NSF GPRA Strategic Plan
FY 2001 � 2006

About the NSF

NSF�s Role

I.   Introduction

The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) provides a mandate to Federal agencies to account for program results through the integration of strategic planning, budgeting, and performance measurement.

According to GPRA, each agency must prepare a strategic plan that addresses its mission and major functions over a six-year period (the current fiscal year and five years into the future). Agencies are required to update their strategic plans every three years for submission to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Congress.

The NSF GPRA Strategic Plan FY 2001-2006 integrates previous strategic planning activities that resulted in 1995's NSF in a Changing World, the 1997 GPRA Strategic Plan, and the National Science Board (NSB) Strategic Plan, 1998. In integrating those plans, NSF seeks to clearly communicate our vision, ideals, and "corporate personality," and to provide a framework for the future. This framework is informed by NSF's mission, as set out by Congress in the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, and by the Foundation's unique role as the only federal agency charged with strengthening the overall health of U.S. science and engineering across a broad and expanding frontier.

The plan emphasizes outcome goals for NSF's investments in people, ideas and tools, and describes the three core strategies -- developing intellectual capital, integrating research and education, and promoting partnerships -- that, together with our core values, guide NSF in pursuing these goals. The plan also sets forth NSF's implementation strategy, and introduces four emerging areas that will benefit from increased attention in the next several years -- information technology research, biocomplexity in the environment, twenty-first century workforce, and nanoscale science and engineering.

In developing this strategic plan, NSF efforts were greatly enhanced by the science and engineering community and others, such as the Office of Management and Budget and the various congressional committees, who are concerned about the vitality of U.S. science and engineering. Their input is reflected throughout this document.

II.  NSF�s Vision and Mission

III.  NSF�s Outcome Goals:  Investing in today�s promise for tomorrow�s achievement

In pursuit of its historic mission, NSF invests in:

• PEOPLE to develop a diverse, internationally competitive and globally-engaged workforce of scientists, engineers and well-prepared citizens. This goal supports the parts of NSF�s mission that are directed at (1) programs to strengthen scientific and engineering research potential; and (2) science and engineering education programs at all levels and in all fields of science and engineering.
• IDEAS to provide a deep and broad fundamental science and engineering knowledge base. These goal supports the parts of NSF�s mission directed at basic scientific research and research fundamental to the engineering process.
• TOOLS to provide widely accessible, state-of-the-art science and engineering infrastructure. This goal supports the parts of NSF�s mission directed at (1)) programs to strengthen scientific and engineering research potential; and (2) an information base on science and engineering appropriate for development of national and international policy.

Issues of equal opportunity in science and engineering are addressed by all three of the outcome goals.

In Appendix 5, Resource Utilization, NSF�s FY 2001 budget request is distributed across the three outcome goals and Administration and Management (A&M), with a total request of $4.572 billion.

In Appendix 7: Crosswalk of NSF Goals and Programs, all NSF programs are classified according to the outcome goal on which they are primarily focused. However, is should be noted that there is considerable synergy among the goals.

For example, a grant supporting materials research at a university may focus on producing new knowledge (Ideas) but also may help train the next generation of scientists and engineers (People), and provide new research equipment (Tools). The ability of NSF-supported projects to simultaneously address multiple outcome goals increases the effectiveness and productivity of NSF�s investments.

A.  PEOPLE:   A diverse, internationally competitive and globally-engaged workforce of scientists, engineers and well-prepared citizens.

NSF is committed to ensuring that the United States has world-class scientists and engineers, a national workforce that is scientifically, technically and mathematically strong, and a citizenry that understands and can take full advantage of basic concepts of science, mathematics, engineering, and technology.

Every dollar NSF spends is an investment in people. The agency supports nearly 200,000 people � teachers, students, researchers, postdoctoral researchers, and many others. NSF supports formal and informal science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (SMET) education at all levels.

NSF employs three core strategies that guide the entire agency in establishing priorities, identifying opportunities, and designing new programs and activities: (1) Develop Intellectual Capital; (2) Integrate Research and Education; and (3) Promote Partnerships. (These strategies are more fully described in Section IV.) Each of these strategies is critical to accomplishing the People goal. In addition, there are implementation strategies that are specific to this goal:

• Use all aspects of NSF activity to enhance diversity in the science and engineering workforce, with particular attention to the development of people who are beginning careers in science and engineering.
• Invigorate research-informed, standards-based SMET education at all levels through partnerships that draw deeply from the research and education community, Federal, state, and local education agencies, civic groups, business and industry, and parents.
• Increase the Nation�s capacity to educate teachers and faculty in SMET areas and provide them with career-long professional development.
• Foster innovative research on learning, teaching, and organizational effectiveness, with special interest in determining the most effective use of information and computer technologies.
• Further the engagement of the U.S. scientific and engineering community in the global community by providing opportunities for international study, collaborations and partnerships.
• Promote greater public understanding of science, mathematics, and technology, and build bridges between formal and informal science education.

The following long-term outcomes of the People Goal provide the basis for development of more specific and time-dependent annual performance goals:

• Improved mathematics, science and technology understanding and skills for U.S. students at the K-12 level and for all citizens of all ages, so that they can be competitive in a technological society.
• A science and technology workforce that draws on the strengths of America�s diversity and has global career perspectives and opportunities.
• Globally-engaged science and engineering professionals who are among the best in the world.
• A public that understands the processes and benefits that accrue from science and engineering.

Appendix 1 describes the critical factors for success that are identified for the outcome goals. In particular, Factor 1, operating a credible, efficient merit review system, is critical because it is at the very heart of NSF's selection of the projects through which its outcome goals are achieved. Factor 2, maintaining a diverse, capable, motivated staff that operates with efficiency and integrity is also critically important because it is the program staff that makes the final selection of projects to be supported, and then monitors performance.

Appendix 2 describes the external factors that must be considered in developing goal achievement strategies. With regard to the People Goal, characteristics of the workforce of scientists and engineers are highly dependent on the systems through which they are educated and trained. NSF programs influence educational systems and the public that supports them, but are only one influence among many factors.

As described in Appendix 3, Assessing NSF Performance, NSF performance is successful if the outcomes of NSF investments for a given period of time are judged to have achieved or to have made significant progress in achieving the specific performance goals. These assessments are made by independent external panels of experts, who use their collective experienced-based norms in determining the level of "significance" necessary for a rating of successful.

B.  IDEAS:  Discovery across the frontier of science and engineering, connected to learning, innovation and service to society.

Investments aimed at discovery fund cutting edge research projects proposed by individuals and groups of scientists and engineers. Because no one can predict every discovery or anticipate all of the opportunities that fresh discoveries will produce, NSF's portfolio must be large and diverse, addressing many fields and activities, ranging from single investigator grants to small groups of investigators to large multi-purpose research centers.

NSF-funded research projects also provide a rich foundation for broad and useful applications of knowledge and the development of new technologies. NSF is committed to fostering connections between discoveries and their use in the service to society. A key strategy for accomplishing this is by promoting partnerships at all levels.

As described in Section IV, NSF employs three core strategies that guide the entire agency in establishing priorities, identifying opportunities, and designing new programs and activities. Each of these strategies is critical to accomplishing the Ideas goal.

In addition, there are some implementation strategies that are specific to this goal. NSF will:

• Support the most promising ideas as selected through merit review of competitive proposals.
• Take informed risks when scientific consensus is lacking or just beginning to form.
• Identify and provide long-term support for new and emerging opportunities within and across all fields of science and engineering.
• Encourage cooperative research and education efforts � among disciplines and organizations, where partners work at different locations, in different sectors, or across international boundaries.
• Foster connections between discoveries and their use in the service of society.

The following long-term outcomes for the Ideas goal provide the basis for development of more specific and time-dependent annual performance goals:

• A robust and growing fundamental knowledge base that enhances progress in all science and engineering areas.
• Discoveries that advance the frontiers of science, engineering, and technology.
• Partnerships connecting discovery to innovation, learning, and societal advancement.
• Research and education processes that are synergistic.

Appendix 1 describes the critical factors for success that are identified for the outcome goals.

Appendix 2 describes the external factors that should be considered in developing goal achievement strategies. The work that results in the achievement of the IDEAS outcome goals is performed largely outside the agency; thus, external factors have a significant impact on NSF's performance. In general, these factors result from changes (social, political, physical, etc.) in the environment for the conduct of research and education activities in the federal sector, the private sector, and in academe. They stem largely from the fact that NSF does not conduct the research and education activities directly and, therefore, influences outcomes rather than controls them.

As described in Appendix 3, Assessing NSF Performance, NSF performance is successful if the outcomes of NSF investments for a given period of time are judged to have achieved or to have made significant progress in achieving the specific performance goals. These assessments are made by independent external panels of experts, who use their collective experienced-based norms in determining the level of "significance" necessary for a rating of successful.

C.   TOOLS:  Broadly accessible, state-of-the-art and shared research and education tools

NSF investments provide state-of-the art tools for research and education, such as instrumentation and equipment, multi-user facilities, accelerators, telescopes, research vessels and aircraft, and earthquake simulators. In addition, investments in Internet-based and distributed user facilities, advanced computing resources, research networks, digital libraries, and large databases are increasing, as a result of rapid advances in computer, information, and communication technologies. NSF's investments are coordinated with those of other organizations, agencies and countries to provide complementarity and integration.

As described in Section IV, NSF employs three core strategies that guide the entire agency in establishing priorities, identifying opportunities, and designing new programs and activities. Each of these strategies is critical to accomplishing the Tools goal. In addition, there are some implementation strategies that are specific to this goal:

• Stimulate and support the development, modernization, maintenance, operation and dissemination of next-generation instrumentation, multi-user facilities, databases, and other shared research and education platforms;
• Upgrade the computation and computing infrastructures for all fields of science, engineering, and education that NSF supports; and
• Provide information on the status of the domestic and foreign science and engineering enterprise to inform science policy and priority setting, and help identify current and emerging opportunities and needs in science and engineering.

The following long-term outcomes for the Tools goal provide the basis for development of more specific and time-dependent annual performance goals:

• Shared-use platforms, facilities, instruments, and databases that enable discovery and enhance the productivity and effectiveness of the science and engineering workforce.
• Networking and connectivity that take full advantage of the Internet and make science and technology information available to all citizens.
• Information and policy analyses that contribute to the effective use of science and engineering resources.

Appendix 1 describes the critical factors for success that are identified for the outcome goals.

Appendix 2 describes the external factors that must be considered in developing goal achievement strategies. For example, NSF relies on the academic research facilities and platforms available at colleges and universities across the country to provide a base upon which grantees can build their research programs. Although NSF support enhances this infrastructure, we do not control its current condition and quality. Failing to maintain a state-of-the-art research infrastructure will slow the pace of discovery and limit the research options available to researchers.

As described in Appendix 3, Assessing NSF Performance, NSF performance is successful if the outcomes of NSF investments for a given period of time are judged to have achieved or to have made significant progress in achieving the specific performance goals. These assessments are made by independent external panels of experts, who use their collective experienced-based norms in determining the level of "significance" necessary for a rating of successful.

IV.  Strategy

A.  Core Strategies

NSF employs the following three core strategies that guide the entire agency in establishing priorities, identifying opportunities, and designing new programs and activities. They cut across all NSF programs and activities, and each is critical to accomplishing NSF�s three outcome goals.

B.  Five-year Strategies

NSF�s mission cannot be accomplished without the U.S. science and engineering community providing significant intellectual leadership in critical, emerging and newly developing fields of research and education. The following five-year strategies help NSF to identify opportunities and make the investments that foster intellectual leadership within science and engineering community. These strategies cut across NSF programs and activities and are critical to accomplishing NSF�s three outcome goals.

(1)  Support competitive investigator-initiated research along a broad and expanding frontier of science and engineering.

Because no one can predict every discovery or anticipate all of the opportunities that fresh discoveries will produce, NSF's portfolio must be large and diverse, addressing many fields and activities, ranging from single investigator grants to small groups of investigators to large multi-purpose research centers. Over one half of NSF�s research budget supports unsolicited, investigator-initiated research proposals. These proposals are supported in expectation that their results will broadly contribute to advances and seed new concepts and opportunities.

This element of NSF�s strategy is primarily aimed at progress toward the Ideas goal. Our support of competitive investigator-initiated research opens the door for discovery. However such activities contribute to NSF�s goals for People and Tools as well, by providing venues for students and postdoctoral researchers to participate and also settings for the development and innovative use of tools.

The escalating complexity of science and engineering is moving research toward a collaborative mode with greater focus on intellectual integration. NSF grants must be of sufficient size and duration to enable this collaboration and permit complex issues to be addressed. In addition, writing and reviewing proposals takes valuable time that researchers and educators could better spend in carrying their agendas forward. Larger, longer-term grants will increase productivity by minimizing the time they must spend writing proposals and managing administrative tasks.

Increasing the average size of research grants to an enabling level of at least $150,000 will greatly enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of researchers. Likewise, increasing the duration of grants from a minimum of three years to four years will facilitate collaborations and provide added stability to the support of graduate students through completion of their graduate activities. Reaching these target levels will require both judicious uses of existing resources and additional new resources.

(2)  Identify and support "unmet opportunities" that strengthen and cross-fertilize the S&E disciplines and promise significant future payoffs for the Nation.

NSF�s commitment to funding basic research assures the Nation a deep reservoir of knowledge and provides flexibility and choices for identifying and addressing future opportunities. Working with broad segments of the research and education community, we identify unmet opportunities that arise in the disciplines we support. These are areas where activity in the community already exists, usually with modest support from the agency. In these areas, the people and tools are available to do the work, but a greater NSF investment now will have a very large future payoff for the Nation

A multi-year investment by NSF will advance: (1) mathematics and statistics in partnership with science and engineering across a broad spectrum of research; (2) information technology based on the study of massive graphs, random graphs, combinatorial optimization, coding theory and cryptology, and discrete and computational geometry; (3) mathematical biology, building on preliminary successes in simulation of organ functions, mathematical ecology, and neuroscience; (4) nanoscale science and engineering by modeling, simulation, and control of molecular processes; and (5) the education and training of a mathematically literate workforce to meet future challenges.

Similar opportunities exist throughout every field of science and engineering. Discoveries in physical science, for example, have created unprecedented opportunities to understand the origins of our universe and the role of quantum mechanics in the development of new chemical and materials systems. These discoveries also promise opportunities in laser science, computing, and medical instrumentation. Molecular science studies are also leading to important new ideas about environmentally benign processes and more efficient energy generation that should be developed more quickly and more deeply.

It is now possible to study an enormous spectrum of the earth�s dynamic processes. New knowledge and technological innovations, such as satellite communications, electronic connectivity, remote sensing and autonomous instruments, are also opening up new windows to the most remote regions on earth, enabling studies of the origin of the universe from the South Pole, the formation of earth's crust beneath the Arctic ice cap, and the evolution of biological species in extreme and isolated environments.

Additional investments may revolutionize our ability to understand and predict nonlinear geophysical systems, such as climate changes and their impacts on the environment, and natural disasters, such as earthquakes and floods.

The convergence of biotechnology and information technology is revolutionizing the biological sciences and their impacts on society. For example, sequencing the genomes of selected organisms, including plant-associated microbes, plant pathogens, and plant-associated insect pests, will provide insights into fundamental biological processes.

Research in the psychological, cognitive, neural, and language sciences will help provide a sharper picture of how human language is acquired and how it is used, both for thought and communication. This will lay the foundation for progress in many areas of national importance, from teaching children how to read and understanding learning processes in science and mathematics to building computers that can talk.

New developments in information technology also provide unprecedented opportunities for social and behavioral researchers to collect, access, and analyze the huge amounts of data necessary to reliably and validly inform policy makers about the complex processes by which we live, learn, and work. Improved efficiency and performance will be gained through an investment in shared infrastructure of web-based databases, research tools, archives, and collaboratories.

Bringing our understanding of learning processes together with advances in information technology creates new opportunities for education, both formal and informal. Such research should stimulate the design of new curricula that integrate technology and learning, contributing to an educational environment in which a high level of competence in information technology would be a natural consequence of all course work.

In the future, additional opportunities will be identified and discussed in NSF�s strategic and performance plans.

(3)  Emphasize several "transcendent" areas of emerging opportunity that enable research and education across a broad frontier of science and engineering.

As NSF and other agencies invest broadly in science and engineering opportunities, a few breakthroughs emerge that are revolutionary and encompassing. As these breakthroughs coalesce and merge with other ideas and technologies, they promise to reshape science and engineering, and change the way we think and live.

NSF works with other government agencies and with National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) to identify and support these areas. This interagency process allows agencies to create a comprehensive program of complementary activities. The goal is to accelerate scientific and technical progress by identifying gaps in knowledge and barriers that prevent progress, and developing methods of addressing gaps and overcoming barriers. This activity means more than a redistribution of dollars - - more money alone does not necessarily accelerate progress or solve problems. Recruiting new talent, inviting scientists in allied fields to "look across the fence," training new investigators to work in new areas will produce better results.

NSF has selected the following areas for increased attention during the next several years.

Information Technology

Sustained U.S. leadership in information technology requires an aggressive Federal program to create new knowledge in a variety of areas. The U.S. economy�s robust growth is in part due to new ideas that become the basis for new products. For example, NSF contributed greatly to the development of today�s Internet. NSF�s investments � in People, Ideas and Tools� have benefited greatly from the application of information technology. So, NSF itself has a strongly vested interest in furthering research in information technology as rapidly and as effectively as possible.

NSF faces two major challenges and opportunities with respect to information technology. One is to support the people, ideas and tools that will create and advance knowledge in all areas of information science and engineering. This includes the creation of wholly new computation approaches to problems arising from the science and engineering disciplines, and the development of new learning technologies for use in education.

The second challenge is to support upgrading the computational and computing infrastructures for all fields that NSF supports. Researchers and educators in many areas need to incorporate information technology and, in some cases, revolutionize their experimental and collaborative processes to attain new effectiveness and greater efficiency. Finally, the United States must address a range of access and workforce issues. The digital divide won�t disappear on its own. Overcoming inequity will require innovative educational technologies, such as highly interactive computer science courseware that is multicultural and multimedia.

NSF is the lead agency for a multi-agency, five-year research initiative in information technology. Each agency participating in the initiative will define specific programs in keeping with that agency's mission. NSF is primarily responsible for basic research to advance knowledge, and for education and workforce development activities. The multi-year Information Technology Initiative investment by NSF will lead to the following outcomes:

• Advancement of fundamental knowledge in techniques for computation; the representation of information; the manipulation and visualization of information; and the transmission and communication of information.
• Enhanced knowledge about how to design, build, and maintain large, complex software systems that are reliable, predictable, secure, and scalable.
• New knowledge about distributed and networked systems, and interactions among component parts, as well as systems� interaction with both individuals and cooperating groups of users.
• Development of a significantly advanced high-end computing capability needed to solve myriad important science and engineering problems.
• Increased understanding of the societal, ethical, and workforce implications of the information revolution.
• A strong information technology workforce and a citizenry capable of using information technology effectively.

Biocomplexity in the Environment

The environment is a subject of profound national and international importance, as well as scientific interest; hence, it is a strategic priority for the Foundation. In fact, the significance of environmental study was recently affirmed by the National Science Board in its report Environmental Science and Engineering for the 21^st Century:  The Role of the National Science Foundation (NSB 00-22).

The goals of NSF�s increasing investment in this area are to enhance environmental research in all relevant disciplines including interdisciplinary and long-term research, create educational opportunities that enhance scientific and technological capacity, enable an increased portfolio of scientific assessments, and support enhanced physical, technological and information infrastructure.

As an initial step, NSF has begun intensive study of biocomplexity in the environment. Biocomplexity refers to phenomena that result from dynamic interactions among biological, physical and social components of the Earth�s diverse systems.

Studying biocomplexity will provide a more complete understanding of natural processes, the effects of human actions on the natural world, and ways to use new technology effectively. A strategic multi-year investment by NSF will lead to the following outcomes:

• More comprehensive understanding of environmental systems including the processes that mediate energy and material flows among systems over space and time; the relationship among genetic information, biodiversity and the functioning of ecosystems; and the social and economic factors affecting the environment.
• Development of new theories, mathematical methods, and computational strategies for modeling complex systems. This may improve the capability to forecast environmental changes and their impacts including long-term climatic change, earthquakes, floods, land-use changes, the ecology of infectious diseases, and introductions of non-native species.
• Development of advanced technologies and approaches including functional genomics and other genetic and nano/molecular level capabilities.
• Utilization of biocomplexity-inspired design strategies for discovery of new materials, measurement technologies and sensors, process engineering and other technologies, especially those that are environmentally beneficial.
• Improved platforms for research such as networked observational systems, physical and digital natural history collections, and digital libraries.

Twenty-First Century Workforce

U.S. leadership in the concept-based, innovation-led global economy of the next century will depend on success in building and sustaining a competent and diverse scientific, mathematics, engineering, and technology (SMET) workforce, drawing on all elements of the Nation�s rich human resources.

The SMET education continuum reaches from pre-kindergarten through elementary and secondary to undergraduate, graduate, and continuing professional education. The level, quality, and accessibility of SMET education depend upon 1) understanding the nature of learning, 2) strategically enabling an improved, science- and technology-based educational enterprise, and 3) building an infrastructure to broaden participation of all members of our society.

Across the Foundation, organizations will provide disciplinary and interdisciplinary support for educational linkages to the research community and new tools and models for K-12, undergraduate, and graduate education. These activities recognize the importance of the SMET content of educational programs for K-12 students and for the instructional workforce.

A National Digital Library for SMET Education will provide ready access to the highest quality educational materials, pedagogy, and research on learning, and enhance the quality of graduate, undergraduate, K-12, and public science education.

The outcomes of NSF�s sustained investment in research, education, training and human resource programs will be:

• Enhanced knowledge about how humans learn;
• Enhanced practices throughout the SMET educational enterprise, especially at the K-12 level, leading to improved teacher performance and student achievement; and
• A more inclusive and globally engaged SMET enterprise that fully reflects the strength of America�s diverse population.

Nanoscale Science and Engineering

Nanoscale science and engineering is likely to yield several prominent technologies for the 21^st century. Control of matter at the nanoscale underpins innovation in critical areas from information and medicine to manufacturing and the environment.

One nanometer (one billionth of a meter) is a magical point on the dimensional scale. Nanostructures are at the confluence of the smallest of human-made devices and the large molecules of living systems. Biological cells, like red blood cells, have diameters in the range of thousands of nanometers. Micro-electrical mechanical systems are now approaching this same scale. This means we are now at the point of connecting machines to individual cells.

Nanoscale science and engineering is the NSF contribution to the interagency National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). A multi-year investment by NSF will lead to the following outcomes:

• Discovery of novel phenomena, processes and tools.
• Enhanced methods for the synthesis and processing of engineered, nanometer-scale building blocks for materials and system components,
• New device concepts and system architecture appropriate to the unique features and demands of nanoscale engineering, and
• Development of a new generation of skilled workers who have the multidisciplinary perspective necessary for rapid progress in nanotechnology.

(4)  Broaden participation and enhance diversity in NSF programs.

NSF emphasizes improving achievement for all students in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology and building capacity for research in these areas across the Nation. These activities enable NSF to set the stage for a concerted effort to broaden and diversify the workforce.

At present, several groups, including underrepresented minorities, women, certain types of institutions, and some geographic areas, perceive barriers to their full participation in the science and engineering enterprise. NSF is committed to leading the way to an enterprise that fully captures the strength of America�s diversity.

All NSF�s research and education programs must be directly involved in broadening participation. Hence, NSF will promote diversity by embedding it throughout the investment portfolio. A key element of NSF�s strategy includes the use of information technology and connectivity to engage under-served individuals, groups, and communities in science and engineering.

For groups and individuals at the collegiate, graduate, and professional levels, NSF aims at new strategies for improving diversity, while maintaining the current suite of focused programs that achieves results.

NSF will build on the cumulative experience of the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) and programs involving, for example, undergraduate and minority serving institutions, to strengthen and broaden the education and research capability and competitiveness of states, regions, institutions, and groups.

Excellence in managing the agency�s activities underpins all of NSF�s goals. Four factors are especially critical to NSF's goal achievement.

Factor 1:  Operating a credible, efficient merit review system.

NSF�s merit review process is the keystone for award selection. All proposals for research and education projects are evaluated using two criteria: the intellectual merit of the proposed activity and the broader impacts of the activity on society. Specifically addressed in these criteria are the creativity and originality of the idea, the development of human resources, and the potential impact on the research and education infrastructure.

The merit review system is at the very heart of NSF's selection of the projects through which its outcome goals are achieved. Ensuring a credible, efficient system requires constant attention and openness to change.

Implementation Strategies

• Regularly assess performance of all aspects of the merit review system, comparing its efficiency, effectiveness, customer satisfaction and integrity against similar processes run by other organizations.
• Promote the use of both merit review criteria (i.e. intellectual merit and broader impacts) in the evaluation of proposals.
• Develop alternative mechanisms for obtaining and reviewing proposals and evaluating their potential for use in determining NSF's investments.
• Reduce the burden on proposers and reviewers while maintaining the quality of decision processes, by increasing award size and duration.

Factor 2:  Exemplary use of and broad access to new and emerging technologies for business application.

NSF has moved aggressively to adopt new technologies in our business processes. NSF must sustain and further develop exemplary mechanisms to streamline business interactions, enhance organizational productivity, ensure accessibility to a broadened group of participants, and maintain financial integrity and internal controls.

Implementation Strategies

• Implement full electronic proposal receipt, review, processing and award, to reduce the administrative burden on staff and partner institutions, and eliminate paper materials wherever possible.
• Implement a high-quality communications infrastructure and state-of-the-art technological tools to enhance organizational productivity.
• Maintain financial and award system integrity through rigorous systems standards and controls and continual system improvements.

Factor 3:  A diverse, capable, motivated staff that operates with efficiency and integrity.

NSF is dependent on the capability and integrity of its staff. Innovative methods of recruitment, development, and employee recognition will be needed to meet the challenges of the future.

Implementation Strategies

• Provide a learning environment where the ideas and opinions of program officers and support staff are highly valued by management.
• Sustain a recruitment and retention policy that enables personnel searches that focus on excellence and diversity in the workplace.
• Invest in staff development and provide training on continuing issues of importance such as avoiding conflicts of interest and on new directions such as electronic proposal submission.
• Improve the participation of underrepresented groups in both career and temporary positions.
• Explore new mechanisms for the recruitment and employment of scientists, engineers, and educators at NSF.
• Use flextime, flexplace, telecommuting, independent research and development plans, and related tools of the work environment to maximize staff productivity and growth.

Factor 4:  Implementation of mandated performance assessment and management reforms in line with agency needs.

An organization that is dependent on public funds must be accountable to the public. The development and use of effective indicators of agency performance -- measuring NSF's ability to meet mission-oriented goals, our competent use of resources in the investment process, and our efficiency and effectiveness as a reliable partner to others -- are needed to better explain the agency's role to the public.

Implementation Strategies

• Assess the reliability, completeness, appropriateness and usability of NSF's management data systems as they support GPRA and the CFO Act.
• Work with academic institutions and other grantees to assure reliable, valid collection of project reporting information.
• Align individual performance plans with agency and organizational plans and with the changing technologies and needs of the workplace.
• Continue to develop appropriate standards and indicators of success for reporting systems.

The work of research and education that results in the achievement of NSF's outcome goals is performed largely outside the agency; thus, external factors have a significant impact on NSF's performance. In particular, the circumstances of our institutional partners in academe, the private sector, and the government affect how individuals and groups are able to respond in both proposing and conducting research and education activities.

For example, NSF relies on the academic research facilities and platforms available at colleges and universities across the country to provide a base upon which grantees can build their research programs. Although NSF support enhances this infrastructure, we do not control its current condition and quality. Failing to maintain a state-of-the-art research infrastructure will slow the pace of discovery and limit the research options available to researchers.

With regard to the "people" goal, characteristics of the workforce of scientists and engineers are highly dependent on the systems through which they are educated and trained. NSF programs influence educational systems and the public that supports them, but are only one influence among many.

Other factors that exist beyond NSF's control include: (1) appropriations; (2) indirect cost rates; (3) government-wide policies; (4) inflation; (5) budgets and plans of other R&D agencies; (6) uncertainty and risk inherent in research; (7) availability and pace of technology; and (8) private sector capacity to use new knowledge.

However, NSF�s influence and leadership extend well beyond our budget, and we can do much to minimize the negative impacts of factors beyond the agency's control. Given our unique role, NSF brings together diverse elements of the larger science and engineering community to achieve our mission. This positions the agency to: (1) establish partnerships that leverage funds beyond our budget and (2) provide leadership that catalyzes new directions for research and education.

The challenge of performance assessment for NSF is that both the substance and the timing of outcomes from research and education activities are largely unpredictable. NSF staff members do not conduct the research and education projects. They provide support for others to undertake these activities based on proposals for the work to be done, the best information available as to the likely outputs and outcomes, and their knowledge of NSF�s outcome goals and the strategies for achieving them. They influence rather than control the outputs and outcomes.

OMB authorized NSF to use alternative format performance goals for NSF's outcomes in research and education. This approach allows for expert judgment to consider both quantitative and qualitative information on performance and to weigh that information in a balanced assessment. NSF uses the descriptive performance goals in our management process through a combination of internal self-assessment and review by independent external panels of experts and peers.

For the three outcome goals, NSF performance is successful if the outcomes of NSF investments for a given period of time are judged to have achieved or to have made significant progress in achieving the specific performance goals. These assessments are made by independent external panels of experts, who use their collective experienced-based norms in determining the level of "significance" necessary for a rating of successful.

Assessment of goal achievement, by external groups of peers and experts will take into account such factors as (1) identified performance indicators for each performance goal, (2) the success to which NSF strategies and plans are implemented; (3) the level of resources invested; (4) external events beyond control of the agency; and (5) the agency�s capability to be flexible and respond rapidly to emerging opportunities. NSF makes use of the following stages in the grant award cycle to assess performance:

• Applicant and Grantee Information/Merit Review
  All applicants and grantees provide results from previous NSF support, information about existing facilities and equipment available to conduct the proposed research, where the research is to be conducted, biographical information on the primary investigators, other sources of support, and certifications specific to NSF. Information is required at the time of application, at the time of an award, and in annual and final project reports. Awards are made based on merit review by peers who are experts in the field using NSF�s merit review criteria, and availability of resources.
• Program Evaluation by Committees of Visitors (COVs)

To ensure the highest quality in processing and recommending proposals for award, qualified external experts review each program every three years. COVs report on the integrity and efficiency of the processes for proposal review and the quality of results of NSF�s programs in the form of outputs and outcomes that appear over time. COVs report on the noteworthy achievements of each year, ways in which projects have collectively affected progress, and expectations for future performance. The recommendations of COVs are reviewed by management and taken into consideration by NSF when evaluating existing programs and future directions for the Foundation.
• Directorate Assessment by Advisory Committees

Directorate advisory committees review internal self-assessments, COV reports, available external evaluations, and annual directorate performance reports, judging program effectiveness, and describing strengths and weaknesses. The advisory committees' reports are reviewed by NSF management, which then integrates committee recommendations into the NSF Annual Performance Report.

Much of this performance assessment is retrospective, addressing investments made at some point in the past. In order to tie this effectively to current issues in management of the programs, the assessments must also address the quality of the set of awards made in the fiscal year under consideration. The focus of this portfolio assessment is the likelihood that the package of awards will produce strong results in the future. Special emphases within the plans for the fiscal year merit special attention in the assessment process.

NSF staff has control over budget allocations and the decision processes that determine the set of awards. NSF performance goals for investment processes, along with those for management of the agency, are generally quantitative. They refer to processes conducted during the fiscal year that are generally captured in NSF systems.

Data Collection, Verification, and Validation for NSF�s Results Goals

Two types of data are used to assess goal performance: (a) non-quantitative output and outcome information, collected and reported using the alternative format, which are used to assess the Outcome Goals and the implementation of the new merit review criteria; and (b) quantitative data collected through systems for the performance target levels of the Investment Process and Management Goals.

NSF sources of data include central databases such as the electronic Project Reporting System, the Enterprise Information System, the FastLane system, the Proposal system, the Awards system, the Reviewer System, the Integrated Personnel System, the Finance System, Online Document System, and the Performance Reporting System; distributed sources such as scientific publications, press releases, independent assessments including Committee of Visitor (COV) and Advisory Committee (AC) reports, program and division annual reports, directorate annual reports, and internally maintained local databases. In a few cases, NSF makes use of externally maintained contractor databases.

Through these sources, output indicators such as the following will be available to program staff, third party evaluators, and advisory committees:

• Related to Ideas:  Results, published and disseminated: journal publications, books, software, audio or video products; contributions within and across disciplines; organizations of participants and collaborators (including collaborations with industry); contributions to other disciplines, infrastructure, and beyond science and engineering; use beyond the research group of specific products, instruments, and equipment resulting from NSF awards; role of NSF-sponsored activities in stimulating innovation and policy development.
• Related to People:  student participants; demographics of participants; descriptions of student involvement; education and outreach activities under grants; demographics of science and engineering students and workforce; numbers and quality of educational models, products and practices; number and quality of teachers trained; student outcomes including enrollments in mathematics and science courses, retention, achievement, and science and mathematics degrees received.
• Related to Tools:  new tools and technologies, multidisciplinary databases; software, newly-developed instrumentation, and other inventions; data, samples, specimens, germ lines, and related products of awards placed in shared repositories; facilities construction and upgrade costs and schedules; operating efficiency of shared-use facilities.

NSF�s electronic Project Reporting System permits organized reporting of aggregate information. We anticipate that the reliability of the information in the system will improve over time, as investigators and institutions become comfortable with its use. FY 1999 was the first year of its full implementation. Electronic submission of project reports is required in FY 2000.

The scientific data from the reporting system will be tested for plausibility as a natural part of the external assessment process. In addition, data from the reporting system will be used to address progress under prior support when investigators reapply to NSF. Thus, the investigators have a strong incentive to provide accurate information that reviewers may rely upon.

Issues Specific to NSF:

Because it is difficult to predict or quantify research results, or to report them in a timely way, NSF�s Outcome goals are expressed in an OMB-approved alternative format. Research results cannot be predicted beforehand, and the time frame for reporting outcomes is typically long after the fiscal year in which an award was made. For example, a grant provided in one fiscal year might not produce a reportable outcome for five years or more, if at all.

It should be noted that while NSF made use of the alternative format using the two standard approach required by the Act ("successful" or "minimally effective"), it was found that there was little to be gained in defining the use of "minimally effective," and that in many instances it was confusing to the evaluators.

Therefore, for FY 2000 and beyond, NSF will define one standard only: the "successful" standard. The programs will be evaluated on whether they succeed in achieving the target goals and their impact.

Collection of data for all goals takes place throughout the year, and is completed near the end of the fiscal year. Depending on the specific type of data, data are collected into a report for a given goal by the group responsible for that goal, and then organized for reporting. The data obtained are reviewed on a continuing basis by senior NSF management throughout the year, to observe whether the results are as expected, or need to be improved, or whether the information being obtained is useful to the agency. Data collection systems are also under constant observance and refinement, as in the case of the new FastLane reporting system.

During FY 1999, NSF staff began to implement a Data Quality Project for the quantitative Investment Process and Management goals. This project is currently underway with the first priority placed on the central data systems used to support the performance plan.

In addition, NSF staff implemented new guidelines and reporting procedures for collecting data for the qualitative Outcome goals. The Committee of Visitor (COV) guidelines were revised in FY 1999 to incorporate the GPRA related reporting requirements. Reporting templates were developed for the COVs to address the performance of programs in a systematic way to allow for aggregating information across NSF. COVs address a common set of questions for all programs reviewed in a fiscal year.

Reporting guidelines were also developed for Advisory Committees to allow for a systematic aggregation of information. The results of using the new procedures have identified areas for improvement that are being incorporated into the FY 2000 reporting guidelines. Many of the results learned while conducting these assessments have been used in revising the FY 2000 performance goals, and the revised strategic plan.

NSF Program Assessment/Evaluation Schedule

__________________________

¹One-third of NSF programs assessed annually; assessments take place throughout the fiscal year. All programs assessed on a three-year cycle. COVs address management of programs and achievement of outcome goals; information used by senior management and in aggregate for performance reporting.

²Advisory committees review directorate activities annually and approve COV reports; assess contributions of directorate in achieving NSFs goals; provide reports for use by NSF management and in aggregating NSF performance results. Schedule: meet twice annually with assessment at end of fiscal year. Advisory committees use COV reports as basis for strategic planning discussions with directorates.

³NSF-wide programs evaluated by external contractors to assess impact of programs. Schedule varies depending on program. MRI= Major Research Instrumentation program external contractor reviewed in FY 2000; CAREER =Faculty Early Career Development program external contractor review being organized in FY 2000 for evaluation in FY 2001; STC= Science and Technology Centers; PFF=Presidential Faculty Fellows; GRF=Graduate Research Fellowships program; GRT=Graduate Research Traineeships program evaluation completed in FY 2000; IGERT= Integrative Graduate Education and Research Training program evaluation ongoing in FY 2000.

⁴Internal staff meetings to review GPRA activities across NSF and make recommendations for implementation of GPRA. DPG = Director�s Policy Group, GIIC= GPRA Infrastructure Implementation Council, GIIC WG= GPRA Infrastructure Implementation Council Working Group.

Many other agencies support or conduct research and education activities in science and engineering in support of their missions. Frequently they will define outcome and performance goals that are similar to those NSF has defined. However, an agency�s mission will have an impact on the nature of the outcome and performance goals, so, in general, they are distinct. NSF�s general approach is to work with other agencies to ensure complementary sets of activities. Certain interagency interactions are particularly important for NSF support of fundamental research:

• National Institutes of Health (NIH):   biosciences, genomics, biomedical research, chemistry, behavioral sciences, cognitive development;
• Department of Energy (DOE):   high energy and nuclear physics, materials, high end computing, genomics;
• Department of Defense (DOD):  engineering, computer and information science and engineering, mathematics;
• Department of Commerce (DOC):  ocean and atmospheric sciences, global climate change, meteorology, atomic and molecular physics;
• National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA):  astronomical sciences, global climate change;
• Department of Agriculture (USDA):  biosciences, genomics;
• Department of Education (ED): &nbps; education research; and,
• Environmental Protection Agency (EPA):  environmental research.

Each of these agencies addresses fundamental research in a somewhat different way with an interdependent mix of intramural research, funding for extramural research, and construction and operation of facilities. For example, in some areas, NSF�s support of extramural research is critically dependent on an investigator�s access to user facilities provided by other agencies. Likewise, results of NSF-supported research may be used in intramural research activities of other agencies.

Many investigators work on several projects simultaneously, seeking support for complementary activities from different agencies. Senior managers at NSF and other agencies maintain the close connections that provide a productive framework for program-level coordination and permit formal cooperation among agencies when working toward similar objectives.

NSF actively participates in many interagency initiatives and planning activities coordinated through the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC). These activities include the following:

• Information Technology Research (ITR),
• National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI),
• U.S. Global Change Research Program,
• High Performance Computing and Communications,
• Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV),
• Education Research,
• Integrated Science for Ecosystems Challenges,
• Children�s Research,
• Plant Genome Research,
• National Oceanographic Partnership Program,
• Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee.

In all of these activities, NSF�s role is at the fundamental end of the research and development spectrum. These interagency planning efforts are coordinated among agencies to reap optimal benefit from the Federal investment.

NSF has been designated the lead Federal agency for an initiative on Information Technology Research (ITR) � a six agency initiative which includes the Departments of Energy and Defense, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. ITR grew from the efforts of several agencies and responds to recommendations made by the President�s Information Technology Advisory Committee (PITAC). NSF�s FY 2001 investment includes a substantial increase for research in software systems, scaleable information infrastructure, high-end computing, and socioeconomic and workforce impacts of IT.

In FY 1999 and 2000, NSF continued to work in partnership with other Federal agencies in planning nanoscale science and engineering activities. NSF chairs the interagency working group on Nanoscience, Engineering and Technology, under the guidance of the NSTC, in cooperation with DOD, DOC, National Institute for Science and Technology, Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR), DOE, Department of Transportation/Volpe Center, Department of Treasury, NASA, and NIH.

NSF also has a number of partnerships with individual agencies or small groups of agencies. Some grow out of formal interagency processes; for example, NSF partners with four other agencies in development of the Next Generation Internet. Other collaborations reflect the particular interests of the partnering agencies. Examples include NSF�s partnership with EPA and DOI in areas such as water and watersheds, ecological and environmental technologies, and risk assessment and evaluation, and also our work with the Department of Energy and NASA in the interagency program of research on Human Origins. These and similar partnerships are designed to make efficient, effective use of Federal resources in support of research.

NSF is involved with numerous agencies in support of research in the biological sciences, including:

• Interagency Arabidopsis Genome Project (USDA/DOE/NIH/NSF as lead agency) which has a goal of understanding biological processes underlying plant growth and development;
• NSF/NIH/USDA International Cooperative Biodiversity Groups;
• NSF/NASA Neurolab which also involves NIH, the Office of Naval Research and international partners to support ground based research leading to experiments flown on the NASA space shuttle;
• The Human Brain Project (NIH/NSF/DOD/DOE/NASA), which is a broad Federal research initiative to support research in the neurosciences and the new field of neuroinformatics;
• Ecology of Emerging Infectious Diseases (NSF/NIH/USDA/NASA/DOI).

NSF is one of twelve federal agencies supporting Arctic research and logistics. NSF provides interagency leadership for research planning as directed by the Arctic Research Policy Act of 1984. NSF is charged with managing all U.S. activities in the Antarctic as a single, integrated program. The U.S. Antarctic Program (USAP) implements national policy to maintain Antarctica as an area of international cooperation reserved for peaceful purposes, to preserve and pursue unique opportunities for scientific research, to understand Antarctica and its role in global environmental systems, to protect the environment, and to assure the conservation and sustainable management of the living resources in the surrounding oceans.

NSF is one of many public and private agencies with responsibilities for obtaining statistical information on areas of important national interest. NSF and other agencies share information on statistical information technology, and other methods and resources through the Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology and related groups.

The resources at NSF's disposal include: (1) a staff of approximately 1,200 government employees, an additional 126 scientists and engineers on various types of visiting appointments, and 192 contractors that support the agency�s work; (2) outstanding information management systems that help the agency process approximately 30,000 competitive proposals, 10,000 new awards and 10,000 continuing awards per year; and (3) members of the science and engineering community who donate tens of thousands of hours each year to the review of proposals for research and education.

NSF recognizes the need to secure a workforce that is skilled, flexible, and performance-oriented with a customer focus. It will increase its use of workforce planning and other strategies that align human resources with the fulfillment of its mission and goals.

Proposals and awards are managed through eight programmatic organizations -- the seven directorates and the Office of Polar Programs -- and a ninth organization that focuses on multidisciplinary programs, the Office of Integrative Activities.

• The Biological Sciences (BIO) directorate supports research ranging from the study of the structure and dynamics of biological molecules, such as proteins and nucleic acids, through cells, organs, and organisms, to studies of populations and ecosystems. (FY 2001 Request: $511.14 million)
• The Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE) directorate supports research on the theory and foundations of computing, system software and computer system design, and human-computer interactions, as well as prototyping, testing and development of cutting-edge computing and communications systems. (FY 2001 Request: $529.10 million)
• The Engineering (ENG) directorate supports research in bioengineering and environmental systems; chemical and transport systems; civil and mechanical systems; electrical and communications systems; design, manufacture, and industrial innovation; and engineering education activities. (FY 2001 Request: $456.50 million)
• The Geosciences (GEO) directorate supports research in the atmospheric, earth, and ocean sciences. (FY 2001 Request: $583.0 million)
• The Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS) directorate supports research in mathematics, astronomy, physics, chemistry, and materials science. (FY 2001 Request: $881.16 million)
• The Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences (SBE) directorate supports research on human characteristics and behavior, including research on economic systems; supports the NSF�s international activities; and provides informational tools for tracking the resources that make up the nation�s science and engineering infrastructure. (FY 2001 Request: $175.14 million)
• The Office of Polar Programs (OPP) supports multidisciplinary research in Arctic and Antarctic regions. (FY 2001 Request: $285.41 million)
• The Education and Human Resources directorate (EHR) supports education and training activities at every level, informal education, research on teaching and learning, human resource development, and development of research capabilities. EHR is the focal point for NSF efforts to promote diversity. (FY 2001 Request: $729.01 million)
• The Integrative Activities (IA) budget activity funds selected Foundation-wide activities such as the Opportunity Fund and the Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) program. (FY 2001 Request: $119.23 million)

Approximately 95% of NSF�s budget goes directly to investments in NSF�s three outcome goals. A fourth function, administration and management, provides operating support for the immediate activities of the agency. The FY 2001 Request leads to the following distribution of NSF budget resources across the three strategic goal and the Administration and Management (A&M) account, with a total Request of $4.572 billion. Dollar estimates are made at a programmatic level based on the principal objectives of the activity.

Crosswalk of Resources with Strategic Goals: FY 2001
(Estimated Millions of Dollars)

Working closely with the National Science Board, NSF advisory committees, and other groups, NSF will periodically re-examine the distribution of resources across these goals.

APPENDIX 6:  LINKING THE GPRA STRATEGIC PLAN TO THE PERFORMANCE PLAN

NSF will develop annual performance plans under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) with performance goals that provide strong accountability and management tools. These annual plans will also reflect the reality that the results of NSF's investment in research and education appear over long time scales and at uneven, unpredictable intervals, arising from the nature of science and technology.

The outcome goals, core strategies, and five-year plans will be used as a basis for organizing both the annual performance plan and the agency's corresponding annual budget request. These comprise the principal directions of agency action and the bulk of NSF funding.

While the three broad goals in this strategic plan are not described in a way that permits assessment of their achievement, the long-term outcomes identified for each of these goals will provide the basis for results-oriented performance goals that can be assessed. (This is permissible under Circular A-11, Part 2, OMB.)

Performance plans for an upcoming fiscal year will be developed in light of the analysis of past performance, assessment of how recent or projected changes in the investment portfolio will influence future performance, and fit to the outcome goals and strategies identified in this strategic plan. Given the expected lag between investment and outcomes, NSF will always be operating with only partial information in developing its program strategies.

Annual performance goals for NSF management will derive from the key strategies under Critical Factors for Success in the body of this GPRA strategic plan, with selected areas highlighted in a given year as it becomes particularly timely. Specific performance goals for each year will be determined by assessing past performance and making reasonable projections for levels of performance that can be expected.

PEOPLE � A diverse, internationally-competitive and globally engaged workforce of scientists, engineers, and well-prepared citizens.

K-12 Support

Undergraduate Support

Graduate and Professional Development Support