NSF 13-529: EarthCube:
Program Solicitation
Program Solicitation NSF 13-529
 |
National Science Foundation |
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
March 26, 2013
EarthCube Test Enterprise Governance
March 26, 2013
EarthCube Research Coordination Networks
May 22, 2013
EarthCube Building Blocks
May 22, 2013
EarthCube Conceptual Designs
March 12, 2014
EarthCube Research Coordination Networks
March 12, 2014
EarthCube Building Blocks
March 19, 2015
EarthCube Integrative Activities
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
Proposals Accepted Anytime
EarthCube Research Coordination Networks
Important Information And Revision Notes
New Funding Opportunities and Deadlines will appear with Amendments to this solicitation.
This serves as an umbrella solicitation for EarthCube. It differs from traditional NSF solicitations because funding opportunities will be amended to the solicitation in response to emerging community needs and priorities defined in collaborative activities. This solicitation provides the overarching description, vision, and goals for EarthCube that will remain unchanged over time. Amendments to the solicitation will add information on funding opportunities. Notifications announcing any EarthCube solicitation updates with Amendments will be sent through the NSF solicitation alert system.
The overarching description, vision, and goals of EarthCube can be found in the Program Description section below. All specifications of the proposal call are described in Amendments, including: (a) what types of proposals are being solicited; (b) pointers to the relevant community documents that guide the call and determine the focus of funding opportunities; (c) specific funding mechanism(s) employed; (d) special review criteria and/or reporting criteria; and (e) other specifics of the funding opportunity. As community guidance moves EarthCube forward, new Amendments will replace old Amendments. A listing of all Amendments can be found on the NSF EarthCube Program website (https://www.nsf.gov/geo/earthcube/).
Amendment IV
This solicitation has been amended to include the fourth funding opportunity (Amendment IV) in the Program Description section below. Amendment IV describes all specifications of the proposal call including (a) types of proposals being solicited; (b) specific funding mechanisms; (c) award information; and (d) special review criteria and proposal preparation instructions.
Collaborative proposals may be submitted to this Amendment.
IMPORTANT INFORMATION
Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the revised NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 15-1), which is effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after December 26, 2014. The PAPPG is consistent with, and, implements the new Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) (2 CFR § 200).
Summary Of Program Requirements
General Information
Program Title:
EarthCube
A Community-Driven Data and Knowledge Environment for the Geosciences
Synopsis of Program:
EarthCube is a community-driven activity sponsored through a partnership between the NSF Directorate for Geosciences (GEO) and the Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering (CISE) Division of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (ACI) to transform research in the academic geosciences community. EarthCube aims to create a well-connected and facile environment to share data and knowledge in an open, transparent, and inclusive manner, thus accelerating our ability to understand and predict the Earth system.
Achieving EarthCube will require a long-term dialog between NSF and the interested scientific communities to develop cyberinfrastructure that is thoughtfully and systematically built to meet the current and future requirements of geoscientists. New avenues will be supported to gather community requirements and priorities for the elements of EarthCube, and to capture the best technologies to meet these current and future needs. The EarthCube portfolio will consist of interconnected projects and activities that engage the geosciences, cyberinfrastructure, computer science, and associated communities. The portfolio of activities and funding opportunities will evolve over time depending on the status of the EarthCube effort and the scientific and cultural needs of the geosciences community.
This umbrella solicitation for EarthCube allows funding opportunities to be flexible and responsive to emerging needs and collaborative processes. The EarthCube vision and goals do not change over time, and this section of the solicitation will remain constant. Funding opportunities to develop elements of the EarthCube environment will be described in Amendments to this solicitation. Amendments will appear in the Program Description section of the solicitation and will include details on the parameters, scope, conditions, and requirements of the proposal call. Researchers who receive alerts related to solicitation releases will receive notification when the EarthCube solicitation is updated with an Amendment.
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.
-
Eva Zanzerkia, Directorate for Geosciences, Earth Sciences Division, telephone: (703) 292-4734, email: ezanzerk@nsf.gov
-
Amy Walton, Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering, Division of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure, telephone: (703) 292-4538, email: awalton@nsf.gov
-
Marco Tedesco, Directorate for Geosciences, Polar Sciences Division, telephone: (703) 292-7120, email: mtedesco@nsf.gov
-
Ilia I. Roussev, Directorate for Geosciences, Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences Division, telephone: (703) 292-8519, email: iroussev@nsf.gov
-
Baris M. Uz, Directorate for Geosciences, Ocean Sciences Division, telephone: (703) 292-4557, email: bmuz@nsf.gov
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
- 47.050 --- Geosciences
- 47.070 --- Computer and Information Science and Engineering
Award Information
Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant
Estimated Number of Awards: 20
Up to 20 awards total for Amendment IV. The number will be determined based on the results of the merit review process and availability of funds. Amendment IV anticipates up to 8 awards for RCNs and up to 12 for Integrative Activities.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $11,750,000
NSF anticipates funding for Amendment IV (Integrative Activities and Research Coordination Networks) to be $11,750,000 pending availability of funds. The size of awards will vary based on the scope and complexity of the funding opportunity and the projects supported under that call.
Specific size and duration limitations will be articulated in Amendments to this solicitation.
Eligibility Information
Who May Submit Proposals:
Proposals may only be submitted by the following:
- Universities and Colleges - Universities and two- and four-year colleges (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in, the US acting on behalf of their faculty members. Such organizations also are referred to as academic institutions.
- Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Independent museums, observatories, research labs, professional societies and similar organizations in the U.S. associated with educational or research activities.
- Other Federal Agencies and Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs): Contact the appropriate program before preparing a proposal for submission.
Who May Serve as PI:
There are no restrictions or limits.
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
There are no restrictions or limits.
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI:
There are no restrictions or limits.
Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
- Letters of Intent: Not required
- Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required
- Full Proposals:
- Full Proposals submitted via FastLane: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide, Part I: Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) Guidelines apply. The complete text of the GPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg.
- Full Proposals submitted via Grants.gov: NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov Guidelines apply (Note: The NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide).
B. Budgetary Information
- Cost Sharing Requirements: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.
- Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Not Applicable
- Other Budgetary Limitations: Not Applicable
C. Due Dates
- Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
March 26, 2013
EarthCube Test Enterprise Governance
March 26, 2013
EarthCube Research Coordination Networks
May 22, 2013
EarthCube Building Blocks
May 22, 2013
EarthCube Conceptual Designs
March 12, 2014
EarthCube Research Coordination Networks
March 12, 2014
EarthCube Building Blocks
March 19, 2015
EarthCube Integrative Activities
- Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
Proposals Accepted Anytime
EarthCube Research Coordination Networks
Proposal Review Information Criteria
Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review considerations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Award Administration Information
Award Conditions: Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Reporting Requirements: Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.
I. Introduction
EarthCube is a community-driven activity aimed at transforming the conduct of geosciences research and education. This effort is a partnership between the NSF Directorate for Geosciences (GEO) and the Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering (CISE) Division of Advanced Cyberinfrastructure (ACI). The goal of EarthCube is to create a well-connected and facile environment to share data and knowledge for all of the geosciences in an open, transparent, and inclusive manner and to accelerate our ability to understand and predict the Earth system.
In 2009 the Advisory Committee for GEO issued the GEOVision report: (https://www.nsf.gov/geo/acgeo/geovision/geo_strategic_plans_2012.pdf), identifying the challenges and opportunities facing the geosciences in the next decade. The report issued this call to action: "Over the next decade, the geosciences community commits to developing a framework to understand and predict responses of the Earth as a system, from the space-atmosphere boundary to the core, including the influences of humans and ecosystems."
In 2011 NSF initiated the Cyberinfrastructure Framework for 21st Century Science and Engineering (CIF21). This initiative emphasizes the importance of enabling computational and data-rich science, engineering, and education and creating within the US a sustainable, community-based and open cyberinfrastructure for researchers and educators (https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=504730).
EarthCube responds to the challenges and opportunities of the GeoVision report and the vision of a national cyberinfrastructure in CIF21. In this effort NSF encourages the community to systematically build cyberinfrastructure for the geosciences that is guided by community dialog, governance, and a common vision. EarthCube endeavors to create an environment that is extendable and manageable, and employs or creates technologies that meet the current and future needs of the geosciences community. EarthCube will foster the training and development of data scientists and cyber-savvy geoscientists. It is expected that EarthCube will build off present NSF and Federal investments in geosciences cyberinfrastructure and will integrate state-of-the art cyberinfrastructure, software development and computer science techniques.
The EarthCube program is designed to be responsive to the needs of and input from the geosciences community, as well as technological advances. Funding opportunities in the EarthCube portfolio will be defined in Amendments to this solicitation and will be based on themes, requirements, and other strategic or community documents from open community activities fostered by EarthCube such as, but not limited to, community meetings, workshops and design and demonstration activities.
Amendments to this solicitation will appear in the Program Description section and will include details on the type, scope, duration, and size of proposals being requested, funding requirements, additional review criteria, and due dates.
II. Program Description
The goal of EarthCube is to create a well-connected and facile environment to share data and knowledge for all of the geosciences in an open, transparent, and inclusive manner, accelerating our ability to understand and predict the Earth system.
How To Use This Solicitation: As noted in the Important Information Section at the beginning of this solicitation, this document serves as an umbrella solicitation for EarthCube. Funding opportunities will be responsive to themes, requirements, and other strategic or community documents from open community activities. In the structure of this solicitation, funding opportunities will be articulated in Amendments in the Program Description.
The description, vision, and overall goals for EarthCube will not change over time. Only the Amendment Section (see below) will change. When a funding opportunity is available, the Amendment section will detail the specifications of the proposal call including (a) what types of proposals are being solicited; (b) references to the relevant community documents that guided the call and determined the focus of the funding opportunity; (c) the specific funding mechanism(s) employed; (d) proposal due dates or submission windows; (e) any special review criteria and/or reporting criteria; (f) and other specifics of the funding opportunity. As EarthCube evolves over time, new Amendments will replace old Amendments. A listing of all Amendments will be found on the EarthCube NSF Program website (https://www.nsf.gov/geo/earthcube/).
AMENDMENT IV:
This is the fourth Amendment to the EarthCube solicitation. The objective of Amendment IV is to solicit proposals in two focus areas that complement ongoing EarthCube activities in the Demonstration Phase. 1) EarthCube RCNs: Virtual Organizations for geoscientists to coordinate, plan and prioritize cyberinfrastructure activities, and 2) EarthCube Integrative Activities.
In this document, the geosciences refers to the academic research community supported by the Geosciences Directorate at NSF, and includes the domains of atmospheric and geospace science, ocean sciences, earth sciences and polar sciences. Further details on the scientific topics that are supported in the geosciences can be found with the core programs.
The Amendment is arranged as follows:
Funding Opportunities
(1) EarthCube Research Coordination Networks (RCN)
- Description of the activity
- Specific Requirements
- Additional Review Criteria
- Additional Proposal Preparation Guidelines
(2) EarthCube Integrative Activities
- Description of the activity
- Specific Requirements
- Additional Review Criteria
- Additional Proposal Preparation Guidelines
Funding Opportunities:
(1) EarthCube Research Coordination Networks (RCN)
Award Information-
Estimated Number of Awards: 5-8
Estimated Award Size and Duration: a maximum of 24 months and a maximum of $300,000.
Proposal Submission: Proposals will be accepted at any time after discussion with program directors and agreement that a proposal should be submitted. Proposals must list the programs and/or program directors that have agreed to the submission in the Project Summary. Proposals without this information will be returned without review. Proposals should be submitted to NSF 13-529, EarthCube.
Description of the Activity
The goal of 2015 EarthCube Research Coordination Networks is to be closely tied to the science and cyberinfrastructure needs of core geosciences programs and domains supported by GEO. To that end, potential proposers must coordinate EarthCube RCN ideas and discuss submission of any EarthCube RCN proposal with the relevant GEO program directors as well as at least one EarthCube program director.
EarthCube RCNs are intended to advance geosciences cyberinfrastructure through interaction, discussion and planning between geoscientists and cyberinfrastructure experts. RCNs provide opportunities for academic geosciences communities to organize, seek input, come to consensus and prioritize data, modeling, and technology needs, as well as standards and interoperability within and across domains. Other opportunities exist to realize cyberinfrastructure development and build tools and services. Outcomes must be tangible and directed towards moving geoscientists closer to shared goals. RCNs are an important information and feedback mechanism within the EarthCube process. Results from these projects will provide feedback for the direction of EarthCube, including architecture and geosciences-wide cyberinfrastructure developments.
Awards will support geosciences communities to organize, to partner with like geosciences communities, via virtual organizations, and to discuss, plan and coordinate the standards, policies and cyberinfrastructure that will meet their end users' common data, software, computation, networking and training needs. Proposals must include participation of both geoscientists and cyber/computer scientists to be considered viable. EarthCube RCNs should 1.) build and strengthen partnerships between geo- and cyber/computer scientists; 2.) foster new collaborations that lead to better scientific outcomes; 3.) expose participants to new ideas, methodologies, approaches, tools, and utilities; 4.) reduce redundancies and duplication of effort; and 5.) expose best practices and "lessons learned" in data management.
Examples of possible EarthCube RCN outcomes include, but are not limited to:
- The development of community standards, data citation or other community plans for data management in one or more fields of the geosciences.
- The articulation of common cyberinfrastructure and technology grand challenges across different geosciences disciplines, including dialog towards designing potential solutions for data integration, computation, modeling, software and/or visualization needed to meet future scientific and education goals.
- Agreements on cyberinfrastructure issues involving multiple geosciences fields that will result in improved interdisciplinary access to products of scientific work or training and education.
RCNs should explore innovative ideas for implementing virtual organizations, community networking strategies and collaborative technologies. Successful proposals will need to demonstrate broad academic geosciences participation, with an emphasis on active engagement of early career scientists and large numbers of end users.
Specific Requirements
- Topic/Focus: EarthCube RCN proposals must be rooted in the academic geosciences community, and include cyber/computer scientists as key participants. Proposals must specify what activities will be undertaken, what groups will be involved, what products will be generated by network activities, and how information about the network and opportunities to participate will be disseminated. The proposal should also outline the expected benefits of the network's activities in moving one or more geosciences fields forward in scientific goals through cyberinfrastructure, as well as the implications for the broader community. The specific outcomes from the RCN should be described.
- Participation: Participation and involvement in EarthCube activities, including meetings, events and sharing information between RCNs and other EarthCube projects will be required. PIs should allocate financial resources to support representatives in EarthCube meetings and activities. Proposals must include a section on how the network will interact with EarthCube governance activities.
- Steering Committee: Each RCN must have a steering committee primarily composed of academic geoscientists. Cyber and/or computer scientists should also have key roles within the network, and these should be described in the proposal. The Steering Committee should reflect the diversity of the network’s participants, and be responsible for the network’s success, but remain a manageable size. The proposal should articulate the roles of the Steering Committee members and the reasons for their selection.
- Network Participants: The size of an RCN is expected to vary depending on the topic or issue and network needs. It is expected that a network will involve investigators at diverse organizations, including different levels of academic institutions. The inclusion of new researchers, post-docs, graduate students, and undergraduates is strongly encouraged. An initial network of likely participants should be identified by position at the institution and name. However, proposals should clearly articulate well-developed mechanisms that will maintain openness, ensure access, and actively promote participation by interested parties outside of that initial list of participants. Although inclusion of Federal Agencies, international organizations and commercial partners is welcome, RCNs are intended to serve the needs of geoscientists in US academic institutions. NSF funding predominantly supports participation by US researchers. Any proposed international collaboration should articulate how it strengthens the project's activities. Participants from institutions outside the US are encouraged to seek support from their respective funding organizations. NSF funds may not be used to support the expenses of international scientists and students at their home institutions.
- Information and Material Sharing: EarthCube RCNs must promote effective communication via virtual organizations, foster new partnerships and provide opportunities for collaboration focused on actionable improvements for the academic geosciences community. Any products of the RCN, including discussion forums, documents, policies and practices must be openly shared with the academic community. Proposals should detail mechanisms that will be used to serve these materials. This may include working closely with other aspects of EarthCube, including Test Enterprise Governance.
Additional Review Criteria
- . RCN proposals will be evaluated for their creativity, innovation, and potential to advance geosciences research through effective organization and outcomes. RCNs cannot use resources to fund research, build cyberinfrastructure or prototypes, or to sustain existing networks.
- RCNs will be evaluated on how well they represent their respective geosciences communities, the quality and caliber of the collaboration with cyberinfrastructure and computer scientists, and the processes and efforts to engage a broad and diverse set of participants.
- Projects are expected to have strong management and integration plans that describe how the activity will be coordinated between partners and how the partners will function as a whole.
Proposal Preparation Guidelines for EarthCube RCNs:
Proposals must follow these guidelines in addition to, or in replacement of, the requirements in Section V.A.
- Cover Page<= The title of the proposed project should begin with the words: "EarthCube RCN:"
- Project Summary The Project Summary must begin with a list of the programs and program directors within GEO that have agreed to the submission of the EarthCube RCN.
- Project Description The Project Description should begin with a list of the Steering Committee members and their institutions. The project description should address aspects of management, coordination, and participant diversity within the 15-page project description, as described below.
- Management plan. Describe plans and procedures for the development and assessment of the proposed activity. Include formal mechanisms to ensure fair and equitable allocation of group resources. Clearly define the responsibilities for leadership and the role of the PI and the Steering committee. Delineate the procedures used for the selection of initial network participants, along with the plans for maintaining an appropriate degree of openness and for encouraging the involvement of additional interested parties. Means for self-evaluation of progress toward the network goals should be presented as an important part of the management plan.
- Coordination plan. Describe the plan for coordinating with other EarthCube activities. If the proposed network will work with other established networks or groups, or if there is a similar activity being planned or ongoing in other countries, describe the plans for coordination and cooperation among the relevant networks.
- Increasing participant diversity. A research coordination network is an important opportunity for encouraging the involvement of a diverse group of investigators. Describe a well-designed plan to increase participation of members outside of the steering committee and core group key personnel and, if applicable, a plan to include new researchers, post-docs, graduate students and undergraduates and individuals and institutions underrepresented in the geosciences and cyberinfrastructure.
- Budget. Funds from this program may not support independent, individual research projects of the participants; nor are they to be used as a mechanism for a mini-grant awarding program. Note that funds requested to support activities of the network participants, such as participant travel, materials and supplies for the network projects, and network retreats should be listed as "participant support" in the proposed budget, and managed by the submitting organization.
- Special Information and Supplementary Documents. In replacement of the Results of Prior Support proposals must include, as a Supplementary Document, Current Activities: PI and the Steering committee members listed in the project description must provide, in no more than a single-page per investigator, a description of the relationship between the proposed project and current research activities in his/her laboratory.
Please note that per guidance in the GPG, the Project Description must contain, as a separate section within the narrative, a discussion of the broader impacts of the proposed activities. Proposers may decide where to include this section within the Project Description.
(2) EarthCube Integrative Activities
Award Information:
Deadline: March 19, 2015
Estimated Number of Awards: 8-12
Estimated Award Size and Duration: Awards must be 24 months in duration and no more than $800,000. In exceptional situations, because of the scale of the collaboration, proposals for more than $800,000 may be submitted after PIs have spoken to EarthCube program directors and received permission to submit.
Description of the Activity
The goal of the EarthCube Integrative Activities is to enable geoscientists to participate in EarthCube. Projects are intended to improve access to the products of geosciences research so that a broader array of geosciences communities may help shape future EarthCube activities and outcomes. Projects are also solicited to improve community standards and capabilities through testing of ongoing scientific or cyberinfrastructure efforts, facilities or projects. These efforts may involve existing EarthCube projects, such as EarthCube Building Blocks, but they may also expose and explore other extant cyberinfrastructure resources as solutions to geosciences needs.
These projects are not equivalent in scope or scale to the previous EarthCube Building Blocks awards. Instead, they are meant to move geosciences research communities closer towards the spirit of data, models, and software availability in EarthCube by encouraging the development of scientific community cyberinfrastructure standards and initiating data access and sharing through pilot activities. Two types of projects will be considered, Standards Developments and Data Infrastructure. Clear outcomes within 24 months or less must be articulated in any successful proposal.
Standards Developments for Communities. EarthCube Integrative Activities provide opportunities for communities to develop standards and best practices for data, models, and other research tools in a way that makes these resources more interoperable within a scientific community and within EarthCube, enabling research communities to better participate in EarthCube development. Proposals may provide platforms, such as testbeds, or develop other temporary and provisional tools or cyberinfrastructure for the purpose of reaching these standards. Proposals may involve existing capabilities in EarthCube Building Blocks projects or other existing cyberinfrastructure resources and can develop tools to explore how these resources will meet (or fail to meet) user requirements or community research challenges. The outcomes of these awards will not be cyberinfrastructure, but data or modeling standards or other guidelines that become apparent through the proposed testing. Proposals must describe how these standards will then be adopted as best practices by a research community, and how these standards will make geosciences resources more available or interoperable across the geosciences. A key component of these efforts will be broad involvement of academic geoscientists and the community organizations that represent them. Proposals should clearly describe what testing will be conducted and how that will lead to outcomes within 24 months that better align the participating research communities with EarthCube.
Data Infrastructure for Communities. EarthCube Integrative Activities also provide opportunities for scientific disciplines to collectively define data requirements, metadata, community-recognized data collections and data types, outputs from models and other codes that will improve the community’s ability to address geosciences research challenges. Projects may develop prototypes and evaluative pilots to meet common data access and discovery needs, and to extend data resources, of interest either to a large number of researchers within a research domain, or extending beyond to encompass other geosciences domains. These projects are not intended for long-term resource or infrastructure support, but rather initial pilots to make the products of geosciences research more openly and more readily available to the EarthCube effort and the geosciences as a whole. Successful proposals will include detailed descriptions on options for sustaining infrastructure or community data after the end of the 24-month Integrative Activity award. This may be accomplished through existing data facilities, ingestion into other infrastructure at the institutional, regional, national or international level, or through other mechanisms that successfully demonstrate long-term maintenance. Re-use of existing modern tools and resources is highly encouraged, and proposals should describe elements of reuse.
Specific Requirements:
- Collaboration: EarthCube Integrative Activities must involve deep engagement and participation of the academic geosciences research community in the development of resources, products or other outcomes. Because EarthCube seeks to build bridges between geoscientists and those that build cyberinfrastructure, strategies for true partnerships and useful developments are necessary for successful proposals. Proposals must identify specific geosciences communities and data/cyberinfrastructure facilities, including other EarthCube projects, such as Building Blocks, RCNs or Conceptual Designs, that will participate in project. Similarly, proposals must identify cyberinfrastructure, computer science, industry, international and agency partners that will participate.
- Outcomes: EarthCube Integrative Activities must produce demonstrable and useful outcomes within 24 months or less. Proposals must discuss what will be demonstrated and evaluated. Proposals must clearly articulate how project outcome(s) relate to the goals of EarthCube and to specific needs articulated by the scientific communities involved. A discussion of the project's lifecycle/sustainability of efforts must be presented.
- EarthCube Participation: EarthCube Integrative Activities must participate in continuing EarthCube governance activities. Awardees will be required to participate in planning and demonstration activities as part of the collaborative spirit of EarthCube. In particular, awardees must participate in governance committees, the EarthCube All-Hands meeting and must be ready to provide any outputs required by the EarthCube Governance organization. Proposers should describe how their anticipated structure, work plan and management plan would accommodate these responsibilities.
Additional Review Criteria:
- Is there a clear description of the community data, software, or standard development that will be met by this project? What is the likelihood of successful creation and adoption of any product?
- Is any prototype, pilot, platform or tool development well conceived for the outcome of the project? For Standards Development proposals, will the suggested experiment or testbed be implementable in the proposed timeframe and produce the desired outcomes? For Data Infrastructure proposals, is the resource development modern, robust and responsive to community needs?
- How many researchers and which domains in the geosciences will benefit from the outcomes of the project? Are participants from geosciences communities explicitly identified and are their roles clear? How does the project clearly demonstrate end user involvement in development and use of a community capability? How will the work enable the community to participate in EarthCube development?
- A sustainability plan must be included for any infrastructure component of the project that is intended to continue. It must describe how the infrastructure will be supported beyond the project time period, and may include integration into long-term data or cyberinfrastructure resources either supported by NSF or other institutions, agencies or partners. Plans will be evaluated on the viability of the sustainable resource, the fit to the infrastructure being developed and the likelihood of ingestion into the long-term system.
Proposal Preparation Guidelines for EarthCube Integrative Activities:
Proposals must follow these guidelines in addition to, or in replacement of, the requirements in Section V.A in this solicitation.
- Cover Page The title of the proposed project should begin with the words: "EarthCube IA:". Collaborative Proposals should begin with the words: "EarthCube IA: Collaborative Proposal:"
- Project Summary-The Project Summary must include a list of all the collaborating institutions involved in the proposal whether they are receiving funds or not.
- Project Description -
This section may be no longer than 15 pages. In addition to intellectual merit and broader impacts, the project description should describe how the work meets the specific requirements and any additional review criteria indicated. The Project Description must include a Management plan that describes plans and procedures for the development and assessment of the proposed activity. The plan should include a list of all participating members of the collaboration, including non-funded participants, their institutions and roles in the project. A clear time line of expected outcomes should be included. A Sustainability Plan must also be included for any infrastructure developments. - Budget - Any subawards must have associated, annualized budgets with associated budget justifications. Budget justifications can be no longer than 2 pages.
- Special Information and Supplementary Documents- To be included in the order specified below:
- In place of the Results of Prior Support section in the Project Description, Current Activities: the PI and members listed as co-PIs or collaborators must provide a single-page (per investigator) description of the relevant prior support. This should be submitted as a Supplementary Document.
- Letters of Collaboration must be provided for any organization or individuals that are mentioned in the Project Description and Management Plan but are not receiving funds (i.e., mentioned in the proposal and not listed in any of the associated budgets). Letters of Collaboration must list the personnel participating in the project and their affiliation and describe the work that the unfunded collaborator will be conducting for the project. Information on acceptable content of Letters of Collaboration may be found in the most recent NSF Grant Proposal Guide and must be followed.
- Additional Required Documents List of Personnel, Collaborators and Affiliates: This document must list all personnel and their collaborators, affiliates and other potential Conflicts of Interest, according to the guidelines in the GPG. Instructions on creating this document are listed in section V.A.k. After receipt of the proposal number from FastLane, send an e-mail to earthcube@nsf.gov. The subject heading of the e-mail should note the proposal number and the lead institution. Attach the document described below, prepared on a template that will be available at https://www.nsf.gov/geo/earthcube. One document per collaborative project is needed.
Please note that per guidance in the GPG, the Project Description must contain, as a separate section within the narrative, a discussion of the broader impacts of the proposed activities. Proposers can decide where to include this section within the Project Description.
III. Award Information
Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant or Cooperative Agreement
Estimated Number of Awards: 20
Up to 20 awards total for Amendment IV. The number will be determined based on the results of the merit review process and availability of funds. Amendment III anticipates up to 8 awards for RCNs and up to 12 for Integrative Activities.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $11,750,000
NSF anticipates funding for Amendment IV (Integrative Activities and Research Coordination Networks) to be $11,750,000 pending availability of funds. The size of awards will vary based on the scope and complexity of the funding opportunity and the projects supported under that call. Specific size and duration limitations will be articulated in Amendments to this solicitation.
