NSF 12-540: CISE-MPS Interdisciplinary Faculty Program in Quantum Information Science
Program Solicitation
Program Solicitation NSF 12-540
 |
National Science Foundation |
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
June 01, 2012
December 04, 2012
June 03, 2013
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.
Summary Of Program Requirements
General Information
Program Title:
CISE-MPS Interdisciplinary Faculty Program in Quantum Information Science
Synopsis of Program:
The CISE-MPS Interdisciplinary Faculty Program in Quantum Information Science is designed to promote research in the area of Quantum Information Science (QIS) by providing resources to allow QIS researchers and researchers from the CISE or MPS disciplines to actively engage in joint research efforts, addressing problems at the interface between the mathematical and physical sciences and computer and information sciences through long-term visits by faculty to a host institution.
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.
-
C. Denise Caldwell, MPS, MPS/PHY, telephone: (703) 292-7371, email: dcaldwel@nsf.gov
-
Dmitry Maslov, CISE, CISE/CCF, telephone: (703) 292-8910, email: dmaslov@nsf.gov
-
Almadena Y. Chtchelkanova, CISE, CISE/CCF, telephone: (703) 292-8910, email: achtchel@nsf.gov
-
John H. Cozzens, CISE, CISE/CCF, telephone: (703) 292-8910, email: jcozzens@nsf.gov
-
Evelyn Goldfield, MPS, MPS/CHE, telephone: (703) 292-2173, email: egoldfie@nsf.gov
-
Daryl W. Hess, MPS, MPS/DMR, telephone: (703) 292-4942, email: dhess@nsf.gov
-
Edward Taylor, MPS, MPS/DMS, telephone: (703) 292-4872, email: etaylor@nsf.gov
-
Ann Orel, MPS, MPS/PHY, telephone: (703) 292-2163, email: aorel@nsf.gov
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
- 47.049 --- Mathematical and Physical Sciences
- 47.070 --- Computer and Information Science and Engineering
Award Information
Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant
Estimated Number of Awards: 12 to 16 NSF anticipates making three to four awards for each deadline.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $4,000,000 subject to the availability of funds. Awards are limited in size to a maximum of $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:
The scholar must be in a tenured faculty position at the associate or full professor level in his or her US home institution and must be prepared to spend a minimum of one contiguous semester with the host's group. Scholar and host must be from substantially different environments, such that the collaborative activity represents a broadening of experience and a bone fide change in the research direction. Scholar and host must also be from different institutions, so that the interaction with the host research group represents a full immersion and not a part-time activity.
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI: 1
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: 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):
June 01, 2012
December 04, 2012
June 03, 2013
December 03, 2013
Proposal Review Information Criteria
Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review considerations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Award Administration Information
Award Conditions: Standard NSF award conditions apply.
Reporting Requirements: Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.
I. Introduction
Quantum Information Science joins two outstanding scientific breakthroughs in the 20th century, quantum mechanics and information science. In January 2009 the United States National Science and Technology Council issued a report "A Federal Vision for Quantum Information Science," which recommended that "The United States ... create a scientific foundation for controlling, manipulating, and exploiting the behavior of quantum matter, and for identifying the physical, mathematical, and computational capabilities and limitations of quantum information processing systems in order to build a knowledge base for this 21st century technology." The report is available at http://www.nist.gov/pml/div684/upload/FederalVisionQIS.pdf.
In response to this recommendation the Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering (CISE) and the Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS) announce the CISE-MPS Interdisciplinary Faculty Program in Quantum Information Science for the promotion of research in the area of Quantum Information Science (QIS), addressing problems at the interface between the mathematical and physical sciences and computer and information sciences. The program will provide resources to allow QIS researchers and researchers from the CISE or MPS disciplines to actively engage in joint research efforts through long-term visits by faculty to a host institution.
II. Program Description
The goal of the CISE-MPS Interdisciplinary Faculty Program in Quantum Information Science is to bring together QIS researchers and researchers from the CISE or MPS disciplines to:
1) Address cross-disciplinary research questions in QIS that explore the power of quantum computation and its impact on computer science, advance knowledge on the fundamental limits of quantum computation and systems, and explore advances in physical realization of quantum systems, as well as
2) Increase the number of US researchers actively working in QIS and train the future generation of QIS scientists.
The awards provide support for faculty with demonstrated success in MPS or CISE research fields to actively engage in new interdisciplinary research with QIS scientists.
The PI (referred to as the scholar) must be in a tenured faculty position in his or her US home institution and must be prepared to spend a minimum of one contiguous semester with the host's group. Scholar and host must be from substantially different intellectual backgrounds, such that the collaborative activity represents a broadening of experience and a bone fide change in the scholar's research direction. Scholar and host must also be based in different institutions, so that the interaction with the host research group represents a full immersion and not a part-time activity. Requests from scholars wishing to visit well-established research groups and centers in Quantum Information Science are particularly welcome.
Upon successful completion of the project, the NSF will entertain a request for supplemental funding up to $50,000 per award, not to exceed 20% of the value of the original award, to allow the scholar to support a graduate student upon returning to the home institution and initiating research in QIS or continuing a collaboration with the host institution.
Awardees (scholar and at least one representative from the host institution) are expected to attend a PI meeting.
While the primary intent of the program is to foster connections between scientists within the US, proposals from scholars to visit institutions with outstanding QIS activities abroad will also be considered. In such cases the application should include as part of the Project Description what the host institution will provide and a plan of how the activity will foster the development of QIS research and education within the US.
III. Award Information
Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant
Estimated Number of Awards: 12 to 16 NSF anticipates making three to four awards for each deadline.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $4,000,000, subject to the availability of funds
Awards are limited in size to a maximum of $250,000
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:
The scholar must be in a tenured faculty position at the associate or full professor level in his or her US home institution and must be prepared to spend a minimum of one contiguous semester with the host's group. Scholar and host must be from substantially different environments, such that the collaborative activity represents a broadening of experience and a bone fide change in the research direction. Scholar and host must also be from different institutions, so that the interaction with the host research group represents a full immersion and not a part-time activity.
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI: 1
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.
Collaborative proposals with the lead proposal submitted by the scholar's home institution will be the preferred method of applying to the program for two institutions located in the US. The scholar's institution requests salary and travel support for the scholar and the host's institution requests materials, supplies, and other allowable expenses for the host. Supplemental awards to the host institution submitted in conjunction with the proposal will be considered on a case by case basis. In the case of a request to visit a foreign institution, only a proposal from the scholar's home institution is required, with a subcontract budget to the host institution.
The project description for the proposal should not be more than ten pages in length and should include the following:
1) A discussion of the research project on which the two investigators will collaborate.
2) A clear statement of how the collaboration will address research questions in QIS in a cross-disciplinary approach and explore the power of quantum computation and its impact on computing, the fundamental limits of quantum systems, and advances in physical realization of quantum systems.
3) A statement of prior accomplishments in the fields relevant to the project for both scholar and host.
4) A discussion of the impact of the collaboration on the research directions and educational and outreach activities of both parties.
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. You can decide where to include this section within the Project Description.
A letter of invitation from the host, as well as a statement of commitment on the part of the host to make the necessary facilities available for the project, should be included in the Supplementary Documents section.
Biographical information from both the scholar and the host should be included within the Biographical Sketch section.
B. Budgetary Information
Cost Sharing: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited
Budget Preparation Instructions:
Awards are limited in size to a maximum of $250,000. Allowable costs include:
- up to 50% of the academic year salary for the scholar relocating for one academic year. In addition, two months of summer salary may be requested if the scholar remains over the summer;
- up to 25% of the academic year salary for the scholar relocating for one academic semester or a minimum of four contiguous months. In addition, two months of summer salary may be requested if the scholar remains over the summer;
- travel expenses for the scholar, including conferences and related meetings, to include the PI meeting;
- S&E for expenses at host institution up to $5,000;
- materials and supplies essential to the implementation of the project.
C. Due Dates
- Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
June 01, 2012
December 04, 2012
June 03, 2013
December 03, 2013
Proposals are due on the first due date and then every six months thereafter for two years.
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: 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.
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: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/fastlane.jsp.
- For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:
Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources webpage: http://www07.grants.gov/applicants/app_help_reso.jsp. In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide provides additional technical guidance regarding preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: 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: 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:
- 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.
Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria
Proposals will be evaluated by interdisciplinary experts in both the mathematical and physical sciences and computer science who will provide the needed interdisciplinary expertise. Awards will be made based on the potential of the proposed work for advancing the connection between the two disciplines in Quantum Information Science, for addressing the need for the development of human capital in Quantum Information Science, as well as on the scientific and educational merit of the activity.
B. Review and Selection Process
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by ad hoc and/or panel review.
Proposals will be reviewed by either ad hoc review or a combination of ad hoc and panel review, depending on the number of proposals received.
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 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.
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:
-
C. Denise Caldwell, MPS, MPS/PHY, telephone: (703) 292-7371, email: dcaldwel@nsf.gov
-
Dmitry Maslov, CISE, CISE/CCF, telephone: (703) 292-8910, email: dmaslov@nsf.gov
-
Almadena Y. Chtchelkanova, CISE, CISE/CCF, telephone: (703) 292-8910, email: achtchel@nsf.gov
-
John H. Cozzens, CISE, CISE/CCF, telephone: (703) 292-8910, email: jcozzens@nsf.gov
-
Evelyn Goldfield, MPS, MPS/CHE, telephone: (703) 292-2173, email: egoldfie@nsf.gov
-
Daryl W. Hess, MPS, MPS/DMR, telephone: (703) 292-4942, email: dhess@nsf.gov
-
Edward Taylor, MPS, MPS/DMS, telephone: (703) 292-4872, email: etaylor@nsf.gov
-
Ann Orel, MPS, MPS/PHY, telephone: (703) 292-2163, email: aorel@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 https://www.nsf.gov/mynsf/.
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.
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 https://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
