This document has been archived.
Title: Advanced Technological Education (ATE)
Date: 09/11/09
Replaced: NSF: 05-530
Advanced Technological Education (ATE)
Program Solicitation
NSF 07-530
Replaces Document(s):
NSF 05-530
[NSF Logo] National Science Foundation
Directorate for Education & Human Resources
Division of Undergraduate Education
Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings
Preliminary Proposal Due Date(s):
April 26, 2007
April 24, 2008
April 23, 2009
Preliminary proposals are optional, but strongly recommended,
especially for institutions or departments that have not
previously submitted to the ATE program. Please see the full text
of this solicitation for further information.
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
October 11, 2007
October 16, 2008
October 15, 2009
REVISION NOTES
Preliminary Proposals. All preliminary proposals must be submitted via
Fastlane.
Changes in the ATE program solicitation for FY2008, FY2009, and FY2010
include:
1. A new project's category "Small Grants for Institutions New to ATE"
has been added for institutions that have not had an ATE award in the
past 10 years.
2. Program Improvement within the ATE projects track has an expanded set
of opportunities.
3. Institution-level reform projects should be submitted under program
improvement.
4. Teacher preparation has been rewritten to broaden the types of
projects that can be supported.
5. The Research on Technician Education activity under projects has been
changed to Targeted Research on Technician Education and is now a
third track of the ATE program.
Please be advised that theNSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide
(PAPPG) includes revised guidelines to implement the mentoring provisions
of the America COMPETES Act (ACA) (Pub. L. No. 110-69, Aug. 9, 2007.) As
specified in the ACA, each proposal that requests funding to support
postdoctoral researchers must include a description of the mentoring
activities that will be provided for such individuals. Proposals that do
not comply with this requirement will be returned without review (see the
PAPP Guide Part I: Grant Proposal Guide Chapter II for further information
about the implementation of this new requirement).
As announced on May 21st, proposers must prepare and submit proposals to
the National Science Foundation (NSF) using the NSF FastLane system at
http://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/. This approach is being taken to support
efficient Grants.gov operations during this busy workload period and in
response to OMB direction guidance issued March 9, 2009. NSF will continue
to post information about available funding opportunities to Grants.gov
FIND and will continue to collaborate with institutions who have invested
in system-to-system submission functionality as their preferred proposal
submission method. NSF remains committed to the long-standing goal of
streamlined grants processing and plans to provide a web services interface
for those institutions that want to use their existing grants management
systems to directly submit proposals to NSF.
SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
General Information
Program Title:
Advanced Technological Education (ATE)
Synopsis of Program:
With an emphasis on two-year colleges, the Advanced Technological
Education (ATE) program focuses on the education of technicians
for the high-technology fields that drive our nation's economy.
The program involves partnerships between academic institutions
and employers to promote improvement in the education of science
and engineering technicians at the undergraduate and secondary
school levels. The ATE program supports curriculum development;
professional development of college faculty and secondary school
teachers; career pathways to two-year colleges from secondary
schools and from two-year colleges to four-year institutions; and
other activities. A secondary goal is articulation between
two-year and four-year programs for K-12 prospective teachers
that focus on technological education. The program also invites
proposals focusing on applied research relating to technician
education.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
* Eileen L. Lewis, Lead Program Director, ATE, Division of Undergraduate
Education, 835 N, telephone: (703) 292-4627, email: ellewis@nsf.gov
* Gerhard L. Salinger, Lead Program Director, ATE, Division of Research
on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings, 885 S, telephone: (703)
292-5116, email: gsalinge@nsf.gov
* Linnea A. Fletcher, Co-Lead Program Director, ATE, Division of
Undergraduate Education, 835 N, telephone: (703) 292-4634, email:
lafletch@nsf.gov
* David B. Campbell, Co-Lead Program Director, ATE, Division of Research
on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings, 885 S, telephone: (703)
292-5093, email: dcampbel@nsf.gov
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
* 47.076 --- Education and Human Resources
Award Information
Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant
Estimated Number of Awards: 75
Anticipated Funding Amount: $46,000,000 each year in FY2008, FY2009, and
FY2010, for both new and continuing ATE awards, subject to the availability
of funds.
Eligibility Information
Organization Limit:
None Specified
PI Limit:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:
An individual may serve as the Principal Investigator (PI) on no
more than one proposal submitted for each deadline date, but may
serve as a co-PI on multiple proposals.
Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
* Letters of Intent: Not Applicable
* Preliminary Proposals: Submission of Preliminary Proposals is optional
but encouraged. Please see the full text of this solicitation for
further information.
* Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: This solicitation contains
information that supplements the standard NSF Proposal and Award
Policies and Procedures Guide, Part I: Grant Proposal Guide (GPG)
proposal preparation guidelines. Please see the full text of this
solicitation for further information
B. Budgetary Information
* Cost Sharing Requirements: Cost Sharing is not required under this
solicitation.
* Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations:
In all planning grants for centers and small grants for institutions
new to the ATE program, indirect costs may not exceed 10 percent of
modified total direct costs.
* Other Budgetary Limitations: Other budgetary limitations apply. Please
see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
C. Due Dates
* Preliminary Proposal Due Date(s):
April 26, 2007
April 24, 2008
April 23, 2009
Preliminary proposals are optional, but strongly recommended,
especially for institutions or departments that have not
previously submitted to the ATE program. Please see the full text
of this solicitation for further information.
* Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
October 11, 2007
October 16, 2008
October 15, 2009
Proposal Review Information Criteria
Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria.
Additional merit review considerations apply. Please see the full text of
this solicitation for further information.
Award Administration Information
Award Conditions: Standard NSF award conditions apply.
Reporting Requirements: Additional reporting requirements apply. Please
see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary of Program Requirements
I. Introduction
II. Program Description
III. Award Information
IV. Eligibility Information
V. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
B. Budgetary Information
C. Due Dates
D. FastLane Requirements
VI. NSF Proposal Processing and Review Procedures
A. NSF Merit Review Criteria
B. Review and Selection Process
VII. Award Administration Information
A. Notification of the Award
B. Award Conditions
C. Reporting Requirements
VIII.Agency Contacts
IX. Other Information
I. INTRODUCTION
The Advanced Technological Education (ATE) program promotes improvement in
the education of science and engineering technicians at the undergraduate
and the secondary school levels. Proposals to the program may aim to affect
either specialized technology courses or core science, mathematics, and
technology courses that serve as prerequisites or corequisites for
specialized technology courses. The curricular focus and the activities of
all projects should demonstrably contribute to the ATE program's central
goals: producing more science and engineering technicians to meet workforce
demands, and improving the technical skills and the general science,
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) preparation of these
technicians and the educators who prepare them.
The ATE program focuses on two-year colleges and expects two-year colleges
to have a leadership role in all projects. Effective technological
education programs should involve partnerships in which two-year colleges
work with four-year colleges and universities, secondary schools, business,
industry, and government, and should respond to employers' need for
well-prepared technicians with adaptable skills.
Because the foundation of America's competitiveness is a
well-educated and skilled workforce, the ATE program is a vital component
of the American Competitiveness Initiative as the program prepares science
and engineering technicians for the many fields on which the nation's
prosperity hinges. Many of these fields also play a vital role in national
security and sustainable energy production and management. Fields of
technology supported by the ATE program include, but are not limited to,
agricultural technology, biotechnology, chemical technology, civil and
construction technology, computer and information technology, cybersecurity
and forensics, electronics, environmental technology, geographic
information systems, manufacturing and engineering technology, marine
technology, multimedia technology, nanotechnology, telecommunications, and
transportation technology. The ATE program does not support projects that
focus primarily on students who will become health, veterinary, or medical
technicians.
Activities undertaken in ATE projects in support of technician education
may include:
* adaptation of exemplary educational materials, courses, and curricula
developed elsewhere;
* professional development of college faculty and secondary school
teachers;
* design and implementation of new educational materials, courses,
laboratories, and curricula;
* research on the effectiveness of various approaches or practices in
technician education;
* internships and field experiences for students, faculty, and teachers;
* evaluation and broad dissemination of exemplary educational materials
and pedagogical strategies;
* programs between two-year colleges and four-year institutions for
prospective future K-12 teachers that focus on technological
education; and
* career pathways for technicians from two-year college programs to
four-year institutions.
Activities may have either a national or a regional focus, but not a purely
local one. All projects must be guided by a coherent vision of
technological education--a vision that recognizes students as life-long
learners together with the needs of the modern workplace and the
articulation of educational programs at different levels. The program
especially encourages efforts that
* give prospective technicians insight into real-world work
environments;
* serve the needs of not only first-time students but also returning
students and workers wishing to acquire new skills;
* implement national science, mathematics, technology, and industry
standards in education;
* use information technology and other educational technologies to
improve learning and teaching; and
* link educators and educational programs in two-year colleges with
those in four-year colleges and universities, secondary schools,
business, industry, and government; and
* provide insight on why projects work, with whom, and under what
circumstances.
2007 is the 14th year of the ATE program. Almost 800 ATE projects have been
supported to date and provide a base upon which future ATE projects should
build. Information about these projects can be found on the NSF web site
(http://www.nsf.gov/) The ATE Centers maintain a website
(http://www.atecenters.org/) that provides information about resources that
projects may wish to adapt. DUE's Project Information Resource System
(PIRS) allows proposers to search for awards made to the ATE program
(https://www.ehr.nsf.gov/pirs_prs_web/search/) by technology field and
year. In addition, a large-scale evaluation of the ATE program has been
performed by the Evaluation Center at Western Michigan University and
includes several research studies on best practices in technician
education. Proposers should visit (http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/ate/) for
information on evaluation and best practices and build proposals on this
evaluation and research base.
II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
A. PROGRAM TRACKS
The ATE program supports proposals in three major tracks: ATE
Projects, ATE Centers, and Targeted Research in Technician
Education. Proposals in all tracks should demonstrate a thorough
awareness of previous relevant ATE grants, research in effective
technician education, and contemporary developments in the
relevant field(s) of technology. Whenever feasible, projects
should utilize and innovatively build from successful educational
materials, courses, curricula, strategies, and methods that have
been developed through other ATE grants, as well as other
exemplary resources (including those not supported by NSF) that
can be adapted to technological education. Proposers should
contact the Principal Investigators (PIs) of previously funded
projects to explore the possibilities for adapting materials,
evaluating materials, receiving guidance, or collaborating in
other ways, such as conducting research projects which focus on
the effectiveness of technician education.
The ATE program encourages partnerships in which two-year
colleges work with secondary schools and four-year colleges or
universities to develop, implement, and evaluate model programs
for technicians and future teachers that focus on technological
education.
1. ATE Projects
ATE Projects focus on one or more of the activities
described below. Multifaceted projects that cut across
these activity categories are encouraged. The ATE
program also supports a small number of conferences,
workshops, and special projects that lead to a better
understanding of issues in advanced technological
education. Typically, these are short-duration events
and are national or international in scope.
Program Improvement: These projects should increase the
relevance of technician education to modern practices
and assure an increased number of students entering the
high performance workplace with enhanced competencies.
Proposed activities should enhance a curriculum in
multiple ways, producing a coherent sequence of
classes, laboratories, and work-based educational
experiences that revitalize the learning environment,
course content, and experience of instruction for
students preparing to be science and engineering
technicians. Employers must be involved, and the
resulting program should constitute a model that will
be disseminated broadly. The improved program should
lead students to an appropriate associate degree or
specific occupational competency or certification
embedded in an associate degree program, provide
business and industry and public sector agencies with a
larger pool of skilled technicians, and induce an
increased proportion of students who enroll to complete
programs.
Components of the program improvement process might
include:
* integrating industry standards and workplace
competencies into the curriculum;
* adapting educational materials or courses
developed elsewhere;
* adding rigorous STEM content to technician courses
and programs;
* incorporating work-based experiences;
* developing innovative methods for using laboratory
and field experiences to improve students'
understanding of basic principles and the modern
workplace;
* using modern instrumentation and new technologies;
* addressing the knowledge, skills, and competencies
needed for the evolving, converging, and emerging
technical workplace;
* incorporating global issues and international
technological and business practices into
technical programs;
* providing professional development for educators;
* improving articulation between programs at
secondary schools and two-year colleges, or
providing pathways from two-year colleges to
four-year college or university programs;
* developing life-long career and educational
pathways for technicians to support the changing
workplace;
* using appropriate assessment instruments to
measure student learning,
* providing educational opportunities for an
increasingly diverse student body; and
* improving the recruitment and retention of
students.
Professional Development for Educators: The ATE program
supports projects that provide current secondary school
teachers and college faculty with opportunities for
continued professional growth in areas that directly
impact technician education. These projects should be
designed to enhance the educators' disciplinary
capabilities, teaching skills, vitality, and
understanding of current technologies and practices.
Activities typically include workshops, intensive
seminars, industrial internships, or a combination of
these. Such activities typically last from a few days
to several weeks and are usually conducted in the
summer, with follow-up activities during the academic
year. To effect long-term change, these projects should
normally span at least two academic years. The program
particularly encourages activities that involve
secondary school teachers and two-year college faculty
working together. Evaluation should demonstrate use in
the classrooms and changes in practice of participating
faculty and teachers.
Curriculum and Educational Materials Development (for
National Dissemination): Proposed activities should
affect the learning environment, course content, and
experience of instruction for students preparing to be
science and engineering technicians and for their
teachers. Projects develop new print, electronic, and
multimedia materials, including simulations, scenarios,
and web-based collections as well as laboratory
experiments and manuals. It is expected that products
will be developed with input from business, industry,
and government, validated by experts from these
organizations, field tested in diverse locations, and
validated in terms of their effectiveness in meeting
learning goals.
The ATE program also anticipates funding a few Large
Scale Materials Development (LSMD) projects that build
on smaller scale efforts whose success has been
demonstrated through evaluation. These projects may
target course sequences or multiple courses that are
integrated and taken concurrently or major changes in
teaching strategies. They should be research-based,
build upon cognitive science, leverage existing
resources, and respond to documented national needs.
Such projects involve several diverse academic
institutions, often bringing different kinds of
expertise to the project. Evaluation activities are
deep and broad, demonstrating the impact of the project
on many students and faculty. Dissemination and
outreach activities that have national impact are an
especially important element of LSMD projects, as are
the opportunities for faculty to learn how to best
adapt project innovations to the needs of their
students and academic institutions. Materials may be
pilot tested locally, but field tests must be done at a
wide range of academic institutions. Evaluation must
include measures of increased student learning of
content and processes and have input from employers.
Teacher Preparation: The foundation for advanced
technological education is grounded in strong
mathematics, science, and technology education in K-12
schools. The preparation of future teachers who will
facilitate student learning in mathematics and science
and cultivate an interest in technological careers is
an important component of the ATE program. ATE teacher
preparation projects help prepare a future K-12
teaching workforce that is skilled in teaching science
and mathematics, understands the technological
workplace, and can prepare students to use a variety of
approaches to solving real world technology related
problems using design processes and principles (See
Standards for Technological Literacy, ITEA,
http://www.iteaconnect.org/.) A project may be designed
to prepare either (a) future K-12 mathematics and
science teachers who understand how processes and
principles of technology may be used to help students
learn material and reinforce concepts presented in
mathematics, science, and computer classrooms or (b)
future middle and high school technology teachers that
also have strong backgrounds in mathematics and
science.
Projects must involve both two-year and four-year
institutions and should aim to increase the number,
quality, and diversity of prospective K-12 science,
mathematics, or technology teachers in pre-professional
or paraprofessional programs at two-year colleges.
These programs are designed to improve the prospective
teachers' technological understanding; to provide them
with experiences to use in engaging students in real
world technological problems; to improve their
understanding of the modern workplace; and to
strengthen their preparation in science and mathematics
(since science and mathematics provide critical
underpinnings for advanced technological education).
Paraprofessional programs should provide pathways to a
four-year degree. Two-year colleges have the unique
advantage of having technology faculty, connected with
the high performance workplace, who can work with
mathematics and science faculty in developing and
teaching these programs.
The project's evaluation plan must describe how the
effectiveness of efforts to recruit prospective K-12
teachers, transfer those students into four-year
teacher preparation programs, enhance their
understanding of advanced technologies used in the
workplace, and enhance their ability to improve the
technological literacy of their students will be
measured. Project leaders should also be prepared to
contribute to longitudinal studies that track students
beyond the grant period, in order to measure the number
who graduate with teaching credentials, find positions
in K-12 schools, and demonstrate successful performance
in the classroom.
Small Grants for Institutions New to the ATE Program:
The primary objective of this category of ATE Project
grants is to increase the incentive and opportunity for
community colleges that have little or no previous
experience with the ATE program to undertake projects
to improve science and engineering technician education
programs or teacher preparation programs that focus on
technological education. This small grants opportunity
is designed to stimulate implementation, adaptation,
and innovation in all areas supported by the ATE
program and to broaden the base of community colleges
participating in the program. Proposers are strongly
encouraged to utilize resources developed by other ATE
or other NSF awardees and to include people from these
projects and centers as consultants and subawardees.
The budget request for these proposals is limited to
$150,000.
These projects strengthen the role of community
colleges in meeting the needs for businesses and
industries in the United States for a well-prepared
technical workforce. Projects, even those that involve
a local implementation, should address issues and
produce results that have the potential for broad
application in technician or teacher education.
Typically, projects should address one or two
components or activities listed in the "Program
Improvement" or "Teacher Preparation" categories and
should involve faculty members and students at one or a
few academic institutions. Projects with a broader
scope or larger scale may be proposed, provided they
can be carried out effectively within the $150,000
budgetary limitation. It is expected that many of the
funded projects in this category will serve as a
prototype or first phase for an idea that may be
expanded in a future proposal for an ATE project or
center.
Only community college campuses that have not had an
ATE award within the past 10 years may be the
"performing organization" on a proposal in this
category. It is acceptable for a system administrative
office or other governing organization to submit the
proposal and be the "awardee organization," even if
that organization has received a previous ATE award.
But the campus that is the "performing organization"
must not have been the performing organization on an
ATE award within the past 10 years and must be
geographically distinct and have its own chief academic
officer. (Note: Community colleges that have had an
ATE award within the past 10 years and other
institutions may still submit a proposal for a small
project under the other categories of ATE Project
grants.)
2. ATE Centers
ATE Centers are national or regional resources that
provide models and leadership for other projects and
act as clearinghouses for educational materials and
methods. They are typically cooperative efforts in
which two-year colleges work with four-year colleges
and universities, secondary schools, business,
industry, and government. Proposals for centers must
clearly articulate a vision of technological education
for the future and must describe a workable plan for
achieving that vision during the period of NSF funding
and for sustaining it afterwards. Proposals for ATE
centers should be based on a three-pronged alliance of
support from (1) NSF, (2) the proposing educational
institution or consortium, and (3) employers.
The ATE program also offers planning grants for
centers. (See Section III. Award Information and
Section V. Proposal Preparation and Submission
Instructions for further information.)
National Centers of Excellence: National Centers should
focus on the comprehensive reform of technological
education in fields that are central to maintaining the
economic competitiveness of the United States. Although
National Centers vary in the technological fields that
they address, they must have major national impact and
visibility. Typically, they focus on a particular field
of technology; but the ATE program will also consider
proposals for centers that focus on pedagogical issues,
core STEM disciplines, or related concepts that have
deep relevance to technician education in multiple
fields. A National Center should catalyze a broad
national network of academic institutions and
industrial entities that are interested in a particular
area of technology. While the participating
organizations should have a national distribution, the
center might also encompass several regional
partnerships that collaborate to improve technological
education.
A National Center should develop high-quality programs
and curricula that reflect the modern technological
workplace; provide professional development for
educators to support the utilization of these
resources; and disseminate and market educational
products and services to a national audience through
commercial publishers, journals, conferences,
workshops, electronic networks, and other means.
National Centers should establish collaborations with
ATE projects in the same or related technological
fields. Centers typically exhibit the following
characteristics:
* a carefully articulated mission that advances the
ATE program's mission and emphases;
* broad national outreach and community-building
among educational institutions, employers,
professional and trade associations,
* educators, and practicing technicians concerned
with the relevant area(s) of technology;
* strong collaboration of educational institutions
with employers;
* utilization, creation, or enhancement of skill
standards;
* attention to core STEM courses that provide a
foundation for technical degree programs;
* articulation of courses and programs between
two-year colleges and secondary schools and
between two-year colleges and four-year colleges
and universities;
* specific strategies for recruiting, retaining, and
placing students (including students from groups
underrepresented in STEM fields), and effective
mechanisms for measuring gains in recruitment,
retention, and placement;
* evaluation of the center's products and services
and their impact on student learning, and of the
center's impact on employers and on the
institutions that manage the center; and
* a realistic plan for achieving sustainability and
institutionalization of key center functions
following the period of NSF funding.
Regional Centers of Excellence: Regional Centers should
focus on a particular field of technology and have a
clear, measurable impact on the workforce and economy
in a logically defined geographic region. Regional
Centers are cooperative efforts between the region's
employers and academic institutions and should be
designed so that the relationships developed during the
grant period are institutionalized. Although a Regional
Center may have national impacts, the mission,
structure, activities, and products of a Regional
Center should be carefully designed to fit the region's
particular characteristics and needs in the relevant
field of technology. When possible, the Center's
activities should be coordinated with local, regional,
and statewide economic development strategic plans.
Regional Centers are expected to focus mainly on
reforming academic programs to produce a greater number
of highly qualified workers who meet regional workforce
demands and who also meet national industry and
academic skill standards.
A Regional Center should normally undertake a wide
range of activities associated with program improvement
and professional development for educators, as
described in Section II.A.1 ("ATE Projects") above.
Normally, the development of new educational materials
is not a mission of a Regional Center, but the
collection, adaptation, and implementation of existing
exemplary materials is a common activity. The center
should lead systemic reform at all or most of the
academic institutions in the region, engaging a large
number of the region's college faculty and secondary
school teachers in the relevant discipline(s). The
center must have mechanisms for measuring the number
and quality of students who are recruited, achieve
competencies in relevant areas, receive industry
certifications (when relevant), participate in
internships, graduate, and find appropriate employment.
The center must also have high visibility and support
at the collaborating educational institutions. Center
leaders should be prepared to contribute to
longitudinal studies that examine students' performance
in the workplace and measure employers' satisfaction
with graduates.
Regional Centers are invited in any field of technology
normally supported by the ATE program. However, all
proposals must present a strong case for the regional
economic significance of the chosen technological
field.
Resource Centers: Resource Centers constitute a highly
visible source of educational materials, ideas,
contacts, and mentoring and have a national focus and a
broad impact. Resource Centers may focus on a
particular field of technological education or cut
across several technology fields to promote best
practices in areas such as recruitment, retention,
curriculum development, teaching practices, and
industry partnerships. Generally, only ATE national or
regional centers and exemplary ATE projects that have
already completed their original grants are
well-positioned to become Resource Centers because
leaders of these centers must demonstrate that they
have already made substantial, high-quality
contributions to technological education.
Resource Centers partner with business and industry,
government agencies, professional societies; and
academic institutions. They work on national
initiatives to bring about systemic changes in the way
students are prepared for our national technical
workforce and to expand the role that community
colleges play as agents of change towards this goal.
Resource Centers typically undertake activities such
as:
* providing support and mentoring for institutions
that wish to start or improve educational programs
in a particular field of technology;
* establishing and supporting additional industry,
business and academic partnerships;
* organizing and offering professional development
opportunities for educators;
* promoting technician careers and visibility and
the public image in the field(s) on which the
Center is focused;
* addressing technician knowledge, skills, and
competencies needed for the evolving, converging,
and emerging technical workplace; and
* screening, validating, updating, and broadly
distributing exemplary materials, curricula, and
pedagogical practices adapted or designed by ATE
centers and projects and other appropriate
sources.
3. Targeted Research on Technician Education
The ATE program supports targeted research on
technician education, employment trends, the changing
role of technicians in the workplace, and other topics
that advance the knowledge base needed to make
technician education programs more effective and more
forward-looking. Employing rigorous standards of
research and scholarship, project proposals should pose
a research question or outline a topic of broad
interest, survey previous research and scholarship on
the issue, conduct original research and compile data,
prepare cogent analyses, present conclusions, and
describe how the results can inform practices in
technician education programs. The results must be
broadly disseminated to researchers and practitioners.
Projects must represent a true collaboration--reflected
in the activities, the leadership, and the
budget--between well-qualified researchers and two-year
college educators and, when appropriate, participants
from four-year colleges and universities, secondary
schools, business and industry, professional societies,
and other non-profit organizations.
The following examples illustrate targeted research
studies in which the ATE program is particularly
interested:
* For specific high-technology fields supported by
the ATE program (e.g., biotechnology,
cybersecurity, nanotechnology),
* what are the future trends of the roles of
technicians, and how can technician education
stay abreast of rapid advances in the field?
* which components of technician education
programs work (or don�t work), with whom,
why, and under what circumstances?
* which educational strategies have proven most
effective in improving student learning in
these specific high technology fields? Can
these strategies be translated to other
fields of technology?
* Across multiple technology fields, what impacts
have strategies such as project-based learning,
particular recruiting and retention strategies,
and remote laboratories had on the effectiveness
of technician education programs? What are the
reasons for these impacts?
* How can stakeholders in technician education
(e.g.; community colleges in collaborations with
business and industry, government, economic
development groups, four-year institutions,
secondary schools, and professional societies)
develop meaningful and mutually beneficial
partnerships?
* What model educational programs and industry
partnerships prepare students for sustained
success in a technician career (as opposed to
training for a specific job)? What are the
characteristics of the employees who adapt most
readily to an evolving technological work
environment? What educational strategies develop
such characteristics? What model educational
programs and industry partnerships prepare
students for sustained success in a technician
career (as opposed to training for a specific
job)?
The list above is not intended to be exhaustive; these
topics should suggest a number of other interesting
ones. Investigators who are interested in conducting a
targeted research project are strongly encouraged to
submit a preliminary proposal.
B. INFORMATION ABOUT PREVIOUS AWARDS
* DUE's web-based Project Information Resource System contains
award abstracts and variety of additional information
provided directly by Principal Investigators.
(https://www.ehr.nsf.gov/pirs_prs_web/search/)
* NSF's web site (http://www.nsf.gov) provides an Awards
Search feature that allows customized searches of NSF's
award database.
III. AWARD INFORMATION
NSF anticipates that approximately $46 million each year will be available
for this program in FY2008, FY2009, and FY2010. The program expects to make
approximately 75 new awards per year. Grants may be awarded in a wide
variety of sizes and durations, as summarized below. The categories below
are expected to encompass most of the activities supported through the ATE
program; however, additional activities and mechanisms may be proposed
after consultation with an NSF program officer. The actual number of awards
and the award sizes are subject to the availability of funds and the
quality of proposals received.
Anticipated number, size, and duration of new awards:
* ATE Projects: approximately 45 new awards, ranging from $25,000 to
$300,000 per year and having a duration of up to three years, except
for Large Scale Materials Development (LSMD) projects, which are
limited to $500,000 per year for four years.
* ATE small grants for institutions new to the ATE program:
approximately 15 awards for up to $150,000 (each) typically spread
over two years.
* National Centers of Excellence: up to 2 new awards for up to $5
million (each) spread over four years, with the possibility of
renewal, at a lower level of funding, for an additional three years.
* Regional Centers of Excellence: up to 3 new awards for up to $3
million (each) spread over four years, with the possibility of
renewal, at a lower level of funding, for an additional three years.
* Resource Centers: up to 4 new awards for up to $1.6 million (each)
spread over four years with the possibility of renewal.
* Planning Grants for Centers: up to 4 new awards for up to $70,000
(each) to develop well-formulated plans for future national or
regional centers (see Section V.A ["Proposal Preparation"] for
additional information).
* Targeted Research on Technician Education: approximately 5 to 8 new
awards, ranging from $100,000 to $300,000 per year for up to 4 years.
IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
Organization Limit:
None Specified
PI Limit:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:
An individual may serve as the Principal Investigator (PI) on no
more than one proposal submitted for each deadline date, but may
serve as a co-PI on multiple proposals.
Additional Eligibility Info:
The categories of proposers identified in the Grant Proposal
Guide (Chapter 1, Section E) are eligible to submit proposals
under this program solicitation. Two-year colleges and other
associate degree-granting institutions are especially encouraged
to submit proposals, and all proposals are expected to include
one or more two-year colleges in leadership roles. A proposal
from an informal consortium of institutions should be submitted
by one member of the consortium; a proposal from a formal
consortium--such as a community college system or school
district--should be submitted by the consortium.
V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
Preliminary Proposals:
Preliminary Proposal Deadline Dates: April, 26, 2007; April 24, 2008; and
April 23, 2009
The submission of a preliminary proposal is optional, but strongly
recommended, especially for institutions or departments that have not
previously submitted to the ATE program. Preliminary proposals are read by
experienced reviewers and NSF staff. On the basis of these readers'
judgment of the likelihood that a full proposal based on the preliminary
proposal could be successful in the formal peer review process, NSF will
either encourage or discourage the submission of a full proposal. This is
an advisory opinion only; a proposer may submit a formal proposal even if
NSF recommends against it. Reviews of preliminary proposals should be
available via FastLane approximately 10 weeks after the deadline date.
These reviews provide comments to help proposers strengthen their ideas and
project plans before submitting a full proposal.
Preliminary proposals must be submitted through FastLane. A preliminary
proposal must include the following sections/forms:
* Cover Sheet: See description under Full Proposal Instructions below.
* Project Data Form: See description under Full Proposal Instructions
below.
* Project Summary: See description under Full Proposal Instructions
below.
* Project Description: See description under Full Proposal Instructions
below. In preliminary proposals, the length of the Project Description
is limited to 6 pages (single-spaced).
* References Cited: See description under Full Proposal Instructions
below.
* Biographical Sketches: See description under Full Proposal
Instructions below.
* Budget: See description under Full Proposal Instructions below. In
preliminary proposals, budgets for subawards are not required.
A preliminary proposal may NOT include the following sections/forms:
* Current and Pending Support
* Facilities, Equipment, and Other Resources
* Special Information and Supplementary Documentation
* Appendices
* Budgets for subawards
Full Proposal Instructions: Proposals submitted in response to this program
solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the
guidelines specified in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG). The complete
text of the GPG is available electronically on the NSF website at:
http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg. Paper copies of
the GPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone
(703) 292-PUBS (7827) or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov.
All preliminary proposals must be submitted via the NSF FastLane System.
When preparing proposals (both preliminary and full), proposers should
follow the standard NSF guidelines for format and content except where the
instructions below specifically allow a departure from that guidance. The
following instructions for particular sections of the proposal supplements
the guidance found in the GPG.
* Cover Sheet: In FastLane, take special care to select the correct
"Program Announcement/Solicitation No."; this number can be found at
the beginning of this document. If the proposal is for a planning
grant, begin the project title with the words "Planning Grant
for...." (See information on planning grants below.)
* Project Data Form: The information on this form is used to direct the
proposal to appropriate reviewers and to determine the characteristics
of NSF-supported projects. Take special care to identify the proper
track for your proposal in Item 1 on the form. For any audience
code(s) marked in Item F (e.g., women, minorities, persons with
disabilities), include in the Project Description a substantive
discussion of the specific strategies that the project will employ to
affect the audience(s). Note: In FastLane, the Project Data Form will
show up in the list of forms for your proposal only after you have (1)
selected the correct Program Announcement/Solicitation No. on the
Cover Sheet and (2) saved the Cover Sheet.
* Project Summary: The one-page Project Summary should clearly indicate,
in the first few sentences, the disciplinary focus (or foci) of the
proposed project, the kinds of activities to be undertaken (e.g.
educational materials development, adaptation and implementation,
professional development for educators), and the primary audience to
be affected by those activities (e.g., two-year college students, high
school students, two-year college faculty members). This information
is used to assign the proposal to a panel for review. Proposers are
reminded that the Project Summary must explicitly address, in separate
statements, both NSB-approved merit review criteria; the statements
should contain the phrases "intellectual merit" and "broader impacts."
Preliminary or full proposals that do not separately address both
merit review criteria within the one-page Project Summary will be
returned without review.
* Project Description (including Results from Prior NSF Support): While
the minimum font size allowed is 10 point (no more than 15 characters
per 2.5 cm), the ATE program strongly recommends that proposers use
11 or 12-point, standard font (e.g., Times New Roman, Times, or
Arial) to ensure readability. In preliminary proposals, the length of
the Project Description is limited to 6 pages (single-spaced). In
full proposals, the length is limited to 15 pages (single-spaced). The
Project Description should explain the project's motivating rationale,
goals, objectives, deliverables, and activities; the timetable; the
management plan; the roles and responsibilities of the PI, co-PI(s),
and other senior personnel; the plan for sustainability after the
period of NSF funding; the evaluation plan; the dissemination plan;
and results from evaluations of prior NSF support. The subsection
on Results from Prior NSF Support should only cover awards pertaining
to education; describe research awards only if they have a direct
bearing on the new proposal. If the proposed project is based on
previously funded work, the proposal must thoroughly describe the
results of the prior project, demonstrate that the project achieved
its objectives, and provide evidence of the quality and effectiveness
of the project's deliverables. (Supplementary documents may also be
used, subject to the constraints indicated below, to illustrate prior
work.) For information about effective approaches to evaluation, see
the following resources:
* The 2002 User-Friendly Handbook for Project Evaluation (NSF
02-057)
* Online Evaluation Resource Library for NSF's Directorate for
Education and Human Resources (http://oerl.sri.com/)
* Field-Tested Learning Assessment Guide (FLAG) for Science, Math,
Engineering, and Technology Instructors
(http://www.flaguide.org/)
* References Cited: Any literature cited should be specifically related
to the proposed project, and the Project Description should make clear
how each reference has played a role in the motivation for or design
of the project. Any relevant literature on research in teaching and
learning should be cited.
* Budget: A Budget Justification of up to three pages must accompany the
budget forms and provide details about budget line items. This
includes justification for the subawards. Except for preliminary
proposals, proposals that involve subawards should include subaward
budgets. Note: Because this program solicitation does not require
cost-sharing, proposers are advised not to include any cost-sharing
on Line M of the proposal budget. Line M of the FastLane budget
should be "0".
* Special Information and Supplementary Documentation: In preliminary
proposals, these sections may not be included. In formal proposals,
they are optional. If included, these sections must be concise and
relevant. Reviewers will be strongly encouraged to disregard any
supplementary documentation material in excess of 30 pages. These
sections might include, for example, letters of commitment, a sample
of previously developed (relevant) educational materials, a published
review of such materials, or a draft of a proposed unit or module.
Letters of commitment should document collaborative arrangements or
pledge resources of significance to the proposal. Letters that
merely endorse the proposal or offer nonspecific support for project
activities should not be included. FastLane's Supplementary Documents
function should be used to upload these sections as one or more PDF
files. Note that any letters must be obtained in or converted to
electronic format; if necessary, electronically scan paper documents
and convert them to PDF. (Proposers should not send videotapes,
computer diskettes, CD-ROMs, slides, books, etc., as appendices or
supplements to a proposal.)
* Because proposals submitted in response to this solicitation will be
reviewed by panel review instead of mail review, there is no need for
proposers to submit a list of suggested reviewers unless an NSF
program officer specifically requests it.
Planning Grants: A proposal for a planning grant for an ATE Center should
clearly describe the activities that will take place during the planning
period. It should also provide details about the workforce demands that the
planning grant will address, the organizations and departments that will be
(or will likely be) partners in the project, the core faculty members or
administrators who will manage the project, and the criteria that will be
used to judge the proposer's readiness to form an ATE center at the end of
the planning period. The proposal should also outline plans for identifying
and enlisting faculty and representatives from business, industry, or
public sector agencies to provide intellectual leadership for the project's
various activities. Planning-grant proposals need not present elaborate
plans for evaluation and dissemination.
Certain special types of proposals described in the GPG--i.e., Small Grants
for Exploratory Research (SGER) proposals (see GPG, Chapter II, Section
D.1), Equipment Proposals (see GPG, Chapter II, Section D.4), and
Accomplishment-Based Renewal (ABR) proposals (see GPG, Chapter V, Section
B.2)--are not appropriate for the ATE program. Collaborative Proposals (see
GPG, Chapter II, Section D.3) should in most cases be submitted as a single
proposal. Under unusual circumstances, Collaborative Proposals involving
the simultaneous submission of proposals from different organizations will
be accepted in the formal proposal cycle. The collaborating organizations
must exactly follow the instructions for electronic submission specified in
GPG, Chapter II, Section D.3.b. The project titles of the related proposals
must be identical and must begin with the words "Collaborative Project,"
and the combined budgets of the related proposals should conform to the
typical award sizes specified in this solicitation. These simultaneous
Collaborative Proposals must be submitted via FastLane and will be treated
as a single proposal (with a single Project Summary, Project Description,
and References Cited) during the review process.
Proposers are reminded to identify the program solicitation number (NSF
07-530) in the program solicitation block on the NSF Cover Sheet For
Proposal to the National Science Foundation. Compliance with this
requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing
guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing.
B. Budgetary Information
Cost Sharing: Cost sharing is not required under this solicitation.
Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations:
In all planning grants for centers and small grants for institutions new to
the ATE program, indirect costs may not exceed 10 percent of modified total
direct costs.
Other Budgetary Limitations:
Funds requested for equipment or instrumentation (computers,
computer-related hardware, software, laboratory or field instrumentation,
and scientific or industrial machinery) must not exceed $150,000. NSF funds
may not be used to support expenditures that would normally be made in the
absence of an award, such as costs for routine teaching activities
(including curriculum development) and laboratory upgrades.
NSF project funds may not be used for:
* equipment or instrumentation that is not mainly for use in the
project;
* replacement equipment or instrumentation that does not significantly
improve instructional capability;
* teaching aids (e.g., films, slides, projectors, "drill and practice"
software);
* vehicles, laboratory furnishings, or general utility items such as
office equipment (including word-processing equipment), benches,
tables, desks, chairs, storage cases, and routine supplies;
* maintenance equipment and maintenance or service contracts;
* the modification, construction, or furnishing of laboratories or other
buildings;
* the installation of equipment or instrumentation (as distinct from the
on-site assembly of multicomponent instruments--which is an allowable
charge).
Workshops: In proposals that involve professional development workshops, it
is generally expected that the home institutions of the participants will
bear the cost of travel to and from the workshop. However, some travel
costs may be included in project budgets. Costs for subsistence (lodging
and meals) during the workshop may be included. In addition, funds may be
requested for a stipend of up to $100 per workshop day for participants;
requests for such stipends must be specific to the target audience and must
be fully justified--for example, to assure participation by faculty with
few professional development opportunities or from resource-poor
institutions.
The use of NSF funds to hire substitute teachers is allowed under the
following conditions: (1) it is necessary to meet the goals and objectives
of the project; and (2) it can be documented that the substitute teachers
are directly replacing teachers participating in the NSF-funded project.
Substitute teachers should be paid in accordance with established school
district policies, and in lieu of paying the teachers participating in the
project. Records must be maintained on the hiring and use of substitutes.
Note that indirect costs may not be charged on participant support costs.
Extra Compensation Above Base Salary. ATE provides for extra compensation
above base salary only for special situations such as teaching evening or
weekend classes or workshops. Further, the extra compensation shall be
computed at a rate not in excess of the monthly rate of the base academic
year salary. Awardees must disclose the intention to pay extra compensation
above the base salary in the Budget Justification section of the grant
proposal. This extra compensation above the base salary must still be
approved by NSF. Permission to charge extra compensation, if granted, will
be included by specific clause in the grant award letter.
National Visiting Committee: For centers, the budget should include
provisions for a National Visiting Committee (NVC) to visit the project on
an annual basis. An NVC is a group of experts who provide advice to the
project staff, assess the plans and progress of the project (and make
reports both to the project leadership and to NSF), and enhance the
dissemination of the project's products. Typically, ATE Centers enlist
eight to ten members. The proposal should only include names of NVC members
who have agreed to serve should an award be made. After an award is made,
an NSF program officer will work with the grantee to finalize NVC
membership. But the proposal should address how the NVC will be used in the
project. (Additional information describing the role of NVCs can be found
at http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/ate/piresources.htm.)
C. Due Dates
* Preliminary Proposal Due Date(s):
April 26, 2007
April 24, 2008
April 23, 2009
Preliminary proposals are optional, but strongly recommended,
especially for institutions or departments that have not
previously submitted to the ATE program. Please see the full text
of this solicitation for further information.
* Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
October 11, 2007
October 16, 2008
October 15, 2009
D. FastLane Requirements
Proposers are required to prepare and submit all proposals for this program
solicitation through use of the NSF FastLane system. Detailed instructions
regarding the technical aspects of proposal preparation and submission via
FastLane are available at: http://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm. For
FastLane user support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or
e-mail fastlane@nsf.gov. The FastLane Help Desk answers general technical
questions related to the use of the FastLane system. Specific questions
related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program
staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.
Submission of Electronically Signed Cover Sheets. The Authorized
Organizational Representative (AOR) must electronically sign the proposal
Cover Sheet to submit the required proposal certifications (see Chapter II,
Section C of the Grant Proposal Guide for a listing of the certifications).
The AOR must provide the required electronic certifications within five
working days following the electronic submission of the proposal. Further
instructions regarding this process are available on the FastLane Website
at: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/fastlane.jsp.
VI. NSF PROPOSAL PROCESSING AND REVIEW PROCEDURES
Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program where
they will be reviewed if they meet NSF proposal preparation requirements.
All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator
serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other
persons outside NSF who are experts in the particular fields represented by
the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with
the oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names
of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the
proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These
suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at
the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is
optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of
interest with the proposal.
A. NSF Merit Review Criteria
All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science
Board (NSB)-approved merit review criteria: intellectual merit and the
broader impacts of the proposed effort. In some instances, however, NSF
will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific
objectives of certain programs and activities.
The two NSB-approved merit review criteria are listed below. The criteria
include considerations that help define them. These considerations are
suggestions and not all will apply to any given proposal. While proposers
must address both merit review criteria, reviewers will be asked to address
only those considerations that are relevant to the proposal being
considered and for which the reviewer is qualified to make judgements.
What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?
How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and
understanding within its own field or across different fields?
How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to
conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment
on the quality of the prior work.) To what extent does the
proposed activity suggest and explore creative, original, or
potentially transformative concepts? How well conceived and
organized is the proposed activity? Is there sufficient access to
resources?
What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?
How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding
while promoting teaching, training, and learning? How well does
the proposed activity broaden the participation of
underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability,
geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the
infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities,
instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? Will the results be
disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological
understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed activity
to society?
Examples illustrating activities likely to demonstrate broader impacts are
available electronically on the NSF website at:
http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf.
Mentoring activities provided to postdoctoral researchers supported on the
project, as described in a one-page supplementary document, will be
evaluated under the Broader Impacts criterion.
NSF staff also will give careful consideration to the following in making
funding decisions:
Integration of Research and Education
One of the principal strategies in support of NSF's goals is to
foster integration of research and education through the
programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and
research institutions. These institutions provide abundant
opportunities where individuals may concurrently assume
responsibilities as researchers, educators, and students and
where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education with
the excitement of discovery and enrich research through the
diversity of learning perspectives.
Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities
Broadening opportunities and enabling the participation of all
citizens -- women and men, underrepresented minorities, and
persons with disabilities -- is essential to the health and
vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this
principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs,
projects, and activities it considers and supports.
Additional Review Criteria:
For the ATE program, questions such as the following are often
relevant to evaluating proposals in terms of NSF's merit review
criteria.
Intellectual Merit
* Does the project have potential for improving student learning in
science or engineering technician education programs?
* Are the goals, objectives, and outcomes and the plans and
procedures for achieving them, worthwhile, well-developed, and
realistic?
* Is the evaluation plan clearly tied to the project outcomes? Is
the evaluation likely to provide useful information to the
project and others?
* Is the rationale for selecting particular activities or
components for development or adaptation clearly articulated and
informed by and build on the research literature and the work of
others?
* Does the project provide for effective assessment of student
learning?
* Is the evidence of institutional support clear and compelling,
and have plans for long term institutionalization been addressed?
Broader Impacts
* Does the project work with employers to address their current and
future needs for technicians?
* Has an assessment of workforce needs for technicians been
conducted?
* Will the project evaluation inform others through the
communication of results?
* Are the results and products of the project likely to be useful
at other institutions?
* Are other educational institutions involved in project
activities?
* Will the project's results be widely disseminated and will its
products be distributed effectively and commercialized when
appropriate?
* Does the project promote diversity in the technical workforce?
B. Review and Selection Process
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be
reviewed by Panel Review.
Reviewers will be asked to formulate a recommendation to either support or
decline each proposal. The Program Officer assigned to manage the
proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate
a recommendation.
After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of
appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant
Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended
for award. NSF is striving to be able to tell applicants whether their
proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months.
The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date,
whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director accepts
the Program Officer's recommendation.
A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and submitted
by each reviewer. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential
documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the
reviewers, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the
Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of
the decision to award or decline funding.
In all cases, after programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals
recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and
Agreements for review of business, financial, and policy implications and
the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are
cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments,
obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of
funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical
or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal
Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments
in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants
and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.
VII. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION
A. Notification of the Award
Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a
Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. Organizations
whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the
cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of
reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided
automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for
additional information on the review process.)
B. Award Conditions
An NSF award consists of: (1) the award letter, which includes any special
provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2)
the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which
NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals
or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in
the award letter; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant
General Conditions (GC-1); * or Research Terms and Conditions * and (5) any
announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in
the award letter. Cooperative agreements also are administered in
accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative
Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and
Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and
Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via
e-mail.
*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at
http://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper
copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone
(703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov.
More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important
information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF
Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available electronically on
the NSF Website at
http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.
C. Reporting Requirements
For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants),
the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the
cognizant Program Officer at least 90 days before the end of the current
budget period. (Some programs or awards require more frequent project
reports). Within 90 days after expiration of a grant, the PI also is
required to submit a final project report.
Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports will delay
NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any
pending proposals for that PI. PIs should examine the formats of the
required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.
PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system,
available through FastLane, for preparation and submission of annual and
final project reports. Such reports provide information on activities and
findings, project participants (individual and organizational)
publications; and, other specific products and contributions. PIs will not
be required to re-enter information previously provided, either with a
proposal or in earlier updates using the electronic system. Submission of
the report via FastLane constitutes certification by the PI that the
contents of the report are accurate and complete.
There are two special ATE reporting requirements. When ATE PIs submit
interim, annual, and final reports through FastLane, they will be asked to
provide information for the Project Information Resource Systems (PIRS). In
addition, to assist NSF in evaluating the ATE program and meeting the
reporting requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act of
1993, the PI must also respond annually to a survey that requests
information about the number and characteristics of students and educators
that have been affected by the project; the retention, graduation, and
placement rates for students; the project's impact on workforce needs;
awards and other measures of the quality of the project's products and
activities; and other indicators of the project's effect on the quality and
quantity of technicians being educated for the high-tech workplace. NSF
will provide guidelines for the collection and reporting of data. (NSF may
use an external evaluator to gather and analyze the data.)
VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS
General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:
* Eileen L. Lewis, Lead Program Director, ATE, Division of Undergraduate
Education, 835 N, telephone: (703) 292-4627, email: ellewis@nsf.gov
* Gerhard L. Salinger, Lead Program Director, ATE, Division of Research
on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings, 885 S, telephone: (703)
292-5116, email: gsalinge@nsf.gov
* Linnea A. Fletcher, Co-Lead Program Director, ATE, Division of
Undergraduate Education, 835 N, telephone: (703) 292-4634, email:
lafletch@nsf.gov
* David B. Campbell, Co-Lead Program Director, ATE, Division of Research
on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings, 885 S, telephone: (703)
292-5093, email: dcampbel@nsf.gov
For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:
* FastLane Help Desk, telephone: 1-800-673-6188; e-mail:
fastlane@nsf.gov.
* Antoinette T. Allen, Information Technology Specialist, Division of
Undergraduate Education, 835 N, telephone: (703) 292-4646, email:
duefl@nsf.gov
IX. OTHER INFORMATION
The NSF Website provides the most comprehensive source of information on
NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding
opportunities. Use of this Website by potential proposers is strongly
encouraged. In addition, National Science Foundation Update is a free
e-mail subscription service designed to keep potential proposers and other
interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and
publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and
procedures, and upcoming NSF Regional Grants Conferences. Subscribers are
informed through e-mail when new publications are issued that match their
identified interests. Users can subscribe to this service by clicking the
"Get NSF Updates by Email" link on the NSF web site.
Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for
Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may
be accessed via this new mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may
be obtained at http://www.grants.gov.
ABOUT THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency
created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC
1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress
of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare
by supporting research and education in all fields of science and
engineering."
NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering.
It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000
colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science
organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The
Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic
institutions for basic research.
NSF receives approximately 40,000 proposals each year for research,
education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded.
In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for
graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories
itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain
oceanographic vessels and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also
supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US
participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and
educational activities at every academic level.
Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities provide
funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with
disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See Grant Proposal Guide
Chapter II, Section D.2 for instructions regarding preparation of these
types of proposals.
The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD)
and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable
individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation
about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed
at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.
The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703)
292-5111.
The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific
progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and
cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences,
mathematics, and engineering.
To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download
copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the
NSF Website at http://www.nsf.gov
* Location: 4201 Wilson Blvd. Arlington,
VA 22230
* For General Information (703) 292-5111
(NSF Information Center):
* TDD (for the (703) 292-5090
hearing-impaired):
* To Order Publications or
Forms:
Send an e-mail to: nsfpubs@nsf.gov
or telephone: (703) 292-7827
* To Locate NSF Employees: (703) 292-5111
PRIVACY ACT AND PUBLIC BURDEN STATEMENTS
The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is
solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of
1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in
connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports
submitted by awardees will be used for program evaluation and reporting
within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may
be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the
proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or
obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the
administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers
and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to
other government agencies or other entities needing information regarding
applicants or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in
order to coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency,
court, or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the
government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be
added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve
as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See Systems of Records,
NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69
Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File
and Associated Records, " 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004).
Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and
complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an
award.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this
collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for this collection of
information is estimated to average 120 hours per response, including the
time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding the burden
estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden, to:
Suzanne H. Plimpton
Reports Clearance Officer
Division of Administrative Services
National Science Foundation
Arlington, VA 22230
Policies and Important Links|Privacy|FOIA|Help|Contact NSF|Contact Web Master|SiteMap
[National Science Foundation]The National Science Foundation, 4201 Last Updated:
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 11/07/06
22230, USA Text Only
Tel: (703) 292-5111, FIRS: (800) 877-8339 |
TDD: (800) 281-8749
[Image]