Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Greetings. Everyone.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Um! Thanks for joining us
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: for the division of environmental biologies. Virtual office hour for the month. Today we have what we hope is a really interesting and helpful topic.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: We're going to cover some things that we've learned at as time Spis. And now i'm working here at Nsf. That might be valuable for the Ti community to know.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Um. We should have plenty of time for questions, and so, if you have questions any point along the way, use the question and answer button available to you on Zoom ideally. You can set yourself to anonymous
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: um, and we'll see those questions. There's also a thumbs up button. So if you see a question that you share, you can just hit that thumb. And the more people that like a question the higher. I'm a list. It goes, and the sooner we'll get to that
We have an excellent cast of characters here today to help us talk about this topic.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: So I'm Jeremy Wojak, a so-called rotating program officer in the population and community ecology cluster in the division of environmental biology and we have three others Chris, Would you like to start us off
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: everyone? Thanks for coming. I'm. Chris, Paula, Christian and I'm. From the program officer in systematics and biodiversity science. I've been in a for about three years, but before that I was a pi, so I have some
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: thanks. Chris and Kim.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): Hi, I'm Kim Hughes. I'm a rotating program officer in evolutionary processes, and my home institution is Florida State University, so i'll be going back there sometime in the next few months.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Finds him and Kendra.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Hi, everyone! I'm Kendra Mclaughlin. I'm a program officer also in the Vision of Environmental biology.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Here I am in the ecosystem science cluster as my home cluster. I've been at Nsf for about five and a half years, so i'll be providing that perspective on. I have a lot of things I I wish I had known, so i'll be providing that perspective
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: right? And as always, Um. Our Webinar today is facilitated by Megan Lewis, Christina Washington, and Bill Lawson apologies. If you care. Dogs in the background
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: protecting me from the ups driver, the
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: just as a reminder, We have a series of office hours coming up that may be of great interest to you.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Our next office hour in September is on macro systems and beyond enabled science. And then in in October we have more of a general overview of the core programs and special programs available in the division of environmental biology.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Note that asterisk means a a time change. The date chain from when we normally host these. Because of holiday
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: November, we'll be talking about the exciting new program debuted last year. Partnership to advance conservation, science and practice.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: And then in December we'll talk about the recently formed directorate of technology, innovation and partnership, which is a new idea to many pis. And so you should come here. What? The the goals and objectives of that Directory
programs are
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: a great way to stay up to date with happenings, and Theeb is by checking in on the blog.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Um, there's the Url there. Um,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: you can subscribe. Follow the blog and get updates about events and solicitations and things that we want to communicate out to the
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: community.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: And if you do miss a virtual office hour that is, of relevance to you. We post recaps often with the slides and curated list of
when we ask questions and answers.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: And so that's a great resource to find things,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: whether you missed it, or you just need a reminder. Be sure to check out that resource,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: and then at a higher level you can subscribe to and Nsf. Updates. If you go to the main and Nsf. Gov. Web page and go all the way to the bottom. You'll see this yellowish orange banner that says, Sign up,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: you can subscribe to things that are of interest to you. So you get poked with no news and upcoming events. And then, lastly, for now, if you're not already serving as a reviewer or a panelist.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Nsf. Merit Review Process. It's a fantastic service to the community, but also a great way to learn about the process. The
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: so you can go visit that Url, and describe your expertise, and then
some more aware of uh
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: what I,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: your expertise is, and how we can involve you in the repeat process.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Right? Just a quick reminder of some upcoming funding opportunities.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Um!
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Most of the programs in De B. The core programs have no deadlines,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: and some of the special programs do have deadlines, including macro systems which is
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: coming up in November along with dices
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: and organism or response to climate change are all in November you can see it. We timed the Macro System's office hour to provide some guidance before that those proposals are due,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: and then you also see a number of Dcl's or dear colleague letters
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: which are not separate solicitations. But there are areas of emphasis points that we want to communicate out to the community. So things like
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: planning proposals to catalyze innovative and inclusive wild land, fire, science,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Wildland fires, obviously a topic of great
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: import.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Our society. And so this Dcr. Outlines some of Nsf's goals and priorities.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Um. And also you've heard some of us describe ourselves as rotating program officers. That means a temporary position where you sort of on loan from your home institution.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Biology is always searching for people to serve in that role. And so that's potential interest. You can look at this
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: document here.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Also. Just reach out via email to program officers to start that conversation.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: All right. I think Chris is going to cover a couple of
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: recent updates to the Dev core solicitation.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: Yes, So some of these are newer than others, and this one this one has to do with the data management plan which we've required for a while. So I want to call your attention to the fact that there's a little bit of new guidance there, and that really is for projects that involve
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: collecting or generating specimens. The data management plan must include a description of how the specimens and associated data will be accessioned into a maintained in an established biological collection.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: Um! And then, uh,
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: I wanted to also call your attention to the int bio track.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: Some of you probably know we had a specific program, a separate program called into Bio, and this has moved within um the core solicitation as a track. But the goals are pretty similar that is, really to foster integrative
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: research. But to be eligible for this track the project must span two or more subdisciplinary
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: boundaries, and so projects that would be that could be easily handled within a single program basically would not be a good fit.
So if you're
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: and as with anything, you know, I think, for a lot of projects. You might have multiple options as to how or where you submit it, and talking to
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: ah us or your most ah closely relevant program officer, with a good place to start to help. Ah figure out whether or not a track like the in Biotrack might make sense
here.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: Small grants are not new, but we did want to call your attention to them. These are basically these are submitted to the core, but they specify a budget maximum of two hundred and
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: thousand. These are not for collecting preliminary data, but really are for just projects that either just have a lower
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: budget because of the nature of the work, or smaller and scope.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: It just is sort of a way to flag that the budget for the project is smaller than what we might normally see. And that's important,
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: I think, in review, because we want to make sure it's obvious to panelists so that they're not comparing apples, more engines. So it's sometimes a little bit confusing when you're comparing a two million dollar budget with a two hundred thousand dollars budget, and this sort of calls that out to them that that's the case,
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: even though we can, of course, see your budget and look at it as Well,
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: um! So having said that if two hundred thousand dollars is, you know,
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: too small, there's nothing stopping you for putting in a budget of two hundred and fifty thousand dollars, and just submitting to the core without using the small grams um in the title. So, as always, we ask that to kind of submit the budget appropriate for the project and building that.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: Lastly, another statement is required for the core of programs, and that is a statement describing a plan for safe and inclusive work environments. There are a lot of materials online to help
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: answer your your questions and to provide some guidance on how to generate these documents, but now they're expected for all programs coming into the Bio and Geo. Core programs, and but only those programs. So there are some programs that do not yet require this. This is the pilot, or within those programs, and so on.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: We're looking at how, how these, how the review processes we reviewed, process, and try not to
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: make sure that we're uh handling these and evaluated
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: proper. So things like the career, for example, do not require this, so as always make sure you kind of check your solicitation carefully, and of course reach out to one of us. If you have any questions about whether you're required to include a statement in the the safe and inclusive work, environment, statement or not.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Thanks. And thank you, Chris.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: All right. So we can begin in earnest with our topic for today.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Um,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: we expect um people will be varying levels of familiarity with and Nsf: but probably even if those of us who are more familiar. Remember, as we first approached it, it can seem kind of intimidating right There's a lot going on. There's many programs,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: many documents, even many interfaces, right with Fast Lane and Research Gov: And so there's a lot to learn about how to interact with Nsf:
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: um.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: So we'll start by talking about ways that you can begin to learn,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: or places or mechanisms by which you can start to learn the culture of Nsf. One place, of course, is the formal documentation. So there's the proposals and awards policy and Procedures Guides, which we often call the path g.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: One of many acronyms right, and the acronyms themselves can be a barrier as you talk about, or to Nsf. There's lots of acronyms to decode.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Um. But if if you're an instructor and you've ah had questions from your students and responded: Read the syllabus. The Pap G is kind of our syllabus right? It outlines very formally most of the basic processes and procedures
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: regarding proposal, submission, and award management. So it's a great resource,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: particularly
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: uh, if you're new to the process.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: There are, of course, solicitations which outline specific funding opportunities.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Dear colleague, letters which communicate emphasis or
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: goals or priorities of Nsf:
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Then there's the research. Gov: and fascinating systems that you may need to interact with to do this work.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: They themselves have rich help resources associated with them.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: And so, but beyond that formal documentation, basically the things that you can find on the web. There's lots of ways that we try to reach out to the community.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: We've talked about some of them already, like the blog. We, our division has a blog, but so do most other divisions and or directorates. And so, if your research crosses boundaries, you may search for those other divisional blogs like, if you're
work at the intersection of organism of biology,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: the Ios division may have a blog of interest to you.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: We also get out to conferences, to meet the
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: people in person, and to give talks and and host professional development.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: And as you'll hear often today, we're available for individual meetings with Pis, our principal investigators teams. Um either before the proposal process after proposal gets reviewed and and during the award management phases
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: another way to sort of continue to learn about, and so culture, and how the process works, and how you can be successful is by participating right? So, of course, you can submit proposals when you get the proposals back you. You have reviews and or panel summaries,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: and so there's things to learn about how to interpret that, and we'll touch on some of those today.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Um, if you're fortunate and you get something funded, there's you'll be responsible for managing that award, and there's lots to learn there.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Um, and and you can also learn by providing service to the community as a reviewer or a panelist. And seeing the process, the Merit review process from the inside is extraordinarily valuable.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: I think Um Kendra is going to pick
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: the micro beer. Okay, great. And so this slide is kind of interesting. It just kind of talks about our perspective of
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: the relationship between a program officer representing Nsf. And you, the Pi Community and your institution.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: I mean, we do think of ourselves as the customer Service Oriented organization, even though, as Jeremy just said, we are also a federal agency that is bound by all the rules and requirements of being a Federal agency,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: we we really are unique among Federal agencies. In that almost the entirety of our budget goes out the door in the form of grants to you and your institutions. So our success as an agency depends entirely on the quality of proposals that we are getting in the door that are submitted by the Pi community. So for that reason we really value this relationship. And you know, customer might not.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: This is the right word, but we do think of ourselves as a service-oriented organization. So it's kind of organized with like myths and truths so first myth is that you know we program officers are too busy to talk with people about their Grant ideas.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Um, I will say we are very busy. Um, not maybe any more busy than anyone working at University. Ah, it may take a couple of tries to make a connection with the program officer, but our job, our job. A big part of our job is to answer P. I email, set up Zoom calls discuss. Um, Certainly, submitted proposals that have been reviewed
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: your current award status and even your ideas. And this is pretty much the best part of the job.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: So um! That um is really important to make sure that that communication is is um happening, and i'll say we can't really initiate that right like the Pis have to initiate that we can't just be saying, Oh, I wonder who my
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: I have questions about their proposal. Right like we. We depend on the pis contacting us to initiate that conversation. So that is the first myth
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: um Jeremy popped up the second myth, which is, you know, ns that should just get a lot of no right like right A proposal it gets rejected. I have an idea there's not an obvious home. It's just, can seem a little disappointing for people,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: and that is also um! There's a kernel of truth in the myth. Right? So we do have limited budget. We do have high proposal pressure, although different programs have much different types of proposal pressure. So please investigate that to the best of your ability.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: So we do have to decline um. Some submitted proposals just a fact, but our success again depends on the success of the community, and So our job is to help
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: people put in the best version of their own ideas, and to help make sure that that proposal has been merit reviewed in the best way possible.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: I'm going to take just a second and talk about How do you find out a funding rate for a program?
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: So there is aggregate information on um on a web page that perhaps Megan Lewis can find, or I will find when i'm done talking, that shows you by directorate
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: the the success rate for a program in a fiscal year. You can search that data further. So it's public public data, and we can point you to that in just a little bit.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Okay. So the other points here on this myth is, you know, we are trying to match the
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: of our opportunities with the types of research you want to do right. We are trying to make sure that we are providing you cutting edge opportunities
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: to give us your most amazing new ideas, and for us to support them. So that's part of our job, and we do a lot of listening and reading papers and thinking about where the research community is going to meet that goal. And we also need to hear kind of what you're facing in terms of obstacles
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: um, and issues. Certainly that during the pandemic.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Ah, that was, you know, extremely eye-opening time for us at Nsf to hear what was happening at universities, to hear what people were dealing with personally and professionally, and we really need to hear what the obstacles are, so that we can support me the best way we can.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: I think there's one more on here, which is the Nsf. Is one thing right. It's one monolith. It's a thing, and we are an agency. We're kind of a small agency, but
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: pretty much uh
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: within certain. You know guidelines.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: There is a place for you at Nsf. For your idea and your proposal. So there's a huge amount of diversity in the process. You know, merit, reuse, merit review, but just the nuances of how that plays out what the emphasis in terms of science areas are and the expectations.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: So I can tell. An evolutionary biologist wrote this slide because it says, Think adaptive radiation. But you know, we have a whole new directorate that is focused on, you know, partnerships with industry essentially
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: so right? That is something that nsf never really did before. Um! And now we're we're in that game for sure. So um just kind of search around and try to find the place or talk to a program officer and try to find a place for yourself. I will also. Um! I know It's time for me to do my next slide, but I will also follow up with just like, What am I doing when I contact the program? Officer? I think that you know another important piece. Um, that we we can help you with it just
a second.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: So the next slide talks about a little more concretely what you might be doing as you prepare to submit the proposal
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: I I can i'm? Not sure. I I see the attendees on the list. I'm not sure um where you're all at in terms of transmitted before. Uh, is this new to you, but I mean the first step is really finding a solicitation right? So we've talked a lot about our deed core solicitation because we are all
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: part of that particular solicitation. But there's hundreds of solicitations at this agency. And so finding the right one for your idea is key.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Um. And yeah, if you're coming at it from the research side, I mean, you know your idea, and you might read the solicitation and say, Oh, I see how my idea fits here. But unless that proposal also is able to make that link,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: the review process, you know, depending on the review criteria can end up,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: not really seeing that that fit and so great ideas that if the wrong program can fail, and it is our job to help you, I would say, find the right solicitation for your idea before you submit it before you take all the time and trouble and effort to submit.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Okay, So that's the first thing.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Um. The next thing is to really take a little bit of time. Um, with a draft before you submit it. So this is something we are seeing in Deb with this switch to no deadline proposals from a a few years ago. We are seeing higher quality proposals. Those are submitted when they're ready. Proposals that have been, you know, read by a few people. Um, So the thing here says, be strategic with your friendly reviews.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: So again, reviewers are going to be reading this proposal and looking for a lot of different things, right? Technical expertise,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: you know. Do I agree with the big picture that this pi is painting. How are the broader impacts looking? Do they have support for the broad impact? So,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: um! You can have different people read that draft proposal with different lenses, because you almost certainly in the review process, will have different people with different lenses. Um, reading the um proposal,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: catching typos and copy editing super important, but also maybe not. Maybe that's what Chat Jbt is for. Oh, just kidding It's being recorded. Okay, maybe not.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Okay. So Yes. Be strategic with your friendly reviews. I believe that is Oh, yeah. So struggling with the process, you're not alone. So
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: yeah, the resource. There are a lot of resources online for both proposal, submission and grant administration advice.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Um. They're usually public that are associated with research, intensive institutions. You may be at a research intensive institution whose sro cranks out, you know, hundreds or thousands of submitted proposals. Ah, every month,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: or you may not be. But there is a lot of advice online. And also I will say Nsf. Does have very interesting outreach materials about that part of the process,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: I see, and Megan Lewis put in the Nsf. By the numbers link, so you can um check on the funding rates there, and I will try to follow up by putting in the chat um the nsf resource. I'm thinking of for um helping with proposal cooperation.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: So thanks so much, and I think i'm handing it up.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Thanks, Kendrick.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Chris is going to.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: I'll pick up from here and talk about what happens after you've submitted.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: Yeah. So this this slide kind of gets at how you interpret panel feedback, which I think probably warrants a little bit of description of how exactly panels work, and how that feedback gets structured
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: so, and the bottom line is when you get your reviews back, one of the things you'll get is a panel summary that really summarizes
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: the key aspects of the panel discussion.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: Key thing is that that summary is the most important document we get back,
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: and the and the reason it's the most important document that you get back is because of the nature of how we run the panels in Db. And across Biode,
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: and this is one of those things that varies across. And so i'm talking here specifically about how we think we do things in Dv. And I think this is true for all of I as well. But
what we do when we're running in a panel basically is, we send out proposals to the panelists, for
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: they submit those reviews in isolation, so they can't see each other's, reviews, and once those reviews are submitted to us. They cannot be changed once we have. And then what we do in a panel is that the panelists get together and discuss.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: Those are reviews, And what we emphasize to the panelists is they is that they are allowed and encouraged to change their mind, based on what the other panelists say, and so that changing of the mind, and that consensus building is meant to be represented in the panelists.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: So sometimes the panel there may be a review that is not consistent with the panel summary,
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: because that reviewer changed their mind. And so that is why the panel summary is,
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: is what we spend a lot of time on in the panel trying to get right, and we really try our best to have it. Be as helpful and instructive as possible. But that's Why, the panel summary is the most important thing to look at, and the reviews sometimes might include comments that are off track.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: And so, even if there is a comment that is off-track interviews. That does not mean that we didn't notice that it was off track or that we didn't catch that in the parallel. It means that the a particular reviewer might have missed something. And of course that's a thing that happens with some frequency, as you may know, from all of your work reviewing.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: Sometimes we miss things. It's just it's just like.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: But so look at the panel, summary, and of course, once you've had the time to digest the reviews on the panel Summary
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: sometimes give it a week, two weeks, that is, when we love to talk to you and and work through those things, so we'll be familiar enough with your proposals that we can help. You understand those points of emphasis and what maybe is not so important one.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: This is this: This bullet is really, I guess, related to what I was was just saying.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: Yes, sometimes there are stuff in proposals that reviewers miss.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: I like to think that we have program officers really don't miss those things, but I wouldn't rule that out one hundred percent, either
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: that that some, some, some aspect that you tried to convey slips by, and it's incredibly frustrating.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: But at the end of the day that we're you know our our reviewers are reading the,
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: you know, somewhere between six and ten proposals. And so there's a huge emphasis on the clarity of communication. And so part of that falls on you, and part of it falls on the reviewers to make sure that they don't miss anything.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: I guess they'll take a second here to note that I think one of the
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: advantages of the virtual panels that we've been having is that we, I think, been able to expand Our, therefore been able to reduce our proposal loads on panelists over the last few years,
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: and I think that's something that we've kind of learned
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: was potentially a good thing, because there was a time when the proposal alone was much higher. When we were reviewing, like fifteen, twenty proposals; and these kind of mistakes, I think, would have been much more common than than we are now, where I think we have quite a manageable road for most of our panelists, and that's it.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: That's a change we've made, and I said, but I think at least then Db. Again, I should say that i'm pretty excited about it, and I can just
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: so, and thank you. Chris Kim is going to talk about
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: what happens after you've been congratulated.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): All right. So after you receive that phone call and you've gotten your money and you started to do some work.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): Your work really isn't over. In fact, your work has kind of just begun at a minimum. You'll be making a record annually, and that report becomes due, I believe, ninety days before the year anniversary of when the award was made.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): And so every year, ninety days before the anniversary, you'll get a notification that your annual report is do in some cases like at my university. My sponsored Projects office also gives those notifications, so they start harassing me about filing my annual reports.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): Ah! Once that ninety day window is up, and if you still haven't had your report submitted and approved, then your report becomes overdue,
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): and an overdue report can really cause a lot of problems. It can cause problems for you. If you have another award
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): that may be recommended for funding that award cannot be processed and recommended for funding until there are no overdue reports associated with it,
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): and that means not just for the pi but for the co-pi as well. So if you have an overdue report, and you're a copi on someone else's proposal with their Api your overdue report will prevent their recommendation.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): Ah! To from going forward. So just be aware that you don't want your annual reports, or your final report, which is your final annual report at the end of the Grant period. You don't want that to be able to.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): There's also a very nice template. I don't know how many years It took me to figure out that there was a template that was really useful for doing your annual reports, but once I figured that out. It made writing the annual reports much easier. Ah, so download that report as soon as you start working, and you'll read through it and and note what you need to keep track of such as all the participants. What you're you've accomplished in each year. What
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): potential setbacks or alterations you've had to make. That's really helpful.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): The other thing that's pretty helpful. That again it took me even longer to figure out. Is that your list of participants can get really long, and I eventually figured out that you can upload an excel file for your list of participants instead of typing them in slowly, one by one. Ah, so that will also save some time.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): But even so, even with these sort of time-saving templates and the ability to upload excel files, It's going to take you a while to do your annual report. I think the Nsf. On their page are on the report says they estimate about five hours, and I think that that's about right. Which for me for doing it
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): so don't procrastinate. And when you do sit down to do it, make sure you have a set aside a few hours to work on it.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): Okay,
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): The other thing I want to talk about on this slide is supplements. You all are probably aware of the core programs, and many of you are probably aware of this
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): special programs as well, but we also fund the supplements to current awards. So again, the ones you might be most familiar with are the research experience for undergraduate or research experience,
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): teachers or research opportunity awards that can be supplements to your current awards.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): It used to be that
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): in the olden days that May, that most of the Reu supplements were funded after your award. But these days many programs strongly encourage you to submit those supplements with the original award,
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): and that's because it's less
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): work for everyone and
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): means you have you. You're able, and we are able to plan for those activities well in advance.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): There are some supplements, though, that you wouldn't normally submit with your initial application, your initial proposal, and some of those might be career, life, balance, awards that can be used when there is a
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): a particular change in your circumstances. Say you take an unpaid leave of absence from work. Because you have a child. Care needs, or elder care needs, or some other unusual needs.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): Then we have career, life, balance, supplements that can be useful in those situations.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): There are also various accomplishment and opportunity-based awards that would come around what might not be appropriate for you throughout your career, but at certain points in your career they might be appropriate.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): So we have the mid career awards. Sorry that's not. That's not a supplement. Sorry
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): Actually, what would be an Ah! An example of an accomplishment an opportunity-based supplement, I haven't encountered those in my time in this. Ah, any of you guys now
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: there's a wide variety of views across Nsf. Programs, or I think, the
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: in many programs they're infrequent, and in some programs they're more frequent. But these are accomplishment based is kind of what it sounds like. If a project is really just, you know, uncovering,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: really interesting results. Um, pushing some boundaries, there, there might be a a supplement that allows the Pis to continue that kind of groundbreaking work.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Um!
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: But again, there's sort of different levels of appetite for those supplements across the agency.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): And so this would be something that you'd probably want to contact the program officers in your program about If you have an idea that relates to to one of these kinds of submarines.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): The other thing to note is that these supplements tend to be most successful when they're tied to some of the core Nsf priorities like broadening participation, workforce development, or specific unique needs of the scientific.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): So again, it's always a good idea to reach out to your program officers, if you have questions about any of these potential supports.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): Okay.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): The other thing that you will start to encounter once your award is made. Is that besides the annual report, there are other instances when you want to communicate with your program. One of the most common, maybe, or a common one, is that say you get your original award period is a three-year award.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): But there was some delay like Covid and your University was shut down, or a postdoc. You had a delay in hiring a postdoc or a graduate student took a lead of absence. If you get to that end of that three year period, and you have not
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): completed your aims, and there is money left to complete those aims. You can request. A no-cost extension.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): Now, no-cost extensions are not just meant to
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): allow you to use unused funds. They are really meant to allow you to complete work that you propose to do
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): so just because you've been frugal, and you could do something really cool with your with money that you've saved. That's not a legitimate justification for a no-cost extension,
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): and you will need to justify the no-cost extension when you request one.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): The other things you'll want to communicate to your program are. If there's any change in the scope of the project. If there's any change in pi or a substantial change in the methods, or there's a substantial change in the person months allocated,
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): you'll want to communicate these. You can communicate those in your annual report at the end of the year, but you can also communicate and talk to your program officer about that before time beforehand.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): If there is that substantive delay, or some or some kind of problem that was unanticipated Again, you know, communicating with your program is, is a good idea. And again, those can be included in your annual report. But
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): ah! Sometimes
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): your program can actually help you surmount those problems. So these reporting requirements about change in scope and delays or problems are not meant to be punitive. They're not meant to say, Oh, you didn't do what you said, you're going to do so now. We're going to remember this. And, Doc, you or hold that against you in the future, if they're actually meant to inform your program if any issues have come up with which we can help,
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): and we often can help.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): But the only way you'll know that is, if you communicate with us. So the bottom line is, you know, communicate early and often. We are here to help you solve problems that that come up.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Excellent thanks, Kim,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: and I think
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: that brings us to question and answer time. We have a chunk of time,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: I think.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: First one is not a question, but some feedback.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Someone wrote in that they're finding it challenging to fit the safe and inclusive work. Environment plan into two pages, especially when there's complicating factors like international settings,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: and I see four thumbs up, and so I
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: people at least, are sharing that feedback. We will absolutely take note of them. And
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Megan, did you have something to add there?
Megan Lewis - NSF: No, just that. I was getting it out for you to move to the next one.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Okay, thanks, Megan.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: The safe and inclusive field plans. It's a pilot that we've just started, and so we are very interested in your feedback about all aspects, both the procedural right literally writing and submitting the document. But then also
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: constitutes a quality plan and the kinds of things that are coming up for you as you draft those plans we Are you
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: absolutely um attuned to them?
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: All right. Next question how our deed panel is chosen?
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Um.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: The questioner says that they've participated in the panel before they've recently been asked about their availability. But weren't chosen,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: and Chris is going to
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: give us some feedback.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: Yeah. This, I would say again, this is a the details of the process that we certainly very even within Dv. And outside of Dv. But
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: but in general, you know, we start out the process by doing a broad survey of our community that's often defined by people who have either previously reviewed or submitted to our to the relevant program, or
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: or we have seen their work in the in the literature. So there's an ever-growing database basically people that we define as our as our community, and it can be quite huge lists of people. So this is why we should not take offense.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: You're not calm, but I think the most relevant thing is that we are trying. When we compose a panel we're trying to get.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: We're trying to match expertise to the best of our best ability possible to match the proposals that are in. We're also taking into a
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: into consideration the demography of the panel. If you will, we want our panels to represent the nation in terms of where people are from and their backgrounds. And if you add that to the research background, and it becomes a
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: complex calculus kind of making a nice and balanced panel. We've really been trying to get more and more panelists on panel that have
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: been on on panel. Again, we've emphasized that panel service is a really great way to understand what makes a successful proposal. And so
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: where we're always bringing in new people. And so you can imagine we're trying to get all of our community, and that experience being on panel and our communities are huge, so I would encourage everyone to not take it personally when they didn't get
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: selected for panel, although I know a panel is fun and rewarding, and we do try to give people the opportunity, and
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: you'll be on panel again one day i'm sure
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: thanks, Chris.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Um. Another question.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Somebody's reflecting on their proposal. Submissions. They've submitted three times the first time it was rated medium priority
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: um second time low priority. Third time it seemed like the reviews were even stronger, but it was still in low priority.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: So I think Kendra volunteered to kind of. Reflect on. How do you interpret
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: varying panel recommendations and the
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: to make decisions about resubmission?
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Yeah. And i'll try to keep this short. First of all, I just want to say I feel for you and this proposal, because this is something we
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: we we do see this, and we try to avoid what we call it a situation where you're They're just kind of churning right. The pi is just kind of trying to put the proposal in and seeing how it does in different um settings, and we also try to avoid,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: you know, like double jeopardy, where where each time you put this in, there's like no no record of what's happened before. I would I mean, i'd say the first thing if this is a situation where the same proposals being submitted to the same
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: program, and it's there's different ratings like this definitely. This is a program officer conversation. That program officer was in the room while the panelists were discussing the proposal. That program officer knows what
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: how those different reviews were considered. Ah! And will help you emphasize or not emphasize things in the proposal that are reviewing. Well or not, you may have already done that; and if so,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: I would just say, to call again with this particular situation in mind, right? So whoever manage your most recent propos will say, Okay, this is my potentially fourth submission. So
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: so what would you advise me to do sometimes? That's finding a different program. Sometimes it's indicating a program for Co-review. And um, sometimes it's really changing some aspect of the proposal. It's just not renewing. Well,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Um some specific questions. Oh, i'd say one more thing which is like,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Of course you're looking, you see, like medium priority, and like low priority, what you know. What do these things mean, I will say those are not absolute terms, either. Right? So different panels we try to, and you know, help our panelists
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: find a target and say like this is what a high priority proposal is. This is what a medium priority proposal is.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: Every panel um can make those different determinations, and Ultimately it's a a few panelists who are making that categorization. So if you have a proposal that's reviewing in the medium to low range, it's fundable according to the panelists. Um, and i'm not sure there's much more that can be read into that.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: So your specific points. Is there any rule precluding us from resubmitting your vice mission? Absolutely not absolutely not.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: And are there any data on the portion of proposals funded on the first tries to get? Try, et cetera. Um, I don't believe there are any publicly available data on this. I will say we are very interested in this in our own programs, because we don't.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: I want to be in a situation where the P. I have to be submitting a proposal three or four times before it's funded. That's a lot of work for you, for the reviewers for us. I will say one thing that's a little bit hard. Is that
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: okay? Um,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: we track what we would call a resubmission, but it's not like a paper or a manuscript where you get a revised and resubmit right, like every proposal, is reviewed separately, and things have changed in between submission. So it's not a perfect um
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: analogy in terms of, you know, proportion of proposals funded on the first drives that could try. So i'll just kind of put that big caveat on, so I guess that was like a long answer. But it's a little bit of a complicated question, and I would just say, like, Don't, give up
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: um. Call your program officer, and you know thank you for the time and effort you're putting into this, and and I hope there is um, you know. I hope you have a successful outcome soon.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Thank you, Kendra.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Here's a um common question.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: When an ru supplement is submitted with the original award. Does the ru funding count in the Max funding? There's a funding limit for that program.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Is there a separate ree pot of money.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: How does this work with the budget? And Kendra? You volunteer for this, You?
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Oh, this is easy, so there's no separate ru pot of money
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: there. We wish there were. But there's not. It all comes out of the program That, said Rus, that are designated as such in the proposal. That is not a supplement,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: but in the proposal can make a proposal go over a published budget cap. So I just made an award, for example, to a proposal to a program that has a budget cap.
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: That proposal involved two Ru students, and they were allowed to
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: have additional funds come out of that program for those are you students?
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: It?
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: That's the answer.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Thanks, Kendra.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: There's a couple of questions that are
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: similar at the heart, so one person says, excited to get started as a applicant,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: but a bit stumped about a cluster and program and division and directorate and special program and core program
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: finding a home for for their work. Similarly, somebody else mentioned the
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: you know their their work is at the interface of Ae. B. Environmental biology and the geosciences. And so how do you handle this
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: knowing where to submit or are The is a proposal going to be review jointly. Chris, What do you?
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: What's going to be tough for us.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: Yeah, I would say, I think there's another question somewhere about how to write a one pager, and that might be that might be relevant to this answer too. So we do have. So the bottom line is that you should reach out to a program officer, and in doing so you should
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: submit a one page here, and that program also can help you find the right program.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: So ah,
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: we do regularly handle proposals that span Bio and Geo. Bio and map all over all over Nsf.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: And we do that through a process of called Co Review that we've alluded to before and in that in co- review the proposal might be reviewed in two panels in those different parts of
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: they it could be just go to one panel, and the other program will sit in and suggest some reviewers or something like that. There's lots of mechanistic details that I
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: won't. Go into there, but
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: we definitely have mechanisms for handling co- review, and we do it a lot so anywhere from a quarter to half of our proposals in any panel that might be coordinated. So it's not not rare at all, and nothing to be afraid of. We have a blog post about Why, you shouldn't be afraid of co- Review that I encourage you to
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: look at, and that, I guess, brings me to the one pager, and I
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: and I think that question about the one page, or maybe suggest a good, another good blog post that we should write. I quickly tried to look, and I didn't see that we already had one hundred and fifty
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: one.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: But the basic idea is the one pager should be similar to what your project summary might look like.
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: You mean that big-picture idea and maybe the specific games for what you're trying to do
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: Once we have that it's easier to talk to you about about what programs might make sense, and we'll just get on a zoom and figure it out. The last thing I guess I need to say. And this long- did answer is that we can't We won't officially. Decide on Co- review until the
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: proposal comes in. So we might, we might suggest what sort of scenario kind of makes sense based on the one pager. But if the proposal. The full proposal comes in, and then it's fairly different, and one of the other programs isn't excited about we're doing it. Then it'll it'll we'll just find the right home for it once the proposal comes in
Chris Balakrishnan - NSF/DEB/SBS: anyone else, I think I tried to cover a lot of ground there hopefully that was semi-coherent,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: coherent. And again, just to reiterate that blog post is
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: helpful to contextualize co- review process.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Another common question is, you you submit a proposal. You get some reviews back, and you're going to resubmit. Do you include an explicit response to the prior reviewers?
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: I can do this one. Uh, maybe
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: I would say for the P. I'm. Seeing a lot of questions that are like I've submitted, you know, three times four times sure right
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: put, you know, response to to previous reviews, and I would use that to make your case for how you have kept things that reviewed strongly before you made adjustments for things that didn't review. Well, and I think it just helps kind of establish that
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: that narrative in reviewers minds that there is a trajectory for this proposal, and there are probably some
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: um like not controversial aspects, but aspect that you know people just view differently. And this is your chance to also make the case for um. For why you want to do those things so. Um. And that is the only indication that panelists have for this process program. Officers know your history. The panelists. Um might not. So I I I always used to do this as a di, but in response to previous reviews, especially if you're doing well,
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: but
Kendra McLauchlan-NSF: but it's totally up to you,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: right. We are just about out of time and have thirteen remaining questions, so we will not get to them all. Obviously. Um, we do um try to look at the questions, and then, when we post our recap to the debris blog
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: uh some of our the unanswered questions may be answered. There
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: we might be able to squeeze one more in. Somebody says,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: What do you suggest doing? If your program officer doesn't answer your emails or phone calls,
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): and i'll start by saying apologies.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): You?
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: Okay, what would you do?
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): So I would say, Yes, There are reasons why that can happen that your program officer might be on leave. Your program Officer might
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): and be in the hospital. Your program, the program officer Ah, might have just missed it in a very long ah storm of emails that came on a particular day. Don't be afraid to reach out to another program officer in the same program. We all communicate with each other. We're very collaborative
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): if you are not getting a response from your
particular program officer.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): So if you're not getting a response from me and it Sam Signer, or some other program officer in my pro evolutionary processes, or whatever they they you're, we will eventually answer you. We are meaning to not answer you. It's just an oversight, so don't be shy.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): What I would say.
Kim Hughes (DEB-Evolutionary Processes): Anybody else have a suggestion.
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: You nailed it, Kim, and it brings us to the top of the hour. Thanks. Everyone for attending and asking great questions again. Check out the recap,
Jeremy Wojdak-NSF/DEB/PCE: the unanswered questions, and we hope to see you again in about one month's time. Take care, everyone.