Print

Archived funding opportunity

This document has been archived. The latest version is NSF 21-601.

NSF 05-537: American National Election Studies (ANES) Competition

Program Solicitation

Document Information

Document History

  • Posted: December 22, 2004
  • Replaced by: NSF 18-519
Download the solicitation (PDF, 0.3mb)
View the program page

American National Election Studies (ANES) Competition

Program Solicitation
NSF 05-537

NSF Logo

National Science Foundation
Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences
      Division of Social and Economic Sciences

 

Full Proposal Target Date(s):

    May 06, 2005

Summary Of Program Requirements

General Information

Program Title:

American National Election Studies (ANES) Competition

Synopsis of Program:

The Political Science Program invites proposals from Ph.D.-holding scholar-investigators who possess the theoretical, methodological, measurement, and administrative skills, as well as the necessary resources, to undertake an important, large-scale, data-collection project on election campaigns, electoral choice, election outcomes, and citizen engagement in the United States.

The ANES recompetition will include three areas of emphasis: a Panel Component; a Core-Continuity Component; and an Experimental-Innovation Component.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

  • Please see the full text of this funding opportunity for contact information.

Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):

  • 47.075 --- Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences

Eligibility Information

  • Organization Limit: None Specified.
  • PI Eligibility Limit:

    The NSF Political Science Program invites proposals from Ph.D.-holding scholar-investigators who possess the theoretical, methodological, measurement, and administrative skills, as well as the necessary resources, to undertake an important, large-scale, data-collection project on election campaigns, electoral choice, election outcomes, and citizen engagement in the United States.
  • Limit on Number of Proposals: None Specified.

Award Information

  • Anticipated Type of Award: Continuing Grant
  • Estimated Number of Awards: 1
  • Anticipated Funding Amount: $7,600,000

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
  • Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: This solicitation contains information that supplements the standard Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) proposal preparation guidelines. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
B. Budgetary Information
  • Cost Sharing Requirements: Cost Sharing is not required.
  • Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Not Applicable.
  • Other Budgetary Limitations: Not Applicable.
C. Due Dates
  • Full Proposal Target Date(s):
      May 06, 2005

Proposal Review Information

  • 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.

I. Introduction

A Competition of The American National Election Studies

On February 14 and 15, 2003 the National Science Foundation's (NSF) Political Science Program sponsored an American Electoral Behavior Workshop at the NSF in Ballston, Virginia. The objective of the workshop was to provide advice on the NSF Political Science Program’s competition for the study of American Electoral Behavior.

The Workshop participants included members of the American National Election Studies Board and outside (national and international) experts knowledgeable in the methodology and/or substance of survey research and electoral research.

Workshop participants were given a set of discussion points and asked to provide written commentaries related to the discussion points. Participants also were given the option to present their own concerns and visions for the future. The Workshop was transcribed and the comments are available on the NSF Political Science Program Web page (https://www.nsf.gov/sbe/ses/polisci/aeb/start.htm). This report serves as the basis for a recompetition of the current American National Election Studies award supported by the NSF Political Science Program (SES 01-18451). An abstract of this award can be accessed at: (https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward.do?AwardNumber=0118451).

In both written and/or spoken commentaries, American Electoral Behavior Workshop participants recommended (among other things) that the NSF Political Science Program address the following methodological and substantive challenges in the next 10 years.

  • Continue support of a presidential study that includes a core component.
  • Consider using a panel design for the presidential election study.
  • Maintain face-to-face interviewing of respondents for the core component.
  • Ensure that investigators have the capacity to do pilot research on innovative methodologies and substantive issues specific to a time and place.
  • Consider a dynamic component that captures on-going events of political importance.
  • Establish a core national study as a “docking station” for substantive modules submitted by researchers who may not be part of the current ANES community.
  • Encourage the research community to seek cooperative arrangements with funding groups, other government agencies (e.g. using census addresses for mail surveys), other surveys (e.g. Bureau of Labor Statistics) and the like.
  • Maintain standards for data access and dissemination.

With the advice of members of this Workshop and the overall academic community, the NSF Political Science Program may make one award to conduct the American National Election Studies (contingent on the availability of funds). The award will be used for primary data collection that will advance the quality of scientific inquiry and knowledge about election campaigns, electoral choice, election outcomes, and citizen engagement in the United States. The maximum amount of the award is $7,600,000 to cover the project. The annual amount of the award is expected to be up to $1,900,000; the duration of the award will be four years. The expected start date is January, 2006.

II. Program Description

Project Descriptions should consider the following Scientific Component Objectives:

Objective 1: Panel Component

  • The issues of feasibility and implementation should be considered for this component objective.

Objective 2: Core-Continuity Component

  • Continue support of a presidential election study that includes a core component.
  • Maintain primarily face-to-face interviewing of the core component.
  • Explain what elements of the "old" core are maintained.
  • Explain what the "new" core contributes to our scientific understanding.
  • Establish that the core national study can serve as a “docking station” for substantive modules submitted by researchers who may not be part of the ANES project team.

Objective 3: Experimental-Innovation Component

  • The broad areas for experimentation and innovation may include: 1) Mode switching; 2) New mode and data collection methods; 3) Incorporating formal modeling and cognitive experiments or a mix of formal modeling and experiments.
  • Ensure that investigators have the capacity to do pilot research on innovative methodologies and substantive issues specific to times and places.
  • Consider a dynamic component that captures on-going events of political importance.

Project Descriptions should also address the following Administrative issues as part of an overall Management Plan:

  • Discuss the role of an independent Board of Overseers.
  • Discuss the standards for data acquisition, archiving, and dissemination.
  • If appropriate, the project description must include a section on Results from Prior Support for principal investigators and co-investigators who have received NSF funding in the last five years. Refer to the GPG for more information.
  • All proposals submitted for the ANES recompetition must contain a section titled “Expected Project Significance.” This section should address both the intellectual merits and the broader impact of the project. The section must identify how the project will generate new science related to the study of electoral behavior, and how it will enhance the capabilities of people who engage in research and/or education in these areas in the future.

III. Eligibility Information

The NSF Political Science Program invites proposals from Ph.D.-holding scholar-investigators who possess the theoretical, methodological, measurement, and administrative skills, as well as the necessary resources, to undertake an important, large-scale, data-collection project on election campaigns, electoral choice, election outcomes, and citizen engagement in the United States.

IV. Award Information

With the advice of members of this Workshop and the overall academic community, the NSF Political Science Program may make one award to conduct the American National Election Studies (contingent on the availability of funds). The award will be used for primary data collection that will advance the quality of scientific inquiry and knowledge about election campaigns, electoral choice, election outcomes, and citizen engagement in the United States. The maximum amount of the award is $7,600,000 to cover the project. The annual amount of the award is expected to be up to $1,900,000; the duration of the award will be four years. The expected start date is January, 2006.

V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Instructions

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

Full Proposal Instructions:

Proposals submitted in response to this program announcement/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: https://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gpg. Paper copies of the GPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from pubs@nsf.gov.

The Following information supplements the instructions in the GPG.

All project descriptions are limited to 30 pages in length. Appendices will not be authorized. Proposals may refer to supplementary materials, such as questions, competitive survey cost estimates, pretest and pilot survey results, and other directly relevant information, posted on investigators' publicly available websites. Panelists/Reviewers will be asked to safeguard their anonymity when accessing these websites.

Pre-Submission Checklist

ANES recompetition proposals must be in compliance with the GPG and special requirements in this Solicitation to be considered for review. Proposals not in compliance with these requirements will be returned without review. Please refer to the following checklist to address some of the items for which proposals may be non-compliant:

  • Font and margin requirements.
  • Paginated pages.
  • Project summary that includes a brief description of broader impacts.
  • Project description that is 30 pages or less, includes separate sections for Results from Prior Support (if appropriate), a Management Plan, and any other separate sections described in the appropriate emphasis area description(s).
  • Biographical Sketches for all principal investigators and senior personnel.
  • Current and Pending Support statements for all principal investigators and senior personnel.

Proposers are reminded to identify the program announcement/solicitation number (05-537) in the program announcement/solicitation block on the proposal Cover Sheet. Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing.

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing:

Cost sharing is not required in proposals submitted under this Program Solicitation.

C. Due Dates

Proposals must be submitted by the following date(s):

Full Proposal Target Date(s):

    May 06, 2005

D. FastLane Requirements

Proposers are required to prepare and submit all proposals for this announcement/solicitation through the FastLane system. Detailed instructions for proposal preparation and submission via FastLane are available at: 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 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 announcement/solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this announcement/solicitation.

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. Proposers are no longer required to provide a paper copy of the signed Proposal Cover Sheet to NSF. Further instructions regarding this process are available on the FastLane Website at: http://www.fastlane.nsf.gov

VI. Proposal Review Information

A. NSF Proposal Review Process

Reviews of proposals submitted to NSF are solicited from peers with expertise in the substantive area of the proposed research or education project. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with the oversight of the review process. NSF invites the proposer to suggest, at the time of submission, the names of appropriate or inappropriate reviewers. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts with the proposer. Special efforts are made to recruit reviewers from non-academic institutions, minority-serving institutions, or adjacent disciplines to that principally addressed in the proposal.

The National Science Board approved revised criteria for evaluating proposals at its meeting on March 28, 1997 (NSB 97-72). All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.

On July 8, 2002, the NSF Director issued Important Notice 127, Implementation of new Grant Proposal Guide Requirements Related to the Broader Impacts Criterion. This Important Notice reinforces the importance of addressing both criteria in the preparation and review of all proposals submitted to NSF. NSF continues to strengthen its internal processes to ensure that both of the merit review criteria are addressed when making funding decisions.

In an effort to increase compliance with these requirements, the January 2002 issuance of the GPG incorporated revised proposal preparation guidelines relating to the development of the Project Summary and Project Description. Chapter II of the GPG specifies that Principal Investigators (PIs) must address both merit review criteria in separate statements within the one-page Project Summary. This chapter also reiterates that broader impacts resulting from the proposed project must be addressed in the Project Description and described as an integral part of the narrative.

Effective October 1, 2002, NSF will return without review proposals that do not separately address both merit review criteria within the Project Summary. It is believed that these changes to NSF proposal preparation and processing guidelines will more clearly articulate the importance of broader impacts to NSF-funded projects.

The two National Science Board approved merit review criteria are listed below (see the Grant Proposal Guide Chapter III.A for further information). The criteria include considerations that help define them. These considerations are suggestions and not all will apply to any given proposal. While proposers must address both merit review criteria, reviewers will be asked to address only those considerations that are relevant to the proposal being considered and for which he/she is qualified to make judgments.

    What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?
    How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields? How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of the prior work.) To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative and original concepts? How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity? Is there sufficient access to resources?
    What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?
    How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning? How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society?

NSF staff will give careful consideration to the following in making funding decisions:

    Integration of Research and Education
    One of the principal strategies in support of NSF's goals is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions provide abundant opportunities where individuals may concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators, and students and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through the diversity of learning perspectives.
    Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities
    Broadening opportunities and enabling the participation of all citizens -- women and men, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities -- is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.
    Additional Review Criteria:

    Reviewers will pay specific attention to the Scientific Component Objectives and Administrative issues that are listed in Section II of this solicitation.

B. Review Protocol and Associated Customer Service Standard

All proposals are carefully reviewed by at least three other persons outside NSF who are experts in the particular field represented by the proposal. Proposals submitted in response to this announcement/solicitation will be reviewed by Ad Hoc 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.

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 Director. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.

NSF is striving to be able to tell proposers whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. The time interval begins on the closing date of an announcement/solicitation, or the date of proposal receipt, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director accepts the Program Officer's recommendation.

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 Division 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.A. 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 (NSF-GC-1); * or Federal Demonstration Partnership (FDP) Terms and Conditions * and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award letter. Cooperative agreement awards also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Terms and Conditions (CA-1). Electronic mail notification is the preferred way to transmit NSF awards to organizations that have electronic mail capabilities and have requested such notification from the Division of Grants and Agreements.

*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/home/grants/grants_gac.htm. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from pubs@nsf.gov.

More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions is contained in the NSF Grant Policy Manual (GPM) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gpm. The GPM is also for sale through the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office (GPO), Washington, DC 20402. The telephone number at GPO for subscription information is (202) 512-1800. The GPM may be ordered through the GPO Website at http://www.gpo.gov.

C. Reporting Requirements

For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the PI must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer at least 90 days before the end of the current budget period.

Within 90 days after the expiration of an award, the PI also is required to submit a final project report. Failure to provide final technical reports delays NSF review and processing of pending proposals for the PI and all Co-PIs. 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. This system permits electronic submission and updating of project reports, including information on project participants (individual and organizational), activities and findings, 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.

VIII. Contacts For Additional Information

General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

  • Dr. Jim Granato or Dr. Frank Scioli, Political Science Program Directors, National Science Foundation. E-Mail: jgranato@nsf.gov, fscioli@nsf.gov;. Phone: (703) 292-7284.

For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:

  • Ms.Charmane Jenkins, Program Technology Specialist, NSF, Division of Social and Economics Sciences, 995 N, Arlington, Virginia, 22230, U.S.A. telephone: (703) 292-8762, fax: (703) 292-9068, email: cjenkins@nsf.gov

IX. Other Programs Of Interest

The NSF Guide to Programs is a compilation of funding for research and education in science, mathematics, and engineering. The NSF Guide to Programs is available electronically at https://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gp. General descriptions of NSF programs, research areas, and eligibility information for proposal submission are provided in each chapter.

Many NSF programs offer announcements or solicitations concerning specific proposal requirements. To obtain additional information about these requirements, contact the appropriate NSF program offices. Any changes in NSF's fiscal year programs occurring after press time for the Guide to Programs will be announced in the NSF E-Bulletin, which is updated daily on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/home/ebulletin, and in individual program announcements/solicitations. Subscribers can also sign up for NSF's Custom News Service (https://www.nsf.gov/home/cns/start.htm) to be notified of new funding opportunities that become available.

About The National Science Foundation

The National Science Foundation (NSF) funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. Awardees are wholly responsible for conducting their project activities and preparing the results for publication. Thus, the Foundation does not assume responsibility for such findings or their interpretation.

NSF welcomes proposals from all qualified scientists, engineers and educators. The Foundation strongly encourages women, minorities and persons with disabilities to compete fully in its programs. In accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and NSF policies, no person on grounds of race, color, age, sex, national origin or disability shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving financial assistance from NSF, although some programs may have special requirements that limit eligibility.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities (investigators and other staff, including student research assistants) to work on NSF-supported projects. See the GPG Chapter II, Section D.2 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

а

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; 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 applicant 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 needing information as part of the review process or in order to coordinate programs; 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," 63 Federal Register 267 (January 5, 1998), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records," 63 Federal Register 268 (January 5, 1998). 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 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 this burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Suzanne Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, Division of Administrative Services, National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA 22230.

OMB control number: 3145-0058.

Top