Title: Climate Change Education Partnership Alliance Office
(CCEPA Office)(nsf13513)
Date: 01/17/13
Replaces: NSF 12-523
Climate Change Education Partnership Alliance Office (CCEPA Office)
[1]Program Solicitation
NSF 13-513
Replaces Document(s):
NSF 12-523
NSF Logo
National Science Foundation
Directorate for Education & Human Resources
Division of Undergraduate Education
Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's
local time):
December 06, 2012
Letter of Intent (Required) Due
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
February 05, 2013
Full Proposal Due
IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND REVISION NOTES
A revised version of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures
Guide (PAPPG), [2]NSF 13-1, was issued on October 4, 2012 and is
effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after January 14,
2013. Please be advised that the guidelines contained in [3]NSF 13-1
apply to proposals submitted in response to this funding opportunity.
Proposers who opt to submit prior to January 14, 2013, must also
follow the guidelines contained in [4]NSF 13-1.
Please be aware that significant changes have been made to the PAPPG
to implement revised merit review criteria based on the National
Science Board (NSB) report, [5]National Science Foundation's Merit
Review Criteria: Review and Revisions. While the two merit review
criteria remain unchanged (Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts),
guidance has been provided to clarify and improve the function of the
criteria. Changes will affect the project summary and project
description sections of proposals. Annual and final reports also will
be affected.
A by-chapter summary of this and other significant changes is provided
at the beginning of both the [6]Grant Proposal Guide and the [7]Award
& Administration Guide.
Please note that this program solicitation may contain supplemental
proposal preparation guidance and/or guidance that deviates from the
guidelines established in the [8]Grant Proposal Guide.
SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
General Information
Program Title:
Climate Change Education Partnership Alliance Office (CCEPA Office)
Synopsis of Program:
In FY 2012, NSF funded six Phase II Climate Change Education
Partnership (CCEP-II) projects. The PI's, Co-PI's and significant
partners of the six CCEP-II projects constitute the CCEP "network".
The lead PI's for the six projects comprise the CCEP Alliance
(CCEPA), which will convene on a regular basis in order to identify
common needs and opportunities for collaboration across the CCEP
network. Key to the success of this networked approach is the
creation of a CCEP Alliance Office (CCEPA Office), which will:
facilitate communication among the projects participating within
the CCEP-II network; enable and nurture cross-project coordination
and collaboration, such as assisting with data collection for a
program-wide evaluation undertaken by NSF; and, support
dissemination of resources developed by the CCEP-II network to the
larger scientific community and the public. The CCEPA Office is
also expected to foster coordination of CCEP-II activities with the
larger climate change education community.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
Please note that the following information is current at the time of
publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of
contact.
* Peter Lea, telephone: (703) 292-8670, email: [9]plea@nsf.gov
* David B. Campbell, telephone: (703) 292-5093, email:
[10]dcampbel@nsf.gov
* Jill L. Karsten, telephone: (703) 292-7718, email:
[11]jkarsten@nsf.gov
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
* 47.076 --- Education and Human Resources
Award Information
Anticipated Type of Award: Cooperative Agreement
Estimated Number of Awards: 1
Anticipated Funding Amount: $1,000,000 Up to $1 million total for 5
years, pending annual performance and availability of funds.
Eligibility Information
Organization Limit:
The categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the
National Science Foundation are identified in the Grant Proposal
Guide, Chapter I, Section E.
PI Limit:
Organizations and individuals involved in CCEP Phase II awards will
not be eligible to serve as the CCEP Alliance Office awardee.
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 1
Collaborative Proposals submitted as separate submissions from
multiple organizations are NOT allowed for this competition.
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI: 1
Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
* Letters of Intent: Submission of Letters of Intent is required.
Please see the full text of this solicitation for further
information.
* Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not Applicable
* Full Proposals:
+ Full Proposals submitted via FastLane: NSF Proposal and Award
Policies and Procedures Guide, Part I: Grant Proposal Guide
(GPG) Guidelines apply. The complete text of the GPG is
available electronically on the NSF website at:
[12]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg.
+ Full Proposals submitted via Grants.gov: NSF Grants.gov
Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission
of NSF Applications via Grants.gov Guidelines apply (Note:
The NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the
Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at:
[13]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gran
tsgovguide)
B. Budgetary Information
* Cost Sharing Requirements: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost
sharing is prohibited.
* Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Not Applicable
* Other Budgetary Limitations: Not Applicable
C. Due Dates
* Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's
local time):
December 06, 2012
Letter of Intent (Required) Due
* Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
February 05, 2013
Full Proposal Due
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: Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
[14]Summary of Program Requirements
I. [15]Introduction
II. [16]Program Description
III. [17]Award Information
IV. [18]Eligibility Information
V. [19]Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. [20]Proposal Preparation Instructions
B. [21]Budgetary Information
C. [22]Due Dates
D. [23]FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements
VI. [24]NSF Proposal Processing and Review Procedures
A. [25]Merit Review Principles and Criteria
B. [26]Review and Selection Process
VII. [27]Award Administration Information
A. [28]Notification of the Award
B. [29]Award Conditions
C. [30]Reporting Requirements
VIII. [31]Agency Contacts
IX. [32]Other Information
I. INTRODUCTION
The Climate Change Education Partnership (CCEP) program is a major
interdisciplinary research and development effort designed to promote
deeper understanding of and engagement with climate science and the
impacts of climate change on natural and human systems. The vision of
this program is a scientifically literate society that can effectively
weigh the evidence regarding global climate change as it confronts the
challenges ahead, while developing the innovative science and
technology workforce to advance our knowledge of human-climate
interactions and develop solutions for a sustainable, prosperous
future. Achieving this vision requires profound and sustained
transformations in formal (K-16) and informal educational systems
across the nation, both to improve the quality and effectiveness of
learning materials, pedagogies, and educator preparation for climate
education and to increase access and exposure to effective resources,
through dissemination and scale-up of proven models and changes in
education policies.
Making progress in addressing these needs requires innovative
collaborations among professionals with diverse expertise, including
climate scientists, learning scientists, and education practitioners,
as well as engagement of relevant government and private-sector
stakeholders. New educational models and strategies for successfully
communicating with a variety of learners about complex,
interdisciplinary, and societally relevant topics like climate
science, that are grounded in research on how people learn and tested
in authentic settings, need to be developed and disseminated.
Educators in formal and informal settings require better pedagogical
approaches for teaching about climate systems and professional
development and training that enhances their climate science content
knowledge and instructional impact. Greater integration and alignment
of climate education content and activities offered through formal and
informal learning environments are also needed, to reinforce knowledge
gains and capitalize on the growing importance of virtual and
out-of-classroom learning. With the rapid pace of progress in
climate-relevant research, effective strategies to engage climate
scientists in the educational enterprise are essential for keeping the
content current; but to be effective in this role, they need to be
better prepared in the theory and practice of how people learn.
In FY 2012, NSF invited proposals to establish Phase II Climate Change
Education Partnership (CCEP-II) projects, through program solicitation
NSF 12-523. Six CCEP-II awards were made via Cooperative Agreements.
The PI's, Co-PI's and significant partners of the six CCEP-II projects
constitute the CCEP "network". The lead PI's for the six projects
comprise the CCEP Alliance (CCEPA), which will convene on a regular
basis in order to identify common needs and opportunities for
collaboration across the CCEP network. Key to the success of this
networked approach is the creation of a CCEP Alliance Office (CCEPA
Office), which will facilitate communication among the projects
participating within the CCEP-II network, enable and nurture
cross-project coordination and collaboration, and support
dissemination of resources developed by the CCEP-II network to the
larger scientific community and the public.
II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This solicitation requests proposals for the creation of the Climate
Change Partnership Alliance Office (CCEPA Office). The Principal
Investigator (PI) will serve as Director of the CCEPA Office and will
work closely alongside all CCEP-II PIs and co-PIs to achieve the
following goals: (1) Facilitate ongoing communication among CCEP-II
projects through both virtual and face-to-face mechanisms; (2) Foster
development of a common identity that serves the collective concerns
and needs of the CCEP-II network; (3) Identify internal and external
opportunities to leverage resources or develop synergistic activities;
(4) Promote dissemination of information and resources both among the
CCEP-II projects and to additional stakeholder communities beyond the
reach of individual CCEP-II projects; and, (5) Inform and coordinate
implementation of data-gathering activities associated with the
program-wide evaluation that will be led by a third party contracted
by NSF.
Specific responsibilities for the CCEPA Office will include, but are
not limited to:
(1) Facilitating Communication:
* Organizing and participating in regular, monthly teleconferences
for the CCEPA members (i.e., the lead PIs for each CCEP-II
project, or their designees);
* Supporting the activities of any committees or working groups
established by the CCEPA;
* Coordinating the planning and logistics of an annual CCEP-II PI
meeting, which will include PI's and Co-PI's for the CCEP-II
projects (in some years, this meeting may be held in conjunction
with a larger multi-agency Climate Change Education PI meeting,
requiring additional coordination with NSF);
* Coordinating the planning and logistics of two face-to-face
meetings of the CCEPA members each year (one meeting will take
place during the annual CCEP-II PI meeting and the second will be
in conjunction with a CCEP-II site visit).
(2) Fostering a Common Identity
* Creating, maintaining and updating content of the CCEP Program
Website, with links to individual CCEP-II project websites;
* Creating a private, online collaboration workspace for the CCEPA
members to conduct business;
* Developing and promoting a high-profile public identity for the
CCEP Program that emphasizes its interdisciplinary nature;
* Being a singular point of communication on behalf of the larger
CCEP-II network.
(3) Identifying Synergistic and Leveraging Opportunities
* Serving as a liaison of the larger CCEP-II network to other
climate change education-related groups or organizations.
* Organizing quarterly webinars regarding new resources, tools, or
activities that may be of relevance to the CCEP-II network.
* Maintaining a common calendar of events and programs being
implemented by the individual CCEP-II projects.
(4) Promoting Dissemination
* Developing a quarterly CCEP-II newsletter and an annual integrated
CCEP-II report with project highlights and news, and maintaining
an archive of these items;
* Developing and distributing CCEP-II outreach materials through the
use of traditional and new media;
* Assisting in the organization of workshops, short courses, and
sessions at national and international meetings;
* Organizing and managing a CCEP-II booth at professional meetings
and conferences;
* Representing the CCEP-II network at research and educational
conferences and public outreach events.
(5) Coordinating Program-Wide Evaluation Activities
* Assisting with the coordination and data collection needed for
program-wide evaluation by a third party contracted by NSF.
Opportunities to engage in additional activities may emerge during the
five-year lifetime of the CCEP-II projects, but additional funding to
support those additional activities would need to be secured through
Supplemental Funding requests or contributions through other grants.
CCEP Alliance Office Structure
NSF anticipates that successful operation and management of the CCEP
Alliance Office will require a total of 2.0 - 2.5 FTEs, including a
senior-level director on a part-time appointment who will serve as the
PI and oversee the activities of the office and Cooperative Agreement;
a full-time office manager or coordinator at the postdoctoral level or
equivalent who will assist the PI with implementation; and additional
technical support staff (either one full-time or two to three
part-time) who will perform the other functions of the office,
including maintaining Web content, providing logistical and other
support for workshops and meetings, supporting the CCEP Alliance
advisory structure, and administrative functions. It is expected that
the PI will have demonstrated expertise in one of the three areas
encompassed by the CCEP-II program (i.e., climate scientist, learning
scientist, formal or informal education practitioner). The CCEPA
Office may hire other appropriate staff, students, and postdoctoral
associates to assist in scientific, education, and outreach
activities, if resources are available. Proposals that are able to
leverage existing infrastructure and staff resources rather than build
an entirely new organization are strongly preferred. Proposals that
demonstrate prior expertise in collaborative management of diverse
teams and institutions are likely to be most competitive.
Links and related documents
Additional information about the expectations for the CCEP Phase II
program can be found in the NSF 12-523 program solicitation, available
at: [33]http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2012/nsf12523/nsf12523.pdf.
Information about the six CCEP Phase II projects can be found through
the following links:
[34]1239797
[35]CCEP II- Making Global Climate Science Local: Implementing an
Effective Model to Educate Key Influentials and Community Leaders
[36]1239758
[37]CCEP-II: MADE-CLEAR - Maryland-Delaware Climate Change Education,
Assessment, and Research
[38]1239733
[39]CCEP - II: Pacific Islands Climate Change Education Partnership
[40]1239775
[41]CCEP-II: National Network for Ocean and Climate Change
Interpretation
[42]1239782
[43]CCEP-II: Climate and Urban Systems Partnership (CUSP)
[44]1239783
[45]CCEP-II: Polar Learning and Responding: PoLAR Climate Change
Education Partnership
III. AWARD INFORMATION
NSF expects to make 1 award through a Cooperative Agreement. Up to $1
million total funding over a period of 5 years is anticipated, pending
annual performance and availability of funds.
IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
Organization Limit:
The categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the
National Science Foundation are identified in the Grant Proposal
Guide, Chapter I, Section E.
PI Limit:
Organizations and individuals involved in CCEP Phase II awards will
not be eligible to serve as the CCEP Alliance Office awardee.
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 1
Collaborative Proposals submitted as separate submissions from
multiple organizations are NOT allowed for this competition.
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI: 1
V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
Letters of Intent(required):A 1-paragraph Letter of Intent identifying
the submitting organization, Principal Investigator, and prior program
management experiences is required. Letters of Intent must be
submitted through FastLane by the deadline indicated.
Letter of Intent Preparation Instructions:
When submitting a Letter of Intent through FastLane in response to
this Program Solicitation please note the conditions outlined below:
* Sponsored Projects Office (SPO) Submission is required when
submitting Letters of Intent
* A Minimum of 0 and Maximum of 4 Other Senior Project Personnel are
allowed
* Submission of multiple Letters of Intent is not allowed
Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposers may opt to submit
proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Grants.gov or
via the NSF FastLane system.
* Full proposals submitted via FastLane: Proposals submitted in
response to this program solicitation should be prepared and
submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in
the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG). The complete text of the GPG
is available electronically on the NSF website at:
[46]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) 292-7827 or by e-mail from
[47]nsfpubs@nsf.gov. Proposers are reminded to identify this
program solicitation number 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.
* Full proposals submitted via Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in
response to this program solicitation via Grants.gov should be
prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov
Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of
NSF Applications via Grants.gov. The complete text of the NSF
Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov
website and on the NSF website at:
([48]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgo
vguide). To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application
Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov site, then
click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package
and Application Instructions link and enter the funding
opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the
NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of
the Grants.gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF
Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail
from [49]nsfpubs@nsf.gov.
The Project Description should address the following information:
* As per the PAPPG (NSF 13-1), a separate section in the project
description discussing the broader impact activities of the
proposed work.
* A description of the philosophical approach or management
strategies that the CCEPA Office Director expects to employ when
working with the six CCEP-II projects, and the rationale for using
those approaches.
* Discussion of the PI's previous experiences in managing complex
scientific research and/or science education projects, and
examples of signficant outcomes from those experiences.
* A detailed description of specific activities to be undertaken and
a timeline for deliverables.
* A management plan that provides a clear description of the roles
and responsibilities of personnel who would be supported through
the program.
* A list of available resources and capabilities that would be
leveraged or used in support of the CCEPA Office and a discussion
of how they relate to the activities being proposed.
* A report on results of prior NSF sponsored work.
B. Budgetary Information
Cost Sharing: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is
prohibited
Budget Preparation Instructions: The proposed budget should include
appropriate resources to support the specific activities of the CCEP
Alliance Office identified in the Program Description, including
development and maintenance of a website, communication and
coordination activities, and outreach and dissemination. The CCEPA
Office is expected to convene monthly conference calls among the lead
PIs for the six CCEP-II projects and organize semi-annual face-to-face
meetings of the CCEPA. The CCEP-II projects already have travel
funding to support their participation in the semi-annual CCEPA
meetings, so only those travel expenses necessary for the
participation of the CCEPA Office staff and occasional guests should
be included. Proposers may include up to 7 days per person for
attendance at the CCEPA meetings in their annual travel budget
requests. Additional expenses associated with outreach at national
conferences and society meetings should also be included.
C. Due Dates
* Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's
local time):
December 06, 2012
Letter of Intent (Required) Due
* Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
February 05, 2013
Full Proposal Due
This is a one-time competition. The CCEP Alliance Office solicitation
will be competed in FY 2013 only.
D. FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements
* For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane:
Detailed technical instructions regarding the technical aspects of
preparation and submission via FastLane are available at:
[50]https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm. For FastLane user
support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail
[51]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: [52]https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/fastlane.jsp.
* For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:
Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must
register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the
applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on
the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using
Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources
webpage: [53]http://www07.grants.gov/applicants/app_help_reso.jsp.
In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide provides
additional technical guidance regarding preparation of proposals
via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the
Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email:
[54]support@grants.gov. The Grants.gov Contact Center answers
general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov.
Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be
referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section
VIII of this solicitation.
Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed,
the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the
application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding
opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The
AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The
completed application will be transferred to the NSF FastLane
system for further processing.
VI. NSF PROPOSAL PROCESSING AND REVIEW PROCEDURES
Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program
for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review.
All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or
educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to
ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists,
or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the
proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged
with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest
names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review
the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal.
These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection
process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names,
however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no
conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers
may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action
on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for
awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award
process (and associated timeline) is included in the GPG as
[55]Exhibit III-1.
A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process
is available on the NSF website at:
[56]http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/meritreview/.
Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential
to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in [57]Empowering
the Nation Through Discovery and Innovation: NSF Strategic Plan for
Fiscal Years (FY) 2011-2016. These strategies are integrated in the
program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review
is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through
the integration of research and education and broadening participation
in NSF programs, projects, and activities.
One of the core strategies in support of NSF's mission is to foster
integration of research and education through the programs, projects
and activities it supports at academic and research institutions.
These institutions 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 variety of learning perspectives.
Another core strategy in support of NSF's mission is broadening
opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and
geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines,
which is essential to the health and vitality of science and
engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems
it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and
supports.
A. Merit Review Principles and Criteria
The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and
diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables
breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and
engineering research and education. To identify which projects to
support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates
consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and
its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission
"to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health,
prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other
purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive,
transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.
1. Merit Review Principles
These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and
organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by
reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program
staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for
funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary
federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in
basic research and education, the following three principles apply:
* All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the
potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of
knowledge.
* NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to
achieving societal goals. These "Broader Impacts" may be
accomplished through the research itself, through activities that
are directly related to specific research projects, or through
activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the
project. The project activities may be based on previously
established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in
either case must be well justified.
* Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should
be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely
correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the
resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the
activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is
not likely to be meaningful. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of
these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated,
level than the individual project.
With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader
Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated
level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the
activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects
should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the
activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document
the outputs of those activities.
These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit
review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the
criteria can better understand their intent.
2. Merit Review Criteria
All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National
Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances,
however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight
the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.
The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to
be given full consideration during the review and decision-making
processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is
sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria.
([58]GPG Chapter II.C.2.d.i. contains additional information for use
by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the
proposal.) Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria,
including [59]GPG Chapter II.C.2.d.i., prior to the review of a
proposal.
When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider
what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan
to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could
accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the
technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may
make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to
evaluate all proposals against two criteria:
* Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses
the potential to advance knowledge; and
* Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the
potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of
specific, desired societal outcomes.
The following elements should be considered in the review for both
criteria:
1. What is the potential for the proposed activity to
a. Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or
across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and
b. Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader
Impacts)?
2. To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore
creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
3. Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities
well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale?
Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?
4. How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to
conduct the proposed activities?
5. Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the
home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the
proposed activities?
Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself,
through the activities that are directly related to specific research
projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are
complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of
scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of
societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not
limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities,
and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator
development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and
public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of
individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive
STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and
others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness
of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and
education.
Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the
Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan,
as appropriate.
Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria
* Do the proposing organization, Principal Investigator, and
associated personnel have demonstrated expertise in management of
large, diverse projects and networks of scientists and educators?
* Does the PI demonstrate sufficient knowledge of and familiarity
with the CCEP program?
* Does the PI demonstrate leadership experience in relevant
scientific or STEM education activities?
* What is the quality of work done by the submitting organization
and PI with previous NSF funding?
* How effectively would the proposed plan create and foster synergy
among the various CCEP-II projects and activities?
* Do the PI and project team demonstrate experience with
communicating about science to broad audiences?
* How well would the proposed plan foster innovative uses of
traditional and new media?
* Is there sufficient institutional support and capacity for the
proposed effort?
* Is there a clear management plan for the proposed effort?
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
[60]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 [61]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
[62]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, and a
project outcomes report for the general public.
Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports, or
the project outcomes report will delay NSF review and processing of
any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for
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. The project outcomes report must be
prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a
brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and
outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website
exactly as it is submitted by the PI.
More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other
important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained
in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available
electronically on the NSF Website at
[63]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.
VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS
Please note that the program contact information is current at the
time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points
of contact.
General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:
* Peter Lea, telephone: (703) 292-8670, email: [64]plea@nsf.gov
* David B. Campbell, telephone: (703) 292-5093, email:
[65]dcampbel@nsf.gov
* Jill L. Karsten, telephone: (703) 292-7718, email:
[66]jkarsten@nsf.gov
For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:
* FastLane Help Desk, telephone: 1-800-673-6188; e-mail:
[67]fastlane@nsf.gov.
* Wlliam Neufeld, telephone: (703) 292-5148, email:
[68]wneufeld@nsf.gov
For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:
* Grants.gov Contact Center: If the Authorized Organizational
Representatives (AOR) has not received a confirmation message from
Grants.gov within 48 hours of submission of application, please
contact via telephone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail:
[69]support@grants.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 [70]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 [71]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 55,000 proposals each year for research,
education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are
funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand
applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency
operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research
Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and
Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative
research between universities and industry, US participation in
international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational
activities at every academic level.
Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities
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 [72]http://www.nsf.gov
* Location: 4201 Wilson Blvd.
Arlington, VA 22230
* For General Information
(NSF Information Center): (703) 292-5111
* TDD (for the hearing-impaired): (703) 292-5090
* To Order Publications or Forms:
Send an e-mail to: [73]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, [74]NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and
Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004), and
[75]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
[76]Policies and Important Links
|
[77]Privacy | [78]FOIA | [79]Help | [80]Contact NSF | [81]Contact Web
Master | [82]SiteMap
National Science Foundation
The National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington,
Virginia 22230, USA
Tel: (703) 292-5111, FIRS: (800) 877-8339 | TDD: (800) 281-8749
Last Updated:
11/07/06
[83]Text Only
[x.gif]
References
1. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#toc
2. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf13001
3. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf13001
4. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf13001
5. http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2011/meritreviewcriteria.pdf
6. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/
pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_sigchanges.jsp
7. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/
pappguide/nsf13001/aag_sigchanges.jsp
8. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/
pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_index.jsp
9. mailto:plea@nsf.gov
10. mailto:dcampbel@nsf.gov
11. mailto:jkarsten@nsf.gov
12. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg
13. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide
14. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#summary
15. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#pgm_intr_txt
16. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#pgm_desc_txt
17. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#awd_info
18. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#elig
19. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#prep
20. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#prep
21. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#budg_cst_shr_txt
22. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#dates
23. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#fastlane
24. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#review
25. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#reviewcrit
26. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#reviewprot
27. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#awardadmin
28. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#awardnotify
29. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#grantcond
30. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#reportreq
31. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#cont
32. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13513/nsf13513.htm#othpgm
33. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2012/nsf12523/nsf12523.pdf
34. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/
showAward.do?AwardNumber=1239797&WT.z_pims_id=503465
35. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/
showAward.do?AwardNumber=1239797&WT.z_pims_id=503465
36. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/
showAward.do?AwardNumber=1239758&WT.z_pims_id=503465
37. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/
showAward.do?AwardNumber=1239758&WT.z_pims_id=503465
38. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/
showAward.do?AwardNumber=1239733&WT.z_pims_id=503465
39. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/
showAward.do?AwardNumber=1239733&WT.z_pims_id=503465
40. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/
showAward.do?AwardNumber=1239775&WT.z_pims_id=503465
41. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/
showAward.do?AwardNumber=1239775&WT.z_pims_id=503465
42. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/
showAward.do?AwardNumber=1239782&WT.z_pims_id=503465
43. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/
showAward.do?AwardNumber=1239782&WT.z_pims_id=503465
44. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/
showAward.do?AwardNumber=1239783&WT.z_pims_id=503465
45. http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/
showAward.do?AwardNumber=1239783&WT.z_pims_id=503465
46. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg
47. mailto:nsfpubs@nsf.gov
48. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/
pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide
49. mailto:nsfpubs@nsf.gov
50. https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm
51. mailto:fastlane@nsf.gov
52. https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/fastlane.jsp
53. http://www07.grants.gov/applicants/app_help_reso.jsp
54. mailto:support@grants.gov
55. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/
pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_3ex1.pdf
56. http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/meritreview/
57. http://www.nsf.gov/news/strategicplan/
nsfstrategicplan_2011_2016.pdf
58. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/
pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_2.jsp#IIC2di
59. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/
pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_2.jsp#IIC2di
60. http://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/
award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF
61. mailto:nsfpubs@nsf.gov
62. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag
63. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag
64. mailto:plea@nsf.gov
65. mailto:dcampbel@nsf.gov
66. mailto:jkarsten@nsf.gov
67. mailto:fastlane@nsf.gov
68. mailto:wneufeld@nsf.gov
69. mailto:support@grants.gov
70. http://www.nsf.gov/
71. http://www.grants.gov/
72. http://www.nsf.gov/
73. mailto:nsfpubs@nsf.gov
74. http://www.nsf.gov/policies/
SOR_PA_NSF-50_Principal_Investigator_Proposal_File.pdf
75. http://www.nsf.gov/policies/
SOR_PA_NSF-51_Reviewer_Proposal_File.pdf
76. http://www.nsf.gov/policies
77. http://www.nsf.gov/policies/privacy.jsp
78. http://www.nsf.gov/policies/foia.jsp
79. http://www.nsf.gov/help/
80. http://www.nsf.gov/help/contact.jsp
81. mailto:webmaster@nsf.gov
82. http://www.nsf.gov/help/sitemap.jsp
83. http://transcoder.usablenet.com/tt/referrer