Program Solicitation
NSF 13-586
Replaces Document(s):
NSF 12-600
National Science Foundation Directorate for Geosciences Division of Ocean Sciences Division of Polar Programs Directorate for Biological Sciences Division of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences Division of Integrative Organismal Systems |
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local
time):
December 03, 2013
IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND REVISION NOTES
A revised version of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies &
Procedures Guide (PAPPG), 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 NSF
13-1 apply to proposals submitted in response to this
funding opportunity.
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, 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 Grant
Proposal Guide and the 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 Grant
Proposal Guide.
The Ocean Acidification program is in its fifth and anticipated last year of
competition. We expect this to be the last solicitation specifically targeting
Ocean Acidification.
This Ocean Acidification solicitation has no maximum budget restrictions for
submitted proposals.
SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
General Information
Program Title:
Ocean Acidification (OA)
Synopsis of Program:
The new National Ocean Policy calls for actions to improve understanding of and capacity to respond to ocean acidification, recognizing the potential adverse impacts of an acidifying sea upon marine ecosystems. The effects of ocean acidification could significantly affect strategies for developing practices towards the sustainability of ocean resources. Basic research concerning the nature, extent and impact of ocean acidification on oceanic environments in the past, present and future is required. Research challenges include:
Understanding the geochemistry and biogeochemistry of ocean acidification; Understanding how ocean acidification interacts with biological, chemical and physical processes at the organismal level, and how such interactions impact the structure and function of ecosystems, e.g. through life histories, adaptive evolution, food webs, biogeochemical cycling, and interactions with other changes in the ocean (e.g., temperature, stratification, circulation patterns); and Understanding how the earth system history informs our understanding of the effects of ocean acidification on the present day and future ocean.The Ocean Acidification program is in its fifth and anticipated last year of competition. We expect this to be the last solicitation specifically targeting Ocean Acidification.
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.
- David L. Garrison, Program Director, Biological Oceanography, telephone: (703) 292-7588, email: dgarriso@nsf.gov
- Candace O. Major, Program Director, Marine Geology & Geophysics, telephone: (703) 292-7597, email: cmajor@nsf.gov
- Donald Rice, Program Director, Chemical Oceanography, telephone: (703) 292-7708, email: drice@nsf.gov
- Irwin Forseth, Program Director, Organism-Environment Interactions, telephone: (703) 292-7862, email: iforseth@nsf.gov
- Lori Stevens, Program Director, Evolutionary Processes, telephone: (703) 292-2994, email: losteven@nsf.gov
- Charles Amsler, Program Manager, Antarctic Organisms and Ecosystems, telephone: (703) 292-2461, email: camsler@nsf.gov
- Henrietta Edmonds, Program Director, Arctic Natural Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-8029, email: hedmonds@nsf.gov
- Anna Manyak, Science Assistant, Chemical Oceanography, telephone: (703) 292-8474, email: amanyak@nsf.gov
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA)
Number(s):
- 47.050 --- Geosciences
- 47.074 --- Biological Sciences
Award Information
Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant
Estimated Number of Awards: 10 to 15 pending availability of
funds.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $11,250,000
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:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI: 1
An individual may appear as Principal Investigator (P.I.), co-P.I., other senior personnel or investigator on only one proposal that responds to this program solicitation. This limitation includes proposals submitted by a lead organization, any sub-award submitted as part of a proposal, or any collaborative proposal. Proposals that do not meet this requirement will be returned without review.These restrictions apply only to this solicitation and are not meant to inhibit submissions of proposals by investigators to other NSF activities or programs.
Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
- Letters of Intent: Not Applicable
- 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: 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:
B. Budgetary Information
- Cost Sharing Requirements: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.
- Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Not Applicable
- Other Budgetary Limitations: Not Applicable
C. Due Dates
- Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):December 03, 2013
Proposal Review Information Criteria
Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved
criteria apply.
Award Administration Information
Award Conditions: Standard NSF award conditions apply.
Reporting Requirements: Standard NSF reporting requirements
apply.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
Ocean acidification research requires the development of interdisciplinary
partnerships and capacity building within the scientific community.
Investigators are encouraged to submit proposals that create new partnerships
across traditional disciplines (including molecular and cellular biology,
physiology, marine chemistry and physical oceanography, ecological sciences,
paleoecology, and earth system history) and use diverse approaches
(observational systems, experimental studies, theory and modeling) to examine
cutting edge research questions related to ocean acidification.
A number of scientific workshops* have been held in the U.S. and abroad to
evaluate what is currently known about ocean acidification, to consider its
potential impacts on ocean ecosystems and the earth system, and to chart a
research course for the future to address the myriad of unknowns. The workshop
discussions and reports were used in developing and updating this solicitation.
There is broad consensus that there is an urgent need for (1) ocean surveys,
monitoring and time-series studies to establish the present day picture and
future course of ocean acidification, and its ecological and environmental
consequences and (2) basic research to discover and understand how the chemistry
and physics of the ocean interplay with changes in acidity, how marine biota and
communities function in an acidifying ocean, how historical excursions of
seawater acidity have played out in the geologic past, and what all this might
reveal for the future.
*Scientific workshops include:
II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The OA program supports research focused on the chemistry of ocean
acidification and its interplay with fundamental biogeochemical and
physiological processes of organisms; the implications of these effects for
ecosystem structure and function; and how the earth system history informs our
understanding of the effects of ocean acidification on the present day and
future ocean The program also seeks to fund projects that investigate factors
that make groups of organisms likely to evolve adaptations or perish, while
identifying unifying principles moving from a single species focus to
understanding how ocean acidification affects entire ecosystems. Ocean
acidification effects will be variable in space and time, with some environments
(e.g. high latitude seas, coral reefs) and organisms (e.g. calcifiers) arguably
at greater risk. Accordingly, research projects are encouraged that identify
vulnerable organisms or ecosystems, as indicated by current trends or the
earth's geologic record. Synthesis and modeling projects, that might inform
earth system models at regional, decadal, or larger spatial and temporal scales,
also are appropriate for consideration. This solicitation is part of the
National Science Foundation's cross-directorate research and education
activities related to the broad theme Science,
Engineering and Education for Sustainability (SEES).
Target Research Areas:
Proposals must clearly demonstrate links between the research outcome and the
emphasis areas described within this solicitation. Proposals are encouraged that
develop and integrate interdisciplinary perspectives (including molecular and
cellular biology, physiology, marine chemistry and physical oceanography,
ecological sciences, paleoecology, and earth system history) and use diverse
approaches (observational systems, experimental studies, theory and modeling) to
investigate one or more of the following basic research areas:
- Ocean acidification interconnected to oceanic biology, chemistry, physics, and geology. For example, how will ocean acidification affect processes such as chemical speciation, equilibria, reaction rates, mineral authigenesis and dissolution, or particle dynamics? What are the impacts on the physical chemistry of seawater? How will regional differences in marine chemistry and physics affect acidification, and what are the downstream implications for organisms and ecosystems? How do organism adapt across a temperature and/or acidity gradient? Can we identify new proxies for ocean acidification that can be used to interpret the geologic record?
- Predicting the consequences of ocean acidification on ecosystem health and function. To what extent will ocean acidification affect cell and organisms' performance? What are the capabilities of marine organisms to acclimatize to near-term effects of ocean acidification? Do populations of marine species have the evolutionary genetic capacity to adapt to these environmental changes in the long-term? What unifying factors underlie the ability to adapt? Are there significant feedbacks to the ocean's geochemical environment? What are the combined effects of ocean acidification with changes in temperature, stratification and circulation patterns on ecosystem structure and function? Areas of interest include, but are not limited to, mechanisms of biomineralization and photosynthesis, electrochemical gradients, cell signaling, developmental events, neural and behavioral functions, and properties of extracellular surfaces and substrates. For example: To what extent do impacts on organismal performance lead to critical alterations in abundance, distribution, reproductive output, and evolutionary dynamics? Which organisms will adapt and which will go extinct, and how will this affect ecosystems? Are there complex interactions, cascades, or bottlenecks that will emerge as the oceans acidify, warm and stratify, and what are their downstream ecosystem implications? Investigators are invited to propose single system studies, or comparative analyses, to examine the broader ecological implications of ocean acidification.
- Interpreting the geologic record to reveal the history of climate change and the assemblages of organisms that have risen, persisted, or declined, as the earth system has evolved. To what extent can the geologic record inform our understanding of the response of modern biotic assemblages to ocean acidification? What can the geologic record tell us about the adaptive responses of organisms at timescales longer than can be simulated in laboratory experiments or even longer term environmental monitoring? Are there robust geochemical and biological signatures in the geologic record that can identify historical excursions of pH and alkalinity, and separate those from other paleoenvironmental variables? Conversely, can our understanding of extant organisms and ecosystems, and their responses to the changing marine environment, be used to expand our understanding of paleoenvironments and paleoecology? Proposals that address these questions are encouraged, as are parallel studies comparing the paleo-ocean and modern environments.
Now in its fifth year, the Ocean Acidification program is particularly
interested in supporting projects that involve synthesis, either within or
across disciplines. We expect this to be the last solicitation specifically
targeting Ocean Acidification.
Submission Guidance
Proposals addressing the topic of ocean acidification must be submitted to
this solicitation. Ocean acidification proposals submitted directly to
participating programs may be redirected to this solicitation if they are
compliant.
III. AWARD INFORMATION
Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant
Estimated Number of Awards: 10 to 15 pending availability of funds.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $11,250,000
Estimated Number of Awards: 10 to 15 pending availability of funds.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $11,250,000
Proposals may be of any size and duration as appropriate for the proposed
project.
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:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:1
An individual may appear as Principal Investigator (P.I.), co-P.I., other senior personnel or investigator on only one proposal that responds to this program solicitation. This limitation includes proposals submitted by a lead organization, any sub-award submitted as part of a proposal, or any collaborative proposal. Proposals that do not meet this requirement will be returned without review.These restrictions apply only to this solicitation and are not meant to inhibit submissions of proposals by investigators to other NSF activities or programs.
V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
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: 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 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: (http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide). 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 nsfpubs@nsf.gov.
In determining which method to utilize in the electronic preparation and
submission of the proposal, please note the following:
Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate
submissions from multiple organizations must be submitted via the NSF FastLane
system. Chapter II, Section D.4 of the Grant Proposal Guide provides additional
information on collaborative proposals.
Important Proposal Preparation Information: FastLane will
check for required sections of the full proposal, in accordance with Grant
Proposal Guide (GPG) instructions described in Chapter II.C.2. The GPG
requires submission of: Project Summary; Project Description; References Cited;
Biographical Sketch(es); Budget; Budget Justification; Current and Pending
Support; Facilities, Equipment & Other Resources; Data Management Plan; and
Postdoctoral Mentoring Plan, if applicable. If a required section is missing,
FastLane will not accept the proposal.
Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this
program solicitation may deviate from the GPG instructions. If the solicitation
instructions do not require a GPG-required section to be included in the
proposal, insert text or upload a document in that section of the proposal that
states, "Not Applicable for this Program Solicitation." Doing so will enable
FastLane to accept your proposal.
Proposal Cover Sheet
When preparing the cover page in FastLane, highlight the program solicitation
number for Ocean Acidification on the pull down list and click on the "Select"
button. Your proposal will automatically be assigned to the correct managing
division on the Cover Sheet. (Grants.gov users: The program solicitation number
will be pre-populated by Grants.gov on the NSF Grant Application Cover Page.)
The proposal title should begin with "Ocean
Acidification:".
Observational Networks, Long Term Sites, and Research
Centers
Where appropriate, investigators are encouraged to work in association with
existing projects, observational networks, long-term ecological research (LTER)
sites or research centers, or testing and evaluation facilities, whether
supported by NSF or other agencies, such as USEPA, USGS, USDA or NOAA.
Collaborations with international researchers are also encouraged; however,
international partners are expected to seek support from their respective
funding organizations.
Principal Investigators are advised to obtain letters of commitment that
affirm such collaborative activities. The project description should make clear
how the proposed work differs from and augments activities already supported.
Inclusion of Data Management Plan Required. Data Management
Plans must describe how metadata and data collected as part of the project will
be disseminated to the broader community, as well as plans for longer term
archiving of these data. Principal Investigators that propose to collaborate
with data centers or networks are advised to obtain letters of commitment that
affirm the collaboration. Where possible, all PIs are strongly encouraged to use
existing data centers and data portals to archive and disseminate their data.
All data collected by projects funded through this solicitation must be freely
and openly available to any interested investigator as soon as practical, but no
later than 12 months following collection. See the NSF Grant
Proposal Guide for page limitations and additional guidance.
Budget Preparation Instructions: Research Platforms and Facilities
Requests
Budgets should be prepared in compliance with guidelines in the GPG or NSF
Grants.gov Application Guide. Budgets should include all costs charged to
the project for platforms and facilities supporting the proposed research except
those facilities separately supported by NSF (e.g. UNOLS research vessels,
research aircraft, or field equipment). For research involving UNOLS vessels, a
UNOLS ship request should be appended to proposals. Likewise, research
involving polar regions should follow established guidelines for requesting
logistical support, as discussed in the relevant proposal solicitations (for
Antarctic Sciences, see NSF 13-527; for
Arctic Sciences, see NSF
10-597). Principal investigators are responsible for filing the appropriate
requests for major research platforms; a copy of the request must be attached as
supplementary document to the proposal.
Investigators should anticipate and budget for funds to attend an annual PI
meeting for ocean acidification researchers. Inclusion of junior scientists
and postdoctoral researchers in these meetings is encouraged. The venue for
these meeting is likely to shift from the west coast to the east coast on
alternate years.
Conflicts of Interest Table Required
Proposals must include, in the single copy documents section, a table
containing a single alphabetized list of the full names (lastname, firstname)
and institutional affiliations of all people with conflicts of interest for all
senior personnel (PI and co-PIs) and any named personnel whose salary is
requested in the project budget. Conflicts to be identified are (1) Ph.D. thesis
advisors or advisees, (2) collaborators or co-authors, including postdoctoral
researchers, for the past 48 months, and (3) any other individuals with whom, or
institutions with which, the senior personnel (PI, co-PIs, and any named
personnel) have financial ties, including advisory committees (please specify
type). For each entry on the list, please specify the type of conflict.
B. Budgetary Information
Cost Sharing: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing
is prohibited
C. Due Dates
- Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):December 03, 2013
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:
- 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:
-
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:
- 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: 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 Exhibit
III-1.
A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is
available on the NSF website at:
Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the
fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in
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.
(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 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:
- What is the potential for the proposed activity to
- Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and
- Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?
To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative,
original, or potentially transformative concepts?
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?
How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the
proposed activities?
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.
B. Review and Selection Process
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed
by Ad hoc Review and/or 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
Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone
(703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from
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
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 prior to the end of the current budget period.
(Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports).
Within 90 days following expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to
submit a final project report, and a project outcomes report for the general
public.
Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports, or the
project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of any future
funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all identified PIs and
co-PIs on a given award. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports
in advance to assure availability of required data.
PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available
through Research.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final project
reports. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project
participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific
products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research.gov
constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate
and complete. The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted
using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically
for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be
posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.
More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other
important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the
NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available
electronically on the NSF Website at
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:
- David L. Garrison, Program Director, Biological Oceanography, telephone: (703) 292-7588, email: dgarriso@nsf.gov
- Candace O. Major, Program Director, Marine Geology & Geophysics, telephone: (703) 292-7597, email: cmajor@nsf.gov
- Donald Rice, Program Director, Chemical Oceanography, telephone: (703) 292-7708, email: drice@nsf.gov
- Irwin Forseth, Program Director, Organism-Environment Interactions, telephone: (703) 292-7862, email: iforseth@nsf.gov
- Lori Stevens, Program Director, Evolutionary Processes, telephone: (703) 292-2994, email: losteven@nsf.gov
- Charles Amsler, Program Manager, Antarctic Organisms and Ecosystems, telephone: (703) 292-2461, email: camsler@nsf.gov
- Henrietta Edmonds, Program Director, Arctic Natural Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-8029, email: hedmonds@nsf.gov
- Anna Manyak, Science Assistant, Chemical Oceanography, telephone: (703) 292-8474, email: amanyak@nsf.gov
For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:
- FastLane Help Desk, telephone: 1-800-673-6188; e-mail: fastlane@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: 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, "My NSF" is an information-delivery system designed to
keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF
funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award
policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences.
Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new
publications are issued that match their identified interests. "My NSF" also is
available on NSF's website at
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
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 http://www.nsf.gov
|
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
Office of the General Counsel
National Science Foundation
Arlington, VA 22230
Reports Clearance Officer
Office of the General Counsel
National Science Foundation
Arlington, VA 22230
The National Science Foundation (NSF),
Guillermo Gonzalo Sánchez Achutegui
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario