NSF 13-527: Antarctic Research

Program Solicitation NSF 13-527

National Science Foundation Directorate for Geosciences      Division of Polar Programs

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):

     April 15, 2013

     April 15, Annually Thereafter

     April 15, 2014

     April 15, Annually Thereafter

Important Information And Revision Notes

Summary Of Program Requirements

General Information

Program Title: 

Synopsis of Program:

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.

• Vladimir Papitashvili, Program Director, Antarctic Astrophysics & Geospace Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-7425, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: vpapita@nsf.gov

• Mark Kurz, Program Director, Antarctic Earth Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-7431, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: Mkurz@nsf.gov

• Julie Palais, Program Director, Antarctic Glaciology, telephone: (703) 292-8033, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: jpalais@nsf.gov

• Lisa M. Clough, Program Director, Antarctic Integrated System Science, telephone: (703) 292-4746, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: lclough@nsf.gov

• Peter Milne, Program Director, Antarctic Ocean & Atmospheric Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-4714, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: pmilne@nsf.gov

• Charles Amsler, Program Director, Antarctic Organisms & Ecosystems, telephone: (703) 292-2461, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: camsler@nsf.gov

• Jessie L. Crain, Research Support Manager, OPP/AIL, telephone: (703) 292-7457, fax: (703)292-9080, email: jlcrain@nsf.gov

• Timothy M. McGovern, Oceans Projects Manager, OPP/AIL, 755S, telephone: (703) 292-4248, fax: (703)292-9080, email: tmcgover@nsf.gov

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

• 47.050 --- Geosciences

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award:  Standard Grant or Continuing Grant

Estimated Number of Awards:  50 approximately

Anticipated Funding Amount:  $55,000,000

The Antarctic Sciences Section anticipates committing approximately $55M as either standard or continuing awards made in response to this solicitation contingent on the availability of funds. Anticipated amounts available by program are: Antarctic Astrophysics and Geospace Sciences, $9M; Antarctic Earth Science, $8M; Antarctic Glaciology, $6M; Antarctic Instrumentation and Technology Development, $12M; Antarctic Integrated System Science, $6M; Antarctic Ocean and Atmospheric Science, $6M; and Antarctic Organisms and Ecosystems, $8M.

Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals: 

The categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the Grant Proposal Guide, Chapter I, Section E.

Who May Serve as PI: 

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: 

There are no restrictions or limits.

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

• Letters of Intent: Not required

• Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required

• 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: https://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: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide)

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):

       April 15, 2013

       April 15, Annually Thereafter

       April 15, 2014

       April 15, Annually Thereafter

Proposal Review Information Criteria

Merit Review Criteria:  National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review considerations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Award Administration Information

Award Conditions:  Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Reporting Requirements:  Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.

I. Introduction

II. Program Description

III. Award Information

IV. Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals: 

The categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the Grant Proposal Guide, Chapter I, Section E.

Who May Serve as PI: 

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: 

There are no restrictions or limits.

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: https://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: (https://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.

Please note that per guidance in the GPG, the Project Description must contain, as a separate section within the narrative, a discussion of the broader impacts of the proposed activities. Unless otherwise specified in this solicitation, you can decide where to include this section within the Project Description.

1. Page limit: 
Proposals must not exceed 15 pages in the project description section (see NSF GPG or NSF Grants.gov Application Guide for details). The normal 15-page limit for the Project Description will be enforced, according to the NSF GPG, Chapter II, C., 2.dii. A proposer can request a waiver from the ANT Section Head. However, they must first consult the appropriate Program Director before beginning this process, which is described in the NSF GPG, Chapter II, A.


2. Reporting on prior support: 
Proposals submitted to this solicitation must report on prior support from NSF. The GPG requires that reporting on prior support is limited to a single award within the last 5 years for each PI, CoPI, or Co-I named on the cover sheet. Furthermore, when an investigator has received more than one award, the report on prior support must cover the one award most closely related to the new proposal (NSF GPG, Section II.C.2.d.iii.).


3. Data and sample disposition:
 NSF and Polar Programs policy requires that investigators make samples and data available to other researchers at no more than incremental cost and within a reasonable time (Guidelines and Award Conditions for Scientific Data). In the Data Management Plan all proposals must describe how data will be managed, shared and archived. This plan must be included as a Supplementary Document (See NSF's GPG Chapter II.C.2.j) and must address requirements of Polar Programs Guidelines and Award Conditions for Scientific Data. Unless otherwise justified, samples and data should be made publicly available no more than two years after collection.


4. Proposals for instrument development must demonstrate that project management best practices will be used to manage the activity, including appropriate plans, milestones, and success criteria for pre-deployment testing and readiness reviews. The Proposal must also demonstrate that the design is optimized to reduce operations and maintenance costs and maximize logistical efficiencies during deployment, servicing and recovery.


5. Proposals Involving No Fieldwork: 
Proposals should be clear about whether or not fieldwork in Antarctica is needed. If no fieldwork is required, the statement "This proposal does not require fieldwork in the Antarctic" must be included as the last line of the Proposal Summary.


6. Proposals Involving Fieldwork:
   
   
   • If fieldwork is required, the statement "This proposal requires fieldwork in the Antarctic" must be included as the last line of the Proposal Summary.
   • Project Descriptions must contain sufficient information for reviewers and NSF staff to judge the scientific need for fieldwork, field readiness, and whether the resource levels requested are appropriate. Investigators must justify the need to conduct laboratory analyses in Antarctica rather than analyzing samples in their home laboratory. All instrumentation used in Antarctic fieldwork must be tested and considered operational prior to deployment.
   • Proposers must submit a Logistical Requirements and Field Plan, which will be subject to peer review, outlining the PI's logistical requests associated with the proposed field work. This statement must be included as a Supplementary Document in FastLane. Proposals with fieldwork that lack this Plan are subject to return without review. The Logistical Requirements and Field Plan must include the following elements and should be limited to one page of text and one page of figures (if needed): Brief statement of research objectives
     
     • List of field sites and the geographic region they are located. For remote sites investigators should consider providing a map of proposed field sites.
     • Description of proposed field activities including major logistical resources required (i.e. fixed-wing aircraft, vessels, helicopter support).
     • Description and justification of the desired deployment schedule.
     • Projected numbers of deploying personnel.
     • Description of any needs for facility construction, alteration, or instrument installation
   • Investigators who require vessel support must fill out a UNOLS ship request form (https://strs.unols.org/Public/diu_login.aspx) and submit the completed form as a Supplementary Document in FastLane.
   • Proposals involving international collaborations must include letters from the foreign investigator outlining the nature of the collaboration and providing the name and contact details for the foreign Antarctic program that will support the research, including information for the relevant funding agency representative if applicable. These letters should be uploaded as Supplementary Documents.
   • Projects requiring support from PASSCAL, UNAVCO, PGC, and IDDO must include a letter of support from the facility, outlining supportability and any additional costs that will be incurred by the proposed work.

The Logistical Requirements and Field Plan will assist reviewers in assessing the readiness of the project and alert the USAP logistics team to the support requirements of the possible upcoming project. Additional aspects related to logistical planning that should be considered when preparing your proposal and Logistical Requirements and Field Plan can be found at: http://www.usap.gov/proposalInformation/.

Investigators unsure of the logistics requirements necessary to accomplish their research goals should contact their Cognizant Program Director, the Antarctic Research and Logistics Integration Program Director (Alexandra Isern, aisern@nsf.gov) or a Research Support Manager in the Antarctic Infrastructure and Logistics Section (Jessie Crain, jlcrain@nsf.gov; Tim McGovern, tmcgover@nsf.gov) before submitting their proposals.

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited

Budget Preparation Instructions:

Budget provisions for field services in Antarctica: Costs for the following items must be included in your funding request. Questions related to this list should be directed to your cognizant Program Director or Research Support Managers in the Antarctic Infrastructure and Logistics Section.

• Physical and dental examinations, including blood work, for all persons deploying to Antarctica. NSF funding cannot be used to support medical or dental treatment that may be required to meet physical qualification requirements established for the U.S Antarctic Program.
  
• Per diem for travel to the departure point to Antarctica (itemized under "Foreign Travel"). Do not include airfare costs to this departure point. If foreign scientists are part of the field team, NSF expects that these individuals will provide their airfare and travel expenses and these funds should not be requested in the proposal.
• Laboratory consumables and supplies above those normally stocked in reasonable quantities by the contractor, project-specific equipment, field supplies that the contractor does not have in inventory, batteries to operate remote equipment, and equipment and supplies required at home organizations. A list of available lab materials, supplies, and chemicals can be found at: http://www.usap.gov/usapgov/proposalInformation/.
• Non-recoverable and potentially non-recoverable equipment, such as moorings (except for the anchor mass), drifters, XCTDs, and satellite tracking tags.
• Mountaineer/sea ice safety support for research teams that will be in the field for two weeks or longer working in technical terrain requiring enhanced field skills to ensure the safety of the field party.
• Technical support for the measurement of nutrients on research cruises.
• Certified explosives blaster support required for detonation of explosives.
• Equipment dedicated to a project for multiple years including UNAVCO and IRIS/PASCAL equipment that cannot be supplied from the core equipment pools
• Cargo and sample shipping within the continental United States to the U.S. Antarctic Program cargo center in Pt. Hueneme CA. Funds for shipment of temperature-sensitive samples from Antarctica should not be requested in the proposal.
• Accompanied excess baggage costs required for transport of research-related equipment
• Specialized packaging or preparation of equipment needed for transport of project-specific equipment to and/or from Antarctica.
• Private medical evacuation insurance if a tour ship or other private transportation will be part of the field plan.

The USAP issues, at no charge to the award, limited amounts of basic polar clothing as described in the USAP Participant Guide (http://www.usap.gov/travelAndDeployment/contentHandler.cfm?id=541).

Insurance: NSF does not provide insurance for grantee personnel in Antarctica, and NSF funding cannot be used for the acquisition of insurance. Persons traveling to Antarctica are expected to have insurance appropriate to their normal life situations so that any needed health care, compensation for property loss, worker's compensation, or survivor benefit will be provided for. Persons who need hospital care will be transported to health care facilities in New Zealand, South America, or the United States, at which time they will be responsible for medical costs. Investigators are encouraged to ensure that their health and life insurance policies cover flights aboard scheduled military aircraft.

C. Due Dates

• Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):

       April 15, 2013

       April 15, Annually Thereafter

       April 15, 2014

       April 15, Annually Thereafter

D. FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements

For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane:

To prepare and submit a proposal via FastLane, see detailed technical instructions 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 solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.

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: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants.html. In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide (see link in Section V.A) provides instructions regarding the technical 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.

Proposers that submitted via FastLane are strongly encouraged to use FastLane to verify the status of their submission to NSF.  For proposers that submitted via Grants.gov, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on Grants.gov.  After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research.gov should be used to check the status of an application.

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: http://nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/.

Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Empowering the Nation Through Discovery and Innovation: NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2011-2016.  These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part.  NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.   

One of the core strategies in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects and activities it supports at academic and research institutions.  These institutions provide abundant opportunities where individuals may concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators, and students, and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through the variety of learning perspectives. 

Another core strategy in support of NSF's mission is broadening opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering.  NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

A. Merit Review Principles and Criteria

The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education.  To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes."  NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects. 

1. Merit Review Principles

These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:

• All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge.
   
• NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals. These "Broader Impacts" may be accomplished through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project.  The project activities may be based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must be well justified.
   
• Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is not likely to be meaningful. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated, level than the individual project.

With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project.  Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities.

These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.

2. Merit Review Criteria

All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.

The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient.  Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria.  (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:

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

Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project.  NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes.  Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.

Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria

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 evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and submitted by each reviewer. 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 strives to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new awardees may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later.  The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation.

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. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform 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.

Once an award or declination decision has been made, Principal Investigators are provided feedback about their proposals.  In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying information, 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.

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 notice, 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 notice; (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 notice. 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 https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov.

More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.

Metadata. Principal Investigators of Antarctic Science awards are required to submit metadata files for all data sets and derived data products in the form of a Directory Interchange Format (DIF) entry, to the Antarctic Master Directory, via the USAP Data Coordination Center (http://www.usap-data.org/). Further information on DIF generation can be found on the Global Change Master Directory website (http://gcmd.gsfc.nasa.gov/). This metadata requirement is needed to meet U.S. Antarctic Program obligations under the Antarctic Treaty. Proof of the metadata entry must be included in the Final Project Report to NSF in the section entitled: Publications - Internet Dissemination.

Antarctic Bibliography. Investigators funded through Antarctic Sciences are requested to send the Antarctic Bibliography one copy, or a URL to an online version, of every publication developed under the award, labeled with the award number. Doing so will waive the General Grant Condition that requires submission of copies of every publication, developed under an NSF award, to the cognizant NSF Program Officer.

Acknowledgement of US Antarctic Program support. In addition to the acknowledgement of NSF support required by the Federal Demonstration Project (Part III.D.51.a.1), projects receiving US Antarctic Program support for field work in the Antarctic shall include the following acknowledgement in publications resulting from the project:

Logistical support for this project in Antarctica was provided by the U.S. National Science Foundation through the U.S. Antarctic Program.

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 https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.

VIII. Agency Contacts

Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

• Vladimir Papitashvili, Program Director, Antarctic Astrophysics & Geospace Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-7425, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: vpapita@nsf.gov

• Mark Kurz, Program Director, Antarctic Earth Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-7431, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: Mkurz@nsf.gov

• Julie Palais, Program Director, Antarctic Glaciology, telephone: (703) 292-8033, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: jpalais@nsf.gov

• Lisa M. Clough, Program Director, Antarctic Integrated System Science, telephone: (703) 292-4746, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: lclough@nsf.gov

• Peter Milne, Program Director, Antarctic Ocean & Atmospheric Sciences, telephone: (703) 292-4714, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: pmilne@nsf.gov

• Charles Amsler, Program Director, Antarctic Organisms & Ecosystems, telephone: (703) 292-2461, fax: (703) 292-9079, email: camsler@nsf.gov

• Jessie L. Crain, Research Support Manager, OPP/AIL, telephone: (703) 292-7457, fax: (703)292-9080, email: jlcrain@nsf.gov

• Timothy M. McGovern, Oceans Projects Manager, OPP/AIL, 755S, telephone: (703) 292-4248, fax: (703)292-9080, email: tmcgover@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, "NSF Update" 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. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website at https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USNSF/subscriber/new?topic_id=USNSF_179.

Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this new mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at http://www.grants.gov.

About The National Science Foundation

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."

NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.

NSF receives approximately 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.

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