Archived funding opportunity

This document has been archived. The latest version is NSF 23-581.

NSF 18-560: Cultural Anthropology Program Senior Research Awards (CA-SR)

Program Solicitation

Document Information

Document History

Program Solicitation NSF 18-560

NSF Logo

National Science Foundation

Directorate for Social, Behavioral & Economic Sciences
     Division of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences

Full Proposal Target Date(s):

     August 15, 2018

     August 15, Annually Thereafter

     January 15, 2019

     January 15, Annually Thereafter

Important Information And Revision Notes

This solicitation provides instructions for preparation of all proposals submitted to the Cultural Anthropology Program other than proposals for Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grants (DDRIG). Researchers submitting DDRIG proposals should consult the CA-DDRIG (NSF 15-556) solicitation. This solicitation describes multiple types of proposals.

The rationale for moving from a program description to a program solicitation is to more comprehensively communicate to the cultural anthropology research community the expectations of the NSF Cultural Anthropology Program for the various types of proposals that are to be reviewed by the Program.

A note to researchers new to NSF

Unaffiliated individuals in the US and US citizens rarely receive direct funding support from NSF. Recipients of Federal funds must be able to demonstrate their ability to fully comply with the requirements specified in 2 CFR § 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. As such, unaffiliated individuals are strongly encouraged to affiliate with an organization that is able to meet the requirements specified in 2 CFR § 200. (From Chapter I.E.5 in the NSF PAPPG.) Academic researchers without affiliations must contact the cognizant NSF Program Officer prior to preparing and submitting a proposal to NSF.

All academic researchers, except those without any organizational affiliation, must begin the submission process by consulting with their campus research office. The research office will help you to register and gain access to NSF's on-line submission system. You, as Principal Investigator, will upload the content of the proposal sections but your institution does the actual submission. The submitting institution must be a United States-based institution (although affiliated PIs do not have to be U.S. citizens).

Important Information

Innovating and migrating proposal preparation and submission capabilities from FastLane to is part of the ongoing NSF information technology modernization efforts, as described in Important Notice No. 147. In support of these efforts, proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation must be prepared and submitted via or via and may not be prepared or submitted via FastLane.

Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that is in effect for the relevant due date to which the proposal is being submitted. The NSF PAPPG is regularly revised and it is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the proposal meets the requirements specified in this solicitation and the applicable version of the PAPPG. Submitting a proposal prior to a specified deadline does not negate this requirement.

Summary Of Program Requirements

General Information

Program Title:

Cultural Anthropology Program Senior Research Awards (CA-SR)

Synopsis of Program:

The primary objective of the Cultural Anthropology Program is to support fundamental, systematic anthropological research and training to increase understanding of the causes, consequences, and complexities of human social and cultural variability. The Cultural Anthropology Program welcomes proposals from researchers in all sub-fields of cultural anthropology and research at any temporal and spatial scale. Methodologies and approaches employed may include ethnographic field research, surveys, remote sensing, the collection of bio-markers, experimental research inside or outside of laboratory settings, archival research, the analysis of materials collections and extant data bases, mathematical and computational modeling, and other research tools as appropriate for the research proposed. The overarching research goals should be to produce empirically grounded findings that will be generalizable beyond particular case studies and contribute to building a more robust anthropological science of human society and culture.

The National Science Foundation's mandate is to support basic scientific research. "Basic research" in cultural anthropology means theory-generating and theory-testing research that creates new knowledge about human culture and society. Therefore, the Cultural Anthropology Program cannot support research that takes as its primary objective improved clinical practice, applied policy, or other immediate application. While application may be a desirable component of the proposal's Broader Impacts, a proposal that only proposes to use anthropological methods and approaches to find solutions to social, medical, or other problems and does not specifically propose to make a theory-testing and/or theory-expanding contribution to anthropological science, will be returned without review.

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.

  • Jeffrey Mantz, Program Director, W13148, telephone: (703) 292-7783, email:
  • Siobhan M. Mattison, Program Director, W13178, telephone: (703) 292-2967, email:
  • Jeremy Koster, Program Director, telephone: (703) 292-8740, email:
  • Brittiney Cleveland, Program Specialist, telephone: (703)292-4634, email:

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

  • 47.075 --- Social Behavioral and Economic Sciences

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant

Estimated Number of Awards: 30 to 40

Anticipated number of awards annually is 30-40.

Anticipated Funding Amount: $4,000,000

Anticipated Funding Amount is approximately $4,000,000, for all new and continuing awards combined, not including DDRIG awards, pending availability of funds.

Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

The categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG), Chapter I.E. Unaffiliated individuals are not eligible to submit proposals in response to this solicitation.

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:

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 Target Date(s):

         August 15, 2018

         August 15, Annually Thereafter

         January 15, 2019

         January 15, Annually Thereafter

Proposal Review Information Criteria

Merit Review Criteria:

National Science Board approved criteria apply.

Award Administration Information

Award Conditions:

Standard NSF award conditions apply.

Reporting Requirements:

Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.

I. Introduction

The Cultural Anthropology Program supports empirically grounded research that will improve understanding of the general principles and processes that underlie human social and cultural diversity. To that end, research can take place at any scale from the household to the global. While we cannot support research whose only goal is improved policy, clinical practice, or other immediate application, we recognize that many of the problems that plague the nation and the world today are either anthropogenic in origin or are exacerbated by anthropogenic activities. Because anthropologists approach the human species holistically, they are uniquely positioned to contribute to understanding and therefore build the knowledge base to help ameliorate these problems. Consequently, the Cultural Anthropology Program encourages basic, theory-testing, and generalizable research that also addresses pathways from theory to policy.

Current types of proposals of the NSF Cultural Anthropology Program include research that increases our understanding of all aspects of human social and cultural life, including but not limited to the following:

  • contemporary urbanization and urban life;
  • the interaction between critical natural processes such as land cover change, climate patterns, and socio-cultural systems and behavior;
  • resilience and robustness of socio-cultural and socio-ecological systems under stress, including natural and anthropogenic disasters;
  • variability in human sociality, including structures and processes of differentiation, inequality, cooperation, regulation, and conflict;
  • human mobility and migration;
  • variability and change in systems of kinship, concepts of relatedness, and family norms;
  • culturally grounded and empirically driven theories and models of health and disease transmission at multiple scales;
  • material and consumer cultures, including changing forms of communication and connectivity, and human-technology interfaces;
  • language and culture, sociolinguistics, cognition, and theories of meaning-making and belief;
  • mathematical and computational models for socio-cultural research including social network analysis, agent-based models, hierarchical models, and machine learning;
  • convergent research that integrates knowledge and techniques from across multiple scientific fields;
  • activities that support research skills enhancement, such as training in research methodologies and analytical techniques at the pre- and post-PhD levels; and activities, such as research planning conferences and the development of data management infrastructures, that enhance and encourage collaboration and data sharing among anthropologists and between anthropologists and other scientists, including supporting the improved maintenance of the anthropological record.

To further these priorities, the NSF Cultural Anthropology Program supports multiple types of proposals. The following are addressed in this solicitation:

  • Senior Research Proposals
  • Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) Program Proposals
  • Scholars Proposals
  • Research Coordination Networks (RCN) proposals
  • Conferences and research community development activities proposals
  • Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) and Research Experiences for Graduate Students (REG) Supplemental Funding Requests
  • EArly-concept Grants for Exploratory Research (EAGER) Proposals
  • Research Advanced By Interdisciplinary Science & Engineering (RAISE) Proposals
  • Rapid Response Research (RAPID) Proposals

When selecting "Type of Proposal" on the Cover Sheet, choose "Research" except for EAGER, RAISE or RAPID which have their own type of proposal designation.

This list does not exhaust the full range of types of proposals described in the PAPPG. Rather, these are the ones most commonly used in proposals submitted to the Cultural Anthropology Program. Investigators are welcome to discuss other possibilities with the cognizant NSF Program Officers. Researchers are always welcome to consult with the cognizant NSF Program Officers about which NSF mechanisms and programs, including programs other than Cultural Anthropology, might best serve their research needs.

II. Program Description

The goal of the Cultural Anthropology Program is to support significant, innovative, and empirical research on humans as culture-bearing, social beings wherever they may live. While the 21st century can be characterized by unprecedented interconnectedness among people and societies, the world today is still far from homogeneous. Research is needed, therefore, from multiple perspectives and at multiple levels of data collection and analysis to document, understand, and explain social and cultural diversities, commonalities, and patterns.

Proposals are welcome in all areas of cultural anthropology. Historically, anthropologists have focused on rich, empirical descriptions and analyses of specific societies and cultures. Increasingly, attention has turned to a range of global processes, such as economic and cultural globalization, new forms of labor migration, and adaptation to environmental change. We particularly encourage proposals that are both ethnographically grounded and attuned to larger significance, including paying heed, theoretically and methodologically, to the meso-scale interface between local and global. Mindful of anthropology's interdisciplinary nature, we welcome convergent research that integrates knowledge and techniques from across multiple scientific fields.



Most proposals will fall into this category. The "senior" designation includes all researchers who have a PhD or equivalent education and experience, sufficient to allow them to carry out independent basic research. A project can be proposed to be carried out by a single researcher or a research team comprising a Principal Investigator along with co-Principal Investigators, other Senior Personnel, Post-doctoral Researchers, and/or other personnel (including specialists from other disciplines and other countries) as needed for the conduct of the research. Projects can be proposed for periods of time up to 36 months.

Budget Guidelines for Senior Research Proposals

There is no award ceiling, but please be advised that a typical senior research award in the Cultural Anthropology Program is in the range of $80,000-$120,000 per year of the project, inclusive of indirect costs. Requests for up to 36 months may include salary, travel expenses (including lodging and per diem), research assistance, equipment, and other normal direct costs of research. Please consult the PAPPG for designations of allowable and unallowable costs.


The NSF Cultural Anthropology Program participates in the NSF-wide CAREER Program for junior faculty (untenured but tenure-track or equivalent). CAREER proposals have a maximum duration of five years and the proposed work should be of sufficient scope, originality, and significance as to justify that amount of time. In addition to research costs, proposers may include expenses for specialized training to enhance the research and their future professional trajectory. As explained in the CAREER solicitation, CAREER proposals must have an educational component; the Cultural Anthropology Program suggests that this component may be integrated with the research, either in the field or at the home institution.

Researchers who want to submit CAREER proposals should consult the CAREER-specific solicitation (NSF 17-537) for eligibility information, submission deadlines (which are different than other Cultural Anthropology proposals), and other CAREER Program requirements. After submission, each CAREER proposal is checked to determine that it is compliant with CAREER Program requirements. Compliant proposals are then reviewed along with other senior research proposals submitted to the Cultural Anthropology Program. Therefore, researchers who plan to submit CAREER proposals are advised to consult the specific requirements for CAREER proposals (NSF 17-537) as well as the guidance in this solicitation and the PAPPG.

Budget Guidelines for CAREER Proposals

Unlike senior research proposals, the minimum CAREER award in Cultural Anthropology is $400,000 and up to five-years (60 month) duration.


The Cultural Anthropology Scholars awards support specialized methodological training for post-PhD cultural anthropologists who have active research programs that would be enhanced by such training. The goal of the program is to improve anthropological research skills by affording researchers the opportunity to undertake training not normally available on their home campuses. Support may be requested to learn any methodological skill that will advance the research agenda, as justified in the proposal with reference to results from prior work. Previous awardees have received training in a wide range of methods drawn from such diverse fields as meteorology, ichthyology, hierarchical modeling, demography, and speech therapy.

Please note that these are training awards, not research awards. The proposal must include a detailed study plan that indicates sponsorship by a senior expert (who should not have been involved with the proposer's Ph.D.), with whom the proposer will study and/or who will supervise the planned program of study. A signed statement affirming sponsorship must be included in the proposal (as a Supplementary Document). Proposals should show how this additional expertise would improve the proposer's ability to do research by referring to specific ongoing research projects and publications. Requests for support of a general upgrading of quantitative or methodological skills, for coursework routinely available on university campuses, or for language training, will not be successful. Scholars proposals should be submitted in accordance with the PAPPG requirements.

Budget Guidelines for Scholars Proposals

Scholars Awards have a ceiling of $75,000 and a maximum duration of 36 months. They may include requests for summer salary, academic year release time, per diem, travel, equipment, supplies, and other training expenses, as well as applicable indirect costs.


The Cultural Anthropology Program supports the "general" track of the NSF-wide Research Coordination Networks (RCN) program. RCN awards are intended to advance research directions by supporting new, thematically focused collaborations of researchers to communicate and coordinate research, training, and educational activities across disciplinary, organizational, geographic, and international boundaries. RCN awards do not support primary research, existing research networks, ongoing collaborations, or collaborations at a single institution. Instead, they are intended to advance the creation of new collaborations, new fields, and new research directions.

Budget Guidelines for RCN Proposals

RCN proposals may request a maximum duration of 5 years and up to $500,000. They should be submitted directly to the Cultural Anthropology Program, but researchers should follow the guidelines described in the RCN Program Solicitation NSF 17-594 as well as the PAPPG.


The Cultural Anthropology Program supports thematic conferences designed to bring together active researchers and students to foster new research and new research standards in an area of current interest. We do not support gatherings whose purpose is primarily to convey the results of completed research. Conference proposals should generally be submitted a year in advance of the proposed event. We also encourage the inclusion of graduate students and members of groups underrepresented in anthropology as active conference participants. While conference proposals may be submitted at any time, we reserve the right to have them reviewed by review panels along with other senior research proposals submitted to the regular target dates. Please consult the "Conference" section of the PAPPG for further instructions, including a list of required elements and budget exclusions. Please follow those instructions while keeping in mind the Cultural Anthropology Program's specific interests and limitations.

Budget Guidelines for Conference Proposals

Cultural Anthropology Program conference support is typically in the range of $20,000 to $40,000, inclusive of indirect costs. We encourage seeking support from multiple agencies and organizations.


Over the years, the NSF Cultural Anthropology Program has supported numerous research community development activities for graduate students and faculty. These have included field schools in the United States and abroad; summer training programs for both graduate students and faculty; software development; a program for mid-project research team meetings; and small awards for preparation of materials for archiving by retiring researchers. Researchers who intend to submit a Research Community Development Activity proposal should consult with a cognizant NSF Program Officer before submitting to ascertain the suitability of the envisioned activity. These proposals are reviewed along with other senior research proposals and should be submitted to one of the usual target dates. Proposers should follow the guidance in the PAPPG, adapting the Project Description as needed for the particulars of the project.

Budget Guidelines for Research Community Development Activities Proposals

The general guidance for senior research proposals applies. There is no award ceiling, but please be advised that a typical senior research award in the Cultural Anthropology Program is in the range of $80,000-$120,000 per year of the project, inclusive of indirect costs, for up to 36 months. The PAPPG provides guidance about allowable and unallowable costs.


For the Cultural Anthropology Program REU and REG Supplement Program, proposers are advised that the PI should be a senior (that is, post-PhD) anthropologist who holds existing NSF award(s) either from the Cultural Anthropology Program or from another NSF program. The student's research must be his or her own research project. These supplements are not intended to support clerical or research assistance to the PI. They also are not intended to support language training except in the context of the research project; they are not for dissertation research; and they are not intended as dissertation planning site visits in the absence of a specific REG research project. The purpose of the REG and REU supplements is to provide promising cultural anthropology students opportunities for independent research while also encouraging PIs to mentor students in collaborative activities. The expectation is that an REU student is planning to go to graduate school in cultural anthropology and that the REG student intends to continue graduate school through the PhD; requests for support of Masters students will be considered. Requests for REG and REU supplements should optimally be submitted by March 1, annually, but requests may also be accepted at other times of the year by contacting the cognizant NSF Program Officer in advance.

The supplemental funding request should include: a two to three-page description of the project to be undertaken, written by the student; a 1-2 page endorsement of the student by the PI mentor, identifying the grounds for the student's selection as well as the PI's plans for mentoring the student; a 2-page biographical sketch for the student; and a budget with budget justification. See NSF 16-044 for more details.

These requests are submitted as supplements to the PI's existing award. If the existing award is not with the Cultural Anthropology Program, please advise the Cultural Anthropology Program when the request is submitted so that the supplemental funding request proposal can be transferred.

Budget Guidelines for REG and REU Supplement Proposals

This supplemental funding provides up to $6000 for an REG anthropology student or $5000 for an REU anthropology student, inclusive of indirect costs, to support the cost of the student's independent research activity.


The Cultural Anthropology Program supports EAGER proposals for funding research on untested but potentially transformative research ideas and approaches. Researchers must have prior approval from a Cultural Anthropology Program Officer to submit an EAGER proposal. The EAGER proposal type should not be used for proposals that could be submitted to a regular competition, so the initial inquiry should explain carefully why the anticipated project fits the EAGER criteria. There are no deadlines, the Project Description is limited to no more than 8 pages, and only internal NSF review is required. Please see the full description of this mechanism in the PAPPG (Chapter II.E.2).

Budget Guidelines for EAGER Proposals

The Cultural Anthropology Program rarely supports EAGER budgets over $30,000, which is less than the maximum allowed by the PAPPG. The maximum duration is 24 months.


The Cultural Anthropology Program is willing to consider requests to submit a RAISE proposal. This type of proposal is for unusually bold, innovative, risky but potentially transformative, and unconventionally interdisciplinary research (that is, bringing together disciplines that do not normally collaborate) for which there is no other appropriate NSF program. Researchers must receive the written support from program officers in two distinct NSF programs (usually in different Directorates) before being allowed to submit a RAISE proposal. There are no deadlines and review is internal. Please refer to PAPPG (Chapter II.E.3) for more details. Researchers interested in this type of proposal must consult the cognizant NSF Program Officers in advance.

Budget Guidelines for RAISE Proposals

The maximum duration is 5 years and the maximum award is $1 million.


RAPID awards are to support urgent research. The urgency is that unanticipated research data would be lost if the researchers had to wait for the completion of a normal review cycle. This might be because of the unanticipated availability of access to rarely available specialized equipment, research sites, or specialized informants. RAPID support is often requested for quick-response research on natural or anthropogenic disasters and other unanticipated events. Unfortunately, anthropologists encounter disasters and urgent situations only too often. To be successful for RAPID support, investigators must convincingly argue that the particular situation to be investigated will produce data that are unlikely to be found in any other situation and that are essential for identified and important research questions. RAPID support is not intended for simple post-disaster appraisals and documentation. If the research is routine, failure to plan ahead is not sufficient rationale for RAPID support.

Researchers must contact a cognizant NSF Program Officer in advance of submitting RAPID proposals. In this initial email, proposers should briefly explain the data to be collected, why these data are scientifically important, an estimate of the needed budget, and a timeline for the research. RAPID proposals are limited to 5 pages and only internal NSF review is required so funding can be made available relatively quickly. More details can be found in the PAPPG (Chapter II.E.1).

Budget Guidelines for RAPID Proposals

Please note that the Cultural Anthropology Program rarely supports RAPID budgets over $30,000, which is less than the maximum allowed by the PAPPG. The maximum duration is 12 months.

III. Award Information

Estimated program budget, number of awards and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds.

IV. Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

The categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG), Chapter I.E. Unaffiliated individuals are not eligible to submit proposals in response to this solicitation.

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 or

  • Full Proposals submitted via Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG). The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: Paper copies of the PAPPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from The Prepare New Proposal setup will prompt you for the program solicitation number.
  • Full proposals submitted via Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via The complete text of the NSF Application Guide is available on the website and on the NSF website at: ( To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the 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 Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from

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 PAPPG Chapter II.E.3 provides additional information on collaborative proposals.

See PAPPG Chapter II.D.2 for guidance on the required sections of a full research proposal submitted to NSF. Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the PAPPG instructions.

Please note that proposers must follow the requirements of the PAPPG, except as modified by this solicitation. The advice here is meant to supplement the PAPPG.

1. Cover Sheet

  • The Project Title should be descriptive and emphasize the generalizable science that the research will address.
  • For the NSF organizational unit to consider the proposal, select BCS-Cultural Anthropology. You may select additional programs if you would like those programs to consider co-review of your proposal with Cultural Anthropology. Note that a request for co-review should be made only when the PIs believe the proposed work makes a strong case for advancing theory and basic knowledge in multiple communities served by multiple programs and when the Project Description engages literature from those communities.
  • Mark human subjects as pending, approved, or exempted.

2. Project Description

  • Proposers may order their proposal as they wish. However, the Cultural Anthropology Program requires that the Project Description include the following (with appropriate adaptations for different kinds of projects).
    • A section labeled Intellectual Merit, that describes the project's potential contribution to advancing anthropological theory beyond the site and context of the project itself, a focused review of what is thought to be known already, and a clear statement of what the project's contribution will be.
    • A section labeled Broader Impacts of the Proposed Work, that discusses the broader impacts of the proposed activities and the pathways by which those broader impacts will be realized. Broader impacts are significant effects beyond basic science. They might include communicating results to policy makers; contributing to the knowledge base to solve an important social problem; engaging students of any age in the research enterprise; doing outreach to the public; producing data bases that contribute to scientific infrastructure; strengthening international research collaborations; broadening the scientific participation of underrepresented communities; and/or strengthening research capacity in developing nations.

In addition, we recommend that there be:

  • a clear, early statement of the research problem including its specific aims, expectations, research questions and/or hypotheses;
  • a discussion of any preliminary studies already undertaken, the results of those studies, and how they inform the project;
  • a research design that includes a discussion of the research site(s) and source(s) of data, the methods by which data will be collected, the reasons those methods are the most appropriate, and how the data will be analyzed to address the research questions, aims, and/or hypotheses;
  • an account of the project's feasibility, such as the researcher's access to research sites, language competence and other skills, and availability of time needed to complete the research; and a research schedule or timeline.

RAISE, EAGER, RAPID, Conference, training, and other special proposals should be tailored to the specific requirements of those types of proposals.

If the proposal is a resubmission, the first paragraph of the Project Description must summarize how the proposal has responded to previous reviewer concerns.

The Project Description must contain, as a labeled separate section within the narrative, a brief account of the "Results from Prior NSF Support" for all PIs and co-PIs who have received NSF support (not including DDRIG support for either themselves or their student) with an end date in the past 5 years. If the researcher has received more than one award, only one award needs to be reported on. See the PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.d(iii) for more details.

3. References Cited

This section should include only references cited in the Project Description. The proposer may use any standard and consistent citation system. There are no page limits for the References Cited section. See PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.D(iii).

4. Biographical Sketches

The Biographical Sketches must be submitted for the PI and all co-PIs. Each may not exceed 2 pages. Also, if there are other personnel whose performance is essential to the success of the research, you may upload additional Biographical Sketches as supplementary documents. The Biographical Sketches must be formatted as described in the PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.f.

5. Budget and Budget Justification

Project budgets should be developed at scales appropriate for the work to be conducted. A typical Senior Research Award rarely exceeds $120,000 per year of the project including indirect costs; many are for much less. Maximum project duration is 36 months, except for CAREER, RCN, and RAISE proposals, which may request up to 60 months, and EAGER and RAPID awards, which are for no more than 24 months and 12 months, respectively.

The proposer may concurrently submit proposals to other funding organizations external to NSF. Please indicate this in the "Current and Pending Support" section of the NSF proposal, so that NSF may coordinate funding with the other organizations as needed. The "Current and Pending Support" section of the NSF proposal should also list the current proposal being submitted. Proposers may submit only one proposal at a time to NSF for a single project. Proposers may submit more than one proposal at a time if they are for different projects, to Cultural Anthropology or to other NSF programs. PIs may request that a single proposal be co-reviewed with one or more other NSF Programs; however, actual co-review will be at the discretion of the cognizant NSF Program Officers.

The PAPPG provides detailed guidance for budgets. Please follow that guidance carefully. Here we note only that the Cultural Anthropology Program does not have fixed expectations. The requests should be tailored to the needs of the project and the researchers. This means that if extended fieldwork time away from the institution and the researcher's normal place of residence is needed, salary support beyond the NSF norm of two months may be requested. However, many researchers limit salary requests if they also request support for lodging, meals, and incidental expenses during the period of field research, unless both are essential for the researcher to carry out the project. The Cultural Anthropology Program's ultimate concern is, "How much excellent research are we going to get for how much money?" The PAPPG allows PIs to include up to three pages of budget justification. These pages are to be used to provide details and explanation for the amounts requested.

6. Facilities, Equipment & Other Resources

You must submit this section of the proposal. PIs who already have partial funding for their project should list it here, not on the budget (where it can be construed as voluntary committed cost-sharing, which is prohibited). You should also list other resources, such as a computer, university library, and lab space, that will support the conduct of the research. Many universities have standard text for this section.

7. Supplementary Documentation

Proposers should include (as applicable or where required):

  • Up to two pages of technical illustrations, maps, or sample survey questions may be included as a Supplementary Document.
  • Biographical sketches of key personnel who are not listed on the budget.
  • Letters of Collaboration. Supplementary Documents may include letters of collaboration from individuals or organizations that are integral parts of the proposed project but are not listed as PI, co-PI, or other senior personnel on the main proposal or any subaward. Such involvement may include subsidiary involvement in some aspect of the project, cooperation on outreach efforts, or documentation of permission to access materials or data. Letters of collaboration are not letters of reference or endorsement; they should focus solely on affirming that the individual or organization is willing to collaborate on the project as specified in the project description. Each letter of collaboration must be signed by the designated collaborator.

We recommend use of the template provided here:

To: NSF _________(Program Title)___________ Program
From: ____________________________________
(Printed name of the individual collaborator or name of the organization and name and position of the official submitting this memo)

By signing below (or transmitting electronically), I acknowledge that I am listed as a collaborator on this proposal, entitled "_____(proposal title)_______," with _______(PI name)______ as the Principal Investigator. I agree to undertake the tasks assigned to me or my organization, as described in the project description of the proposal, and I commit to provide or make available the resources specified therein.

Signed: _______________________
Organization: ________________________________
Date: _________________________

  • A Data Management Plan (DMP) of no more than two pages is required for all research proposals; proposals that do not include a DMP will not be able to be submitted. The DMP should address the following questions:
    • What kinds of data, software, and other materials will your research produce?
    • How will you manage them (e.g., standards for metadata, format organization, etc.)?
    • How and when will you give other researchers access to your data, while preserving confidentiality, security, intellectual property and other rights and requirements?
    • How and when will you archive data and preserve access in the short and the long term?

The NSF Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (SBE) Directorate has additional guidance available on the SBE website (

PIs are also encouraged to consult the American Anthropological Association's (AAA) Statement on Professional Ethics, Sections 5, "Make Your Results Accessible," and 6, "Protect and Preserve Your Records" (, as well as the AAA's data management course modules ( Besides describing the AAA's practice standards, there are links to other resources. PIs who plan to use a standard archive, such as the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) archive housed at the University of Michigan, Harvard University's Dataverse, or the Qualitative Data Repository (QDR) at Cornell University, are strongly advised to contact the archive before undertaking the research to ascertain any specific requirements for permissions or metadata, which would require advance planning. The AAA maintains a wiki site where researchers can identify where their data are archived or deposited ( We recommend use of this facility to enhance data sharing.

  • A Post-doc Mentoring Plan of no more than one page is required to be uploaded if the proposal Budget contains a request to support a postdoctoral researcher. Mentoring activities will be evaluated under the Broader Impacts review criterion. Such activities might include, but are not limited to, career counseling, grant writing, publication preparation, presentations, teaching, collaboration skills, and training in professional ethics and responsibilities. See the PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.j for more details.

8. Single copy (NSF-use only) documents

  • List of Suggested Reviewers or Reviewers not to include. This document is optional but the Cultural Anthropology Program strongly recommends that PIs do suggest expert reviewers. Please include at least minimal contact information, such as institution and email address. If you list reviewers not to include, you do not need to explain why.
  • Collaborators and Other Affiliations information. Proposers should follow the guidance specified in Chapter II.C.1.e of the NSF PAPPG. Users: The COA information must be provided through use of the COA template and uploaded as a PDF attachment.

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing:

Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

C. Due Dates

  • Full Proposal Target Date(s):

         August 15, 2018

         August 15, Annually Thereafter

         January 15, 2019

         January 15, Annually Thereafter

D. Requirements

For Proposals Submitted Via

To prepare and submit a proposal via, see detailed technical instructions available at: For user support, call the Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail The Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the 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

Before using 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 website. Comprehensive information about using is available on the Applicant Resources webpage: In addition, the NSF Application Guide (see link in Section V.A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via For user support, contact the Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: The Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of 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 and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to The completed application will be transferred to for further processing.

Proposers that submitted via may use to verify the status of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted via, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, 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 PAPPG Exhibit III-1.

A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at:

Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Leading the World in Discovery and Innovation, STEM Talent Development and the Delivery of Benefits from Research - NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2022 - 2026. 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 strategic objectives 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 must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U.S. technology-based economy. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation's most creative scientists and engineers. NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.

NSF's mission calls for the broadening of 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. (PAPPG Chapter II.D.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 PAPPG Chapter II.D.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 other underrepresented groups in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

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

B. Review and Selection Process

Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review, or Internal NSF Review.

Internal Review is required for EAGER, RAPID, and RAISE proposals.

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 generally be completed and submitted by each reviewer and/or panel. 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 or the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Support 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 an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer. 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 Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from

More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at

Administrative and National Policy Requirements

Build America, Buy America

As expressed in Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All of America's Workers (86 FR 7475), it is the policy of the executive branch to use terms and conditions of Federal financial assistance awards to maximize, consistent with law, the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States.

Consistent with the requirements of the Build America, Buy America Act (Pub. L. 117-58, Division G, Title IX, Subtitle A, November 15, 2021), no funding made available through this funding opportunity may be obligated for an award unless all iron, steel, manufactured products, and construction materials used in the project are produced in the United States. For additional information, visit NSF's Build America, Buy America webpage.

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 no later than 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). No later than 120 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, 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 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 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 Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at

VIII. Agency Contacts

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

General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

  • Jeffrey Mantz, Program Director, W13148, telephone: (703) 292-7783, email:
  • Siobhan M. Mattison, Program Director, W13178, telephone: (703) 292-2967, email:
  • Jeremy Koster, Program Director, telephone: (703) 292-8740, email:
  • Brittiney Cleveland, Program Specialist, telephone: (703)292-4634, email:

For questions related to the use of NSF systems contact:

  • NSF Help Desk: 1-800-673-6188
  • Help Desk e-mail:

For questions relating to contact:

  • Contact Center: If the Authorized Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not received a confirmation message from within 48 hours of submission of application, please contact via telephone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail:

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. provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this mechanism. Further information on may be obtained at

About The National Science Foundation

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

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

NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide Chapter II.F.7 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

  • Location:

2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314

  • For General Information
    (NSF Information Center):

(703) 292-5111

  • TDD (for the hearing-impaired):

(703) 292-5090

  • To Order Publications or Forms:

Send an e-mail to:

or telephone:

(703) 292-8134

  • To Locate NSF Employees:

(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 System of Record Notices, NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records." 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
Policy Office, Division of Institution and Award Support
Office of Budget, Finance, and Award Management
National Science Foundation
Alexandria, VA 22314