]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grants govguide) B. Budgetary Information * Cost Sharing Requirements: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited. * Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Not Applicable * Other Budgetary Limitations: Not Applicable C. Due Dates * Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time): October 15, 2013 October 15, Annually Thereafter Proposal Review Information Criteria 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 [10]Summary of Program Requirements I. [11]Introduction II. [12]Program Description III. [13]Award Information IV. [14]Eligibility Information V. [15]Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions A. [16]Proposal Preparation Instructions B. [17]Budgetary Information C. [18]Due Dates D. [19]FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements VI. [20]NSF Proposal Processing and Review Procedures A. [21]Merit Review Principles and Criteria B. [22]Review and Selection Process VII. [23]Award Administration Information A. [24]Notification of the Award B. [25]Award Conditions C. [26]Reporting Requirements VIII. [27]Agency Contacts IX. [28]Other Information I. INTRODUCTION The Paleo Perspectives on Climate Change (P2C2) competition is a coordinated paleoclimate science initiative that is funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) Divisions of Atmospheric and GeoSpace Sciences (AGS), Earth Sciences (EAR), Ocean Sciences (OCE), and Polar Programs (PLR) in the Geosciences (GEO) Directorate. The annual P2C2 competition supports the scientific objectives of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) by fostering interdisciplinary research and synthesis of climate data. The importance of P2C2 research, as an element of the USGCRP, stems from its unique capability, on timescales longer than the instrumental record, to: 1) document the past temporal and spatial variability of Earth's climate system; 2) evaluate the rates of change associated with this variability; 3) determine the sensitivity of the Earth's climate system to variations in climate-forcing factors; and 4) provide a test environment for simulation predictions from numerical models. Proposals to the P2C2 competition must clearly state how the proposed projects will contribute to achieving these goals and how the research is relevant to the P2C2 Areas of Research Interest. Research projects that link polar and non-polar regions are strongly encouraged. Research projects that seek to use existing and archived digital data and physical samples are strongly encouraged. II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION Rapidly increasing atmospheric greenhouse gases will alter the climate system in ways that have not been seen on Earth in many millions of years. While much can be learned about the climate system using existing historical observations and current climate models, the record is far too short to study and observe its full response on multi-decadal to millennial time scales. For that, data from the geological record are required. The goal of research funded under the P2C2 solicitation is to utilize key geological, chemical, cryospheric, and biological records of climate system variability to provide insights into the mechanisms and rate of change that characterized Earth's past climate variability, the sensitivity of Earth's climate system to changes in forcing, and the response of key components of the Earth system to these changes. The paleoclimate research questions contained in P2C2 are designed to reduce uncertainties in future climate trajectory predictions by focusing on three specific and complementary lines of inquiry related to the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). Important scientific objectives of P2C2 are to: 1) provide comprehensive paleoclimate data sets that can serve as model test data sets analogous to instrumental observations; and 2) enable syntheses of paleoclimate data and modeling outcomes to understand the response of the longer-term and higher magnitude variability of the climate system that is observed in the geological record. These are ongoing challenges to the paleoclimate community because these goals require the development of climate targets with sufficiently large signal to noise ratios, and well-constrained boundary and initial conditions of ocean-atmosphere-terrestrial-cryosphere interaction, to accurately determine internal and external forcing. These goals also require paleoclimate reconstructions with chronologies sufficiently constrained to be able to quantify short-term changes in climate with well-resolved spatial distributions. Areas of Research Interest 1. What were the regional responses of coupled climate systems such as ENSO, the monsoons, NAM, and the MOC during past climate changes? The regional expression of climate change, and in particular hydrological variability, extreme events, and possible abrupt transitions, are likely to have the greatest impact on human populations and pose the most serious societal challenges in the future. Dynamical modes of climate variability, such as El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO), the Northern Annular Mode (NAM), and the meridional overturning circulation (MOC), have large-scale influences and strong regional impacts around the globe. Previous paleoclimatic reconstructions have highlighted that regional climate varied significantly in the past, with large regional differences in the hydrological cycle being particularly noteworthy. Changes in the response of these modes of variability are likely to be among the primary mechanisms by which global-scale radiative forcing is converted into regional-scale climate impacts. Contributions are particularly sought to improve understanding in the large-scale hydrological variability of tropical and extra-tropical regions and to developing spatial-temporal networks needed to understand variability in ENSO, monsoons, Inter Tropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ) position, and regional hydrologic variability (e.g., droughts and floods) in North America and the tropics. Priority will be given to proposals that synthesize existing data, make use of existing samples, or clearly justify the collection of new data to address relevant questions such as: a) How have regional climates, including temperature, precipitation-evaporation, climate modes (e.g., ENSO, NAM, monsoons) and extreme climate events (e.g., droughts, floods, tropical storms), varied and interacted on seasonal to longer timescales? b) What forced this observed variability in the geological record, and how realistically can the full-range of regional climate variability be simulated with current climate models? 2. How does the geological record inform research about past climate sensitivity and the impact of past abrupt changes in climate under a variety of different boundary conditions, past climate states, or during periods of large and rapid changes in forcing? Data and models support the idea that Earth?s climate system does not always respond linearly to external forcing and, even in the apparent absence of forcing, is capable of abrupt transitions between climate states. Assessing the likelihood of future abrupt climate change requires improved paleoclimate data sets and rigorous paleoclimate modeling studies in order to identify the causes and mechanisms of past abrupt climate change. Key scientific needs include understanding the relationship between abrupt climate change and (1) ocean circulation, particularly related to deep water formation; (2) sea-ice transport and processes, particularly where they interact with deep water formation; (3) land-ice behavior; (4) modes of atmospheric variability and how they are altered by changes in mean climate conditions; (5) the hydrological cycle, including storage, runoff and permafrost changes; and 6) feedback processes that control the interactions between the global carbon, biotic, and hydrologic systems and their impact on other aspects of the climate system across a broad spectrum of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels evident in the geologic record. Priority will be given to proposals that synthesize existing data, make use of existing samples, or clearly justify the collection of new data to address relevant questions such as: a) How do feedbacks in the Earth system (i.e., water vapor, land and sea ice, land surfaces, vegetation, dust, greenhouse gases) act to amplify a primary radiative forcing? b) What are the non-linearities in the climate system and can they limit the ability to use past climates as analogs for future climate changes? c) What caused abrupt changes in water availability in the past? d) How have the oceans responded chemically and biologically to higher or lower pH (e.g., ocean acidification due to varying carbon dioxide levels including those significantly different than pre-industrial levels)? 3. How sensitive was ice (i.e., sheets, caps, mountain glaciers) and sea level to rapid changes in climate especially during past warm climates? Future sea level rise has enormous consequences for society, but just how much of Greenland and Antarctica will melt and how quickly is poorly understood. There exists some possibility for rapid disintegration of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets and a consequent rapid rise in global sea-level. Evaluation of the likelihood and warning signs of such an event will require significant improvements in our understanding of the potential rate of dynamic change in the cryosphere as evidenced by the geologic record. The ability to predict future melting is hampered by an insufficient theoretical understanding of ice sheet behavior (i.e., subglacial and englacial hydrology, ice shelf buttressing, sliding dynamics, and cracking). In addition, the observational record of ice sheet behavior is both sparse and short relative to the timescales at which ice sheets will adjust to climate change. A focused paleoclimate component is necessary to spur insight and test theories to improve the scientific understanding of the potential for abrupt changes in ice sheet dynamics. Priority will be given to proposals that synthesize existing data, make use of existing samples, or clearly justify the collection of new data to address relevant questions such as: a) What was the state of the cryosphere and sea level during the warm periods of the last 5 million years encompassing the Pliocene, Pleistocene, and Holocene? b) What was the rate of change in sea ice distribution and land ice in the past and what were the dominant controls on the rates of change? c) What were the climatic impacts of ice dynamics, such as melting, during periods of past climatic variability? III. AWARD INFORMATION It is anticipated that approximately 35 new awards per year will be made with a typical award duration of three years. Approximately $11 million is expected to be available each year, pending availability of funds. IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION Who May Submit Proposals: The categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the Grant Proposal Guide, Chapter I, Section E. Who May Serve as PI: There are no restrictions or limits. Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: There are no restrictions or limits. Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: There are no restrictions or limits. V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS A. Proposal Preparation Instructions 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. * Full proposals submitted via FastLane: Proposals submitted in response to this program 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: [29]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg. Paper copies of the GPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from [30]nsfpubs@nsf.gov. Proposers are reminded to identify this program solicitation number in the program solicitation block on the NSF Cover Sheet For Proposal to the National Science Foundation. Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing. * Full proposals submitted via Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via Grants.gov should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov. The complete text of the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: ([31]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgov guide). To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov site, then click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Application Instructions link and enter the funding opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of the Grants.gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from [32]nsfpubs@nsf.gov. 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 [33]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. Guidelines for Proposers Wishing to Conduct Research in Antarctica Proposers wishing to conduct fieldwork in Antarctica must adhere to the guidelines for submissions to the Antarctic Research solicitation (NSF 10-543). Information for proposers can also be found on the U.S. Antarctic Program website at: [34]http://www.usap.gov/usapgov/proposalInformation/index.cfm?m=3 B. Budgetary Information Cost Sharing: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited. C. Due Dates * Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time): October 15, 2013 October 15, Annually Thereafter D. FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane: To prepare and submit a proposal via FastLane, see detailed technical instructions available at: [35]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 [36]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: [37]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: [38]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. VI. NSF PROPOSAL PROCESSING AND REVIEW PROCEDURES 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 [39]Exhibit III-1. A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: [40]http://www.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 [41]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. A. Merit Review Principles and Criteria 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: * All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge. * NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals. These "Broader Impacts" may be accomplished through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. The project activities may be based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must be well justified. * Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is not likely to be meaningful. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated, level than the individual project. 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. ([42]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 [43]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: * Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge; and * Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes. The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria: 1. What is the potential for the proposed activity to a. Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and b. Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)? 2. To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts? 3. Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success? 4. How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities? 5. Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities? 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 Proposals to the P2C2 competition must clearly state how the proposed projects will contribute to achieving these goals and how the research is relevant to the P2C2 areas of Research Interest. B. Review and Selection Process Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or 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 generally be completed and submitted by each reviewer and/or panel. 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. 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 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.) B. Award Conditions 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 [44]http://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 [45]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 [46]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag. C. Reporting Requirement 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 no later than 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). No later than 120 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 [47]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag. VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS 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: * David J. Verardo, Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-8527, email: [48]dverardo@nsf.gov * Candace O. Major, Division of Ocean Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-7597, email: [49]cmajor@nsf.gov * Justin Lawrence, telephone: (703) 262-2425, email: [50]jlawrenc@nsf.gov * William J. Wiseman, Division of Polar Programs, telephone: (703) 292-4750, email: [51]wwiseman@nsf.gov * Julie M. Palais, Division of Polar Programs, telephone: (703) 292-8033, email: [52]jpalais@nsf.gov For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact: * FastLane Help Desk, telephone: 1-800-673-6188; e-mail: [53]fastlane@nsf.gov. For questions relating to Grants.gov contact: * Grants.gov Contact Center: If the Authorized Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not received a confirmation message from Grants.gov within 48 hours of submission of application, please contact via telephone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail: [54]support@grants.gov. IX. OTHER INFORMATION 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 [55]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 [56]NSF's website. 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 [57]http://www.grants.gov. ABOUT THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 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 [58]http://www.nsf.gov * Location: 4201 Wilson Blvd. Arlington, VA 22230 * For General Information (NSF Information Center): (703) 292-5111 * TDD (for the hearing-impaired): (703) 292-5090 * To Order Publications or Forms: Send an e-mail to: [81]nsfpubs@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; 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, [60]NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004), and [61]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 [62]Policies and Important Links | [63]Privacy | [64]FOIA | [65]Help | [66]Contact NSF | [67]Contact Web Master | [68]SiteMap National Science Foundation The National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230, USA Tel: (703) 292-5111, FIRS: (800) 877-8339 | TDD: (800) 281-8749 [69]Text Only References 1. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#toc 2. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf16001 3. mailto:dverardo@nsf.gov 4. mailto:cmajor@nsf.gov 5. mailto:jlawrenc@nsf.gov 6. mailto:wwiseman@nsf.gov 7. mailto:jpalais@nsf.gov 8. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg 9. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide 10. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#summary 11. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#pgm_intr_txt 12. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#pgm_desc_txt 13. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#awd_info 14. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#elig 15. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#prep 16. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#prep 17. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#budg_cst_shr_txt 18. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#dates 19. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#fastlane 20. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#review 21. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#reviewcrit 22. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#reviewprot 23. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#awardadmin 24. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#awardnotify 25. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#grantcond 26. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#reportreq 27. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#cont 28. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13576/nsf13576.htm#othpgm 29. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg 30. mailto:nsfpubs@nsf.gov 31. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key= grantsgovguide 32. mailto:nsfpubs@nsf.gov 33. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg 34. http://www.usap.gov/usapgov/proposalInformation/index.cfm?m=3 35. https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm 36. mailto:fastlane@nsf.gov 37. http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants.html 38. mailto:support@grants.gov 39. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf15001/gpg_3ex1.pdf 40. http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/ 41. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf14043 42. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf15001/gpg_2.jsp# IIC2di 43. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf15001/gpg_2.jsp# IIC2di 44. http://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF 45. mailto:nsfpubs@nsf.gov 46. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag 47. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag 48. mailto:dverardo@nsf.gov 49. mailto:cmajor@nsf.gov 50. mailto:jlawrenc@nsf.gov 51. mailto:wwiseman@nsf.gov 52. mailto:jpalais@nsf.gov 53. mailto:fastlane@nsf.gov 54. mailto:support@grants.gov 55. http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/outreach.jsp 56. https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USNSF/subscriber/new? topic_id=USNSF_179 57. http://www.grants.gov/ 58. http://www.nsf.gov/ 59. mailto:nsfpubs@nsf.gov 60. http://www.nsf.gov/policies/SOR_PA_NSF-50_Principal_Investigator_ Proposal_File.pdf 61. http://www.nsf.gov/policies/SOR_PA_NSF-51_Reviewer_Proposal_ File.pdf 62. https://www.nsf.gov/policies 63. https://www.nsf.gov/policies/privacy.jsp 64. https://www.nsf.gov/policies/foia.jsp 65. https://www.nsf.gov/help/ 66. https://www.nsf.gov/help/contact.jsp 67. mailto:webmaster@nsf.gov 68. https://www.nsf.gov/help/sitemap.jsp 69. https://assistive.usablenet.com/tt/referrer