MCB Virtual Office Hour: Faculty Early Career Development Program (CAREER)

About the series

Join the Division of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences (MCB) at the National Science Foundation for our next virtual office hour. On Wednesday, May 8 from 2-3pm ET, the topic will be Faculty Early Career Development Program (CAREER). Program Directors will be present to address your questions.

Please register here.

For alerts on future virtual office hours, please subscribe to the MCB Blog.

Presentation outline

Resources:

MCB Blog posts upcoming topics, opportunities and recordings of past office hour presentations: https://mcbblog.nsfbio.com/
View CAREER program contacts: https://www.nsf.gov/crssprgm/career/contacts.jsp
Find recent BIO funding opportunities
To learn about more opportunities and resources, visit NSF National Synthesis Center for Emergence in the Molecular and Cellular Sciences webpage: https://ncems.psu.edu/

Molecular and Cellular Biosciences (MCB)

Supports quantitative, predictive and theory-driven research to understand complex living systems at the molecular, subcellular, and cellular levels
Encourages use of approaches at intersections of biology and other disciplines
Promotes activities that build capacity and ensure diversity, equity and inclusion in the scientific enterprise.
MCB core solicitation supports research across four core clusters: cellular dynamics and function; genetic mechanisms; molecular biophysics; and systems and synthetic biology

View MCB Core Solicitation (NSF 23-548) for more information.

Faculty Early Career Development Program (CAREER) (NSF 22-586)

The main changes of 22-586

Deadline change to the 4th Wednesday in July. Next submission date is July 24th, 2024.
Addition of a clarification sentence in the departmental chair letter to state that the Chair Letter is not a support letter.
Edits in the PECASE language that adds the additional requirement for the PI candidate to reflect a commitment to STEM equity, diversity, accessibility, and/or inclusion. The language also updates the new allocation of PECASE candidates for NSF.
Inclusion of a new single copy document for PIs to include that states their eligibility for PECASE. It is not a required document. There is an opportunity for the PI to submit this “certification” post-award via an interim report to the cognizant program officer if they did not have the required status as of their submission date.
CAREER submission will be through Research.gov or Grants.gov. Fastlane is no longer used for submission since the July 2023 deadline.

See the CAREER program page for more information.

CAREER Proposal Submission Logistics

As part of the Spring 2023 NSF Virtual Grants Conference, a representative from NSF's Division of Information Systems will present an overview of CAREER proposal submission logistics: Tuesday, June 7, 2024, from 2:00 to 3:30 PM Eastern time
A demo of how to prepare a CAREER proposal in Research.gov, review of the system-related requirements in the CAREER proposal submission timeline guidance, and a Q&A segment will be included. Submit questions in advance to careerproposalprep@nsf.gov.
There is another Spring 2024 NSF Virtual Grants Conference on June 3-5, 2024. Registration is open on the conference website. The last session is about CAREER application. Please visit the conference website for more information on grant writing. Any questions about this technical webinar may be directed to careerproposalprep@nsf.gov.

Proposal Submission Timeline

In 9 days on July 15, 2024: Submit CAREER proposal through Grants.gov

Proposals submitted via Grants.gov must go through additional processing before they are accepted at NSF. For this reason, we recommend allowing extra time to resolve any system errors and avoid high volume delays at the NSF Help Desk if problems arise.

In 6 days on July 18, 2023: Submit CAREER proposal through Research.gov

Aim to submit your proposal by this date to allow time to resolve any system errors in advance of the deadline and avoid high volume delays at the NSF Help Desk. Print the file to a PDF and view it online to make sure the correct version was submitted. Corrections are automatically accepted before the deadline.

In 0 days on July 24, 2023: Proposal submission deadline

Proposals are due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time. System does not allow submission after the deadline.

CAREER Program Aims

Emphasize the importance of early development of academic careers in which the excitement of research is enhanced by inspired teaching.
Provide stable support at a sufficient level and 5 year duration to enable awardees to develop careers as outstanding researchers and effective, committed educators
Encourage faculty and institutions to support the integration of research and education, in which the process of discovery stimulates learning to ensure quick and effective communication of research findings to a large audience.

Investigator Eligibility

Hold a doctoral degree in a field supported by NSF
Be engaged in research in an area of science, engineering, or education supported by NSF
Hold at least a 50% tenure-track (or tenure-track equivalent) position as an assistant professor (or equivalent title)
Be untenured
Have not previously received a CAREER (OK to have other research awards) award
Have not had more than two CAREER proposals reviewed previously

Tenure-track Equivalency

Must meet all of the following requirements:

The employee has a continuing appointment that is expected to last the five years of a CAREER grant.
The appointment has substantial research and educational responsibilities.
The proposed project relates to the employee's career goals and job responsibilities as well as to the mission of the department or organization.
The Departmental Letter must affirm that the investigator's appointment is at an early-career level equivalent to pre-tenure status, and the Departmental Letter must clearly and convincingly demonstrate how the faculty member's appointment satisfies all the above requirements of tenure-track equivalency.

Faculty members who are Associate Professors or in equivalent appointments, with or without tenure, are not eligible for the CAREER program. Faculty members who hold Adjunct Faculty or equivalent appointments are not eligible CAREER program.

Sections of the Proposal

Summary: It should address both Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in separate sections
- Panelists who are not assigned to your proposal will read only the summary.
Description: should include Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts, and-if applicable- Prior support sections. It may also include some background information, rationale for undertaking this research, how the research will be conducted, and what are the expected outcomes and their significance
Facilities, Equipment, and Other Resources must document the nature of all project collaborations:
- Intellectual contributions to the project
- Permission to access a site, use instrumentation or facility
- Offer to furnish samples / materials for research
- Logistical support / evaluation services
- Mentoring of U.S. students at a foreign site, if applicable
Letters of Support should consist of a single-sentence statement of collaboration:
- “If the proposal submitted by Dr. [name of PI] entitled [proposal title] is selected for funding by the NSF, it is my intent to collaborate and/or commit resources as detailed in the Project Description.”
- Must NOT recommend or endorse PI or project

See CAREER solicitation for more information.

Departmental Letter

Commitment to the PI’s proposed CAREER research and education activities
Description of how the PI’s career goals and responsibilities mesh with that of the organization and department
Description of how the department will contribute to the professional development of the PI with mentoring and whatever is needed to further the PI’s efforts to integrate research and education
Statement indicating the PI’s eligibility for the CAREER program

More Information

Co-PIs on cover sheet are not allowed
Request for support of other senior personnel, consultants, or subawards is allowed, commensurate with a limited role in the project
International activities are encouraged and may be supported by the Office of International Science and Engineering (OISE)
Programs may support buy-out of academic year time for teaching intensive institutions (check with your Program Director)
If you are not sure about budget check with your Program Director

Five Review Elements

The potential for the proposed activity to:
1. Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit)
2. Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)
To what extent the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts.
The plan for carrying out the proposed activities is well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale, and includes a mechanism to assess success.
How well qualified the individual, team, and institution are to conduct the proposed activities.
That adequate resources are available to the PI (either at the home institution or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities.

How to Start Preparing a Grant proposal?

Ask yourself

What do you intend to do that others want to know?
Why is the work important, innovative and exciting?
What has already been done and why is your way better?
How are you going to do the work to answer the question(s) uniquely?

Prepare yourself and demonstrate knowledge

Literature survey and discussions with others
Get preliminary data
If you do not have access to the best facilities, who will you collaborate/partner with?

Ingredients of a Highly Competitive Proposal

Novel idea/research question/sound rationale
Well-balanced feasibility and boldness
Research plan addresses the question(s)
Well-justified and well-written
The PI is qualified
Meaningful collaborations are in place (if needed)
Facilities are available (at the institution or through collaboration)

Background and Introduction

Avoid extensive literature review, this is not a review article. Review only relevant work to the proposed research (make sure to cite the most relevant articles and players of the field).
Describe the rationale and the plan to address the needs, gaps, and hypotheses
Make sure to communicate your overall goal/central hypothesis within the first few paragraphs
Avoid using excessive jargon (remember every reviewer is not in your area of research)

Research Design

Choose experimental approach that answers the question directly and has the required sensitivity and resolution for the problem (not necessarily the fanciest technique)
Know strengths and weaknesses of experimental techniques you will use (you don’t need to be an expert in all)
Explain what type of data you will acquire from each experiment and provide interpretation and how it stands with respect to the current state of knowledge. Make sure to discuss alternative interpretations
Make sure to address potential pitfalls and how you plan to use alternative approaches to address them
Don’t be afraid of saying that a given set of experiments in an aim may not yield the overall goal. In that case explain significance of even a partial result
Every aim does not need feasibility data. There should be a good balance between feasibility and boldness
After writing this section, take a look at your hypotheses and see whether the experimental design actually tested them or it is made up of “doable” experiments
You may want to include a timeline to demonstrate your plan how you will accomplish the work
Aims of a proposal should not be dependent on the success of the first aim. They should be complementary towards the overall goal but independent of each others successful completion

Some Additional Comments

This is a proposal and not a manuscript - Know the difference
All parts of the proposal help communicate your ideas to the reviewers and Program Directors
Do not compress the font or squeeze the margins - use your allowed page limits wisely
Embed the figures correctly and make it look good on the page
The care you take with your research this proposal communicates the care you will take and education program
If you have trouble writing well - Take a class!

Most Common Mistakes

Work is too close to what has been done before - i.e., Incremental advance
Project has too large a scope or is too narrowly focused to be exciting
Proposed methods/resolution/research plan are not likely to yield results
that will address the stated goals of the project
The experiment/theoretical/analytical design is flawed
Resources not available or PI does not have demonstrated expertise in it
Potential pitfalls and alternate strategies are not described
Alternate interpretation of data is ignored
The PI has not been very productive either during or since his/her Ph.D.
Education component is generic and what is expected of any PI in your field - one more student in your lab is not enough!
Unrealistic education activity - “This work will revolutionize K-12 education in the state of X"
Reinventing the wheel - another blog, another website
Research and education plans are not integrated
Lack of understanding of what is effective in education. A literature search helps here, too.

Broader Impacts/Educational Activities

The education activities must be well integrated with the research
Use institutional activities relevant to your research
Plans should reflect your disciplinary and educational interests and goals, as well as the needs of your organization
Demonstration of previous results with successful education activities is a plus
Who will benefit from the proposed activities?
Assessment Plan to show that these activities are effective.
A wide range of research and education activities are appropriate for the CAREER program
Some investigators may wish to pursue an additional activity such as entrepreneurship, industry partnerships, or policy that enhances their research and education plans

Basis for Funding Decision

Peer Review

Content of the review is more important than rating
Panel Summary shows what aspects of your proposal were considered most important for that rating.
Program Director analyzes: Fairness and substance of the reviews; technical issues raised (can they be resolved swiftly and easily); reviewers’ enthusiasm for the project; additional feedback from reviewers/panels or other program directors; sometimes also clarification from the PI if needed

Portfolio Balance

Research and education topics and their integration; potential for transformative impact in both; priority or timeliness of the area of research and systems; demographics of the PI population and diversity of institution types; stage of the career development of the PI; geographic diversity; gender balance; international partnerships

Declination is a Part of the Process

Stay Calm and Do NOT Get Discouraged!

Read the reviews and Panel Summary more than once
Ask others to interpret the reviews for you
Reflect on your next moves after you have had time to digest the feedback (Reviews, Panel Summary, PD Comments, Context Statement)
Contact your Program Director

Resubmit after addressing significant weaknesses