NSF 20-515: Future of Work at the Human-Technology Frontier: Core Research (FW-HTF)
Program Solicitation
Document Information
Document History
- Posted: November 14, 2019
- Replaces: NSF 19-541
- Replaced by: NSF 21-548
Program Solicitation NSF 20-515
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time): March 09, 2020 Important Information And Revision NotesThe Future of Work at the Human-Technology Frontier (FW-HTF) program solicitation has been revised for the FY 2020 competition, and prospective Principal Investigators are encouraged to read the solicitation carefully. Among the changes are the following:
Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the revised NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 19-1), which is effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after January 28, 2019. Summary Of Program RequirementsGeneral InformationProgram Title:
Synopsis of Program:
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.
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
Award InformationAnticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant Estimated Number of Awards: 30 Up to 15 Planning Grant Awards and up to 15 Research Grant Awards. The number of awards is dependent upon the proposals received and the degree to which proposals meet the solicitation goals and NSF merit review criteria. Anticipated Funding Amount: $30,000,000 Two classes of proposals will be considered through this solicitation:
FW-HTF program funding is pending the availability of funds. Eligibility InformationWho May Submit Proposals:
Who May Serve as PI:
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: 1
Proposal Preparation and Submission InstructionsA. Proposal Preparation Instructions
B. Budgetary Information
C. Due Dates
Proposal Review Information CriteriaMerit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria apply. Award Administration InformationAward Conditions: Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information. Reporting Requirements: Standard NSF reporting requirements apply. I. IntroductionThe landscape of jobs and work is changing at unprecedented speed, enabled by advances in computer science and engineering, deeper understanding of societal and environmental change, advances in the learning sciences, and new conceptions of work and workplaces. This technological and scientific revolution presents a historical opportunity to the Nation and its people, in the creation of new industries and occupations, enhanced productivity and quality of work life, and the potential for more people to participate in the workforce, ultimately yielding sustained innovation and global leadership. But, as history teaches, such changes also come with risks. Some risks are immediate, such as jobs lost to automation or demand for skills not met by current educational pathways. Other equally important risks include new security threats, algorithmic biases, unanticipated legal consequences including privacy implications, dependence on technology and erosion of human knowledge and skills, inadequate workplace policies and practices, or undesirable impact on the built environment. The Future of Work at the Human-Technology Frontier (FW-HTF), one of the Big Ideas, is one mechanism by which NSF is responding to the challenges and opportunities for the future of jobs and work. The overarching vision is to support convergent research to understand and develop the human-technology partnership, design new technologies to augment human performance, illuminate the emerging socio-technological landscape, understand the risks and benefits of new technologies, understand and influence the impact of artificial intelligence on workers and work, and foster lifelong and pervasive learning. The specific objectives of the Future of Work at the Human-Technology Frontier program are to (1) facilitate convergent research that employs the joint perspectives, methods, and knowledge of computer science, design, engineering, learning sciences, research on education and workforce training, and social, behavioral, and economic sciences; (2) encourage the development of a research community dedicated to designing intelligent technologies and work organization and modes inspired by their positive impact on individual workers, the work at hand, the way people learn and adapt to technological change, creative and supportive workplaces (including remote locations, homes, classrooms, or virtual spaces), and benefits for social, economic, educational, and environmental systems at different scales; (3) promote deeper basic understanding of the interdependent human-technology partnership to advance societal needs by advancing design of intelligent work technologies that operate in harmony with human workers, including consideration of how adults learn the new skills needed to interact with these technologies in the workplace, and by enabling broad workforce participation, including improving accessibility for those challenged by physical or cognitive impairment; and (4) understand, anticipate, and explore ways of mitigating potential risks arising from future work at the human-technology frontier. Ultimately, this research will advance understanding of how technology and people interact, distribute tasks, cooperate, and complement each other in different specific work contexts of significant societal importance. It will advance the knowledge base related to worker education and training and formal and informal learning to enable all potential workers to adapt to changing work environments. It will advance our understanding of the links between the future of work at the human-technology frontier and the surrounding society, including the intended potential of new technologies and the unintended consequences for workers and the well-being of society. II. Program DescriptionA. Overview For the purposes of this solicitation, work is defined as mental or physical activity to achieve tangible benefit such as income, profit, or community welfare. The "future of work at the human-technology frontier" is, in turn, a conceptualization of work in the future that will be enabled or improved by advances in intelligent technology and their synergistic integration with human skill to achieve broad participation in the workforce and improve the social, economic, and environmental well-being of society. To reach this goal, research is sought that is anchored in work. Proposals must clearly define the work and work context addressed by the research. Technological innovations should be integrated with advances in the learning sciences, research on education and workforce training, and social, behavioral, and economic science perspectives. Potential results should contribute to fundamental advances in optimizing the human-technology team, the science and technology of future workforce development and education, work environments, and positive work outcomes for workers and society at large. Proposals are encouraged that are oriented toward the future of work at the human-technology frontier and that are not overly couched in current technology or work practices. A proposal for a research grant in this program must focus on advancing fundamental understanding of future work, and potential improvements to work, workplaces, workforce preparation, or work outcomes for workers and society. It must be convergent research that addresses the human and societal dimensions as well as the technological innovation and their potential impact on future work. In doing so, the research should make significant contributions to both intellectual merit and broader impact. Achieving this goal requires integration and convergence of disciplines across behavioral science, computer science, economic science, engineering, learning sciences, research on education and workforce training, and the social sciences. A convergent perspective is essential to understand and shape long-term social and economic drivers, so that advanced intelligent technology will strengthen the social fabric. A convergent perspective also provides insights into education and re-skilling, so that the benefits of emerging technology can be conferred upon both current and future workers. The Project Description should explain why the level of resources requested is appropriate to the project scope. This is especially important for FW-HTF-R Large proposals. The FW-HTF program welcomes outreach activities, such as those intended to provide undergraduate students with a meaningful research experience. The Project Description should describe these activities, and the Budget should request funds sufficient to carry them out. Post-award supplements to support such activities are not anticipated. A broad range of possible research themes and questions is sought. Proposals are welcomed from a diverse blend of perspectives and convergent interdisciplinary partnerships, provided they address and advance the overall vision of the FW-HTF program. Proposals in which one discipline or set of skills is mainly in service of the others are not appropriate. Ideally, the research will be interdependent, integrated, and will contribute novel understanding and impact on the Future of Work at the Human-Technology Frontier. Such integration and impact may require extra effort in leadership, regular communication, and cross-training. Research projects must address a well-defined form of work or workplace domain with the purpose of creating new or improved partnerships of technology and human workers. Research questions must intentionally target the future of work with a conceptualization of future work at the human-technology frontier that is embedded in its social and economic context. That context includes the immediate workplace environment and community, as well as the larger ethical, societal, and environmental context. The research should acknowledge not just the conceptual and operational challenges of future worker-technology teamwork, but also the potential unintended consequences of new kinds of work and environments at the human-technology frontier. In doing so, the proposed convergent research should contribute not just to broader impact but significantly to the intellectual merit of the research, that is, to better understanding of the fundamental processes and science of work, workplaces, and workforce development, including, for example, understanding how adults learn new skills or adapt skills to new contexts, or how jobs and work fit within society as a whole. Projects are welcome that advance a convergent research approach anchored in any primary discipline, with project leadership representative of project intellectual priorities. Proposal personnel should reflect this diversity of perspectives, including PIs, co-PIs, or other senior personnel with expertise representative of the required range of disciplines and domains. The participation of disciplinary experts and their integration with the project should be appropriate to the research questions. Proposal narratives may describe meaningful research questions in three areas, referred to below as future technology, future workers, and future work. Preference will be given to convergent proposals that show clear intellectual merit in all three areas. To facilitate the evaluation of these elements, it is strongly recommended that proposals address each one in separate and clearly labeled subsections of the Project Description, which should also describe the synergistic interactions between these research elements. For the purposes of this solicitation, the terms have the following interpretations: Future Technology refers to advances in engineering, computer science, or other fields, with the potential to create human-technology work partnerships. Relevant domains include but are not limited to: robotics; artificial intelligence; virtual, augmented and mixed reality; user interfaces; privacy, security and trust; future manufacturing. Future Workers refers to advances in the fundamental understanding of individual workers, work teams, workplaces, and work organizations in the context of future work and future technology. Relevant topics of interest include but are not limited to: individual and group behavior; organizational psychology; learning, education and training (including assessment of skills and knowledge); creativity and innovation; ergonomics; health and safety. Future Work refers to advances in the fundamental understanding of educational, organizational, societal, or economic factors, considering both benefits and risks. Relevant domains include but are not limited to: economic incentives or competitiveness; job and work design; workplace-based learning; individual, community, and national wellbeing; equity and inclusiveness. The FW-HTF program recognizes the critical role that lifelong learning, education, and training will play in the future of jobs and work. The program welcomes innovative research projects addressing fundamental advances in the science of learning in work contexts, and exploration of new modalities of education and training. Partnerships between educational institutions and employers are encouraged. The Intellectual Merit of these elements should be clearly described in the Project Description. Questions about the suitability of specific projects may be addressed to a FW-HTF Program Director. Prospective PIs are encouraged to discuss potential proposal ideas with a FW-HTF Program Director before submission. B. Components In addition to the sections required by the PAPPG, the Project Description must include the following separate sections, clearly labeled with the headings used below: Work Context A “Work Context” section must be included that clearly identifies and defines the future work domain, workers, and workplaces that are the focus of the research, and the scope and scale of work, employment, and/or self-employment outcomes and benefits envisioned. This section must also identify any partnerships with industry or stakeholders. When the work to be investigated has community welfare as its goal, the community must be described in this section. Integrative Research Researchers from diverse fields are expected to work collaboratively and interdependently, creating shared visions, models, methods, and discoveries. The “Integrative Research” section must describe how knowledge, techniques, and expertise from multiple fields and sectors will create new and expanded frameworks for addressing the research goals (see Convergence Research at NSF). The proposal should describe the symbiosis within the multidisciplinary team, and how the team will collaborate to illuminate the technological, human, and larger societal dimensions of the future of work and the implications of deploying pervasive, intelligent, and autonomous systems at the human-technology frontier. Thus, the “Integrative Research” section must identify specific collaboration mechanisms that will enable cross-discipline and cross-sector integration of teams and describe how the research will be integrated over the course of the project. Methods, Measures, and Metrics The proposal must include a "Methods, Measures, and Metrics" section that describes how progress and outcomes will be assessed. All proposals must specify the measures, metrics, and criteria for testing research hypotheses, validating models, and assessing interventions or policies. These could include one or more systematic method(s): qualitative and/or quantitative methods, public participation in data collection, periodic and/or longitudinal analyses, lab or field experiments, or other robust and reliable approaches. C. Proposal Category This solicitation will support projects in two categories: FW-HTF Planning Grants (FW-HTF-P): FW-HTF-P are intended to stimulate research capacity through multidisciplinary team-building and the development of high-impact, fundamental research concepts. FW-HTF-P are appropriate for supporting a range of planning activities intended to foster a convergent research team that can effectively integrate multiple disciplinary perspectives, explore the work context and build collaborations with relevant stakeholders, and hone research gaps, questions, and hypotheses. Activities within scope include but are not limited to, travel, multidisciplinary workshops, stakeholder meetings, data collection, preliminary experiments, and pilots. At the conclusion of the Planning Grant, researchers should be prepared to pursue a well-defined research agenda responsive to FW-HTF. Each award will provide support for a period of one year and with a total budget not exceeding $150,000. FW-HTF Research Grants (FW-HTF-R): FW-HTF-R must advance fundamental understanding of the human-technology partnership in the context of future work, describing potential improvements to work, workplaces, workforce preparation, and work outcomes for workers and society. FW-HTF-R proposals should pursue knowledge, techniques, and expertise from multiple fields and sectors to create new and expanded frameworks for addressing the research goals. The proposal should describe the symbiosis within the multidisciplinary team, including stakeholders in the work context, and how the team will collaborate to illuminate the technological, human, and larger societal dimensions of the future of work and the implications of deploying pervasive, intelligent, and autonomous systems at the human-technology frontier. Medium FW-HTF-R awards will provide support for a period of up to 3 years, with a total budget request not exceeding $1,500,000. Large FW-HTF-R awards will provide support for a period of up to 4 years, with a total budget request between $1,500,001 and $3,000,000. D. Principal Investigator Meetings In order to accelerate the rate of dissemination of ideas among researchers, to build an intellectual research core to address FW-HTF challenges, and to enable enhanced research collaborations, the FW-HTF program plans to host principal investigator (PI/co-PI) meetings every year with participation from all funded projects and other representatives from academia, industry, government, and community organizations. PIs must participate in these PI/co-PI meetings throughout the duration of the award. This requirement applies both to Research and Planning Grants. For multi-institution projects, investigators from each collaborating institution are expected to participate. A substitute project representative may be designated to attend a PI/co-PI meeting, but only with prior approval from an NSF Program Officer. As noted in "Budget Preparation Instructions," budgets for all projects must include funding for one or more designated FW-HTF project representatives (PI/co-PI/senior personnel or NSF-approved replacement) to attend each FW-HTF PI/co-PI meeting during the proposed lifetime of the award. III. Award InformationAnticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant Estimated Number of Awards: Up to 15 Planning Grant Awards and up to 15 Research Grant Awards. The number of awards is dependent upon the proposals received and the degree to which proposals meet the solicitation goals and NSF merit review criteria. Anticipated Funding Amount: $30M Estimated program budget, number of awards and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds and quality of proposals received. IV. Eligibility InformationWho May Submit Proposals:
Who May Serve as PI:
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: 1
Additional Eligibility Info:
V. Proposal Preparation And Submission InstructionsA. Proposal Preparation InstructionsFull Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via FastLane, Research.gov, or Grants.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. PAPPG Chapter II.D.3 provides additional information on collaborative proposals. See PAPPG Chapter II.C.2 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 PAPPG instructions. Special instructions for submitting to this Big Idea solicitation FastLane Users: Proposers are reminded to identify the program solicitation number (located on the first page of this document) in the first block on the NSF Cover Sheet. Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Please note that even though proposals must be submitted to ENG/EFMA, once received the proposals will be managed by a cross-disciplinary team of NSF Program Directors. Research.gov Users: The Prepare New Proposal setup will prompt you for the program solicitation number (located on the first page of this document). Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. As stated previously, even though proposals must be submitted to ENG/EFMA, once received the proposals will be managed by a cross-disciplinary team of NSF Program Directors. Grants.gov Users: The program solicitation number will be pre-populated by Grants.gov on the NSF Grant Application Cover Page, however you will need to locate the Division Code, Program Code, Division Name, and Program Name for the specific solicitation you are applying to by visiting https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/pgmannounce.jsp. As stated previously, even though proposals must be submitted to ENG/EFMA, once received the proposals will be managed by a cross-disciplinary team of NSF Program Directors. Cover Sheet: Proposal Title: The title of the proposal must begin with “FW-HTF-RM” to designate a Medium Research Proposal, “FW-HTF-RL” to designate a Large Research Proposal, or “FW-HTF-P” to designate a Planning Proposal. The rest of the title of the proposal should describe the project in concise, informative language without acronyms so that a scientifically or technically literate reader can understand what the project is about. The title should emphasize the scientific work to be undertaken and be suitable for use in public press. Personnel Listed on the Cover Sheet: Provide complete information requested on the cover sheet for the PI and up to four co-PIs. Project Description:
Both proposal categories––FW-HTF-R proposals and FW-HTF-P proposals––must include all sections required by the PAPPG. In addition, the Project Description must contain the following separate sections, clearly labeled with the headings used below, with content as described in Section II.B:
In addition, the Project Description should explain why the level of resources requested is appropriate to the project scope. This is especially important for FW-HTF-R Large proposals. The FW-HTF program welcomes activities intended to provide undergraduate students with a meaningful research experience. The Project Description should describe these activities, and the Budget should request funds sufficient to carry them out. Post-award supplements to support such activities are not anticipated. Supplementary Documents: The following supplementary documents are required and should be uploaded into the Supplementary Documentation Section. No other supplementary materials are allowed. Proposals that do not contain all of these documents will be returned without review.
"If the proposal submitted by Dr. [insert the full name of the Principal Investigator] entitled [insert the proposal title] is selected for funding by NSF, it is my intent to collaborate and/or commit resources as detailed in the Project Description or the Facilities, Equipment or Other Resources section of the proposal." Proposals with Letters of Collaboration that contain any endorsement or evaluation of the proposed project will be returned without review. Collaborative activities that are identified in the budget should follow the instructions in the NSF PAPPG. Any substantial collaboration with individuals not included in the budget should also be described in the Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources section of the proposal and documented in a Letter of Collaboration from each collaborator.
Single Copy Documents: Collaborators and Other Affiliations Information: Proposers should follow the guidance specified in Chapter II.C.1.e of the NSF PAPPG. FW-HTF Proposal Preparation Checklist: The following checklist is provided to help ensure the FW-HTF proposal includes all required elements before submission. This is a summary of the requirements described in the sections above. This is a summary of key items that are in addition to the requirements listed in the PAPPG, and does not replace the requirements listed in the PAPPG.
B. Budgetary InformationCost Sharing: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited. Budget Preparation Instructions: Budgets for all projects must include funding for one or more designated FW-HTF project representatives (PI/co-PI/Senior Personnel or NSF-approved replacement) to attend each FW-HTF PI meeting during the proposed lifetime of the award. This requirement applies both to Research and Planning Grants. For budget preparation purposes, PIs should assume these meetings will be held in the spring of each year in the Washington, DC area. C. Due Dates
D. FastLane/Research.gov/Grants.gov RequirementsFor Proposals Submitted Via FastLane or Research.gov:
For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:
Proposers that submitted via FastLane or Research.gov may use Research.gov 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 ProceduresProposals 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 PAPPG Exhibit III-1. A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://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 Building the Future: Investing in Discovery and Innovation - NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2018 – 2022. 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 CriteriaThe National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects. 1. Merit Review Principles These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:
With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities. These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent. 2. Merit Review Criteria All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities. The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (PAPPG 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 PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.d(i), prior to the review of a proposal. When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:
The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:
Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education. Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as appropriate. B. Review and Selection ProcessProposals 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 InformationA. Notification of the AwardNotification 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 ConditionsAn NSF award consists of: (1) the award notice, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award notice; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1)*; or Research Terms and Conditions* and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award notice. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail. *These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov. More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg. Special Award Conditions: For every FW-HTF award, one or more designated project representatives (PI/co-PI/Senior Personnel or NSF-approved replacement) must attend annual FW-HTF PI meetings throughout the duration of the grant. Attribution of support: Grantees are required to include appropriate acknowledgment of NSF support under the NSF Future of Work at the Human-Technology Frontier Big Idea in any publication (including World Wide Web pages) of any material based on or developed under the project, in the following terms: "This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation NSF Future of Work at the Human-Technology Frontier Big Idea under Grant No. (Grantee enters NSF grant number.)" Grantees are also required to orally acknowledge NSF support using the language specified above during all news media interviews, including popular media such as radio, television and news magazines. C. Reporting RequirementsFor 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 Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg. VIII. Agency ContactsPlease 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:
For questions related to the use of FastLane or Research.gov, contact:
For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:
IX. Other InformationThe NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences. Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website. 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 https://www.grants.gov. About The National Science FoundationThe 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 (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide Chapter II.E.6 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.
Privacy Act And Public Burden StatementsThe 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 System of Record Notices, NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records.” 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 |
