NSF 06-607: Joint DMS/NIGMS Initiative to Support Research in the Area of Mathematical Biology (DMS/NIGMS)
Program Solicitation
Document Information
Document History
- Posted: September 15, 2006
- Replaces: NSF 04-572
- Replaced by: NSF 10-579
Program Solicitation
NSF 06-607
Replaces Document(s):
NSF 04-572
 |
National Science Foundation | |
 |  |
|
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
December 15, 2006
October 01, 2007
October 01, 2008
October 01, 2009
Revision Notes
Please be advised that the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) includes revised guidelines to implement the mentoring provisions of the America COMPETES Act (ACA) (Pub. L. No. 110-69, Aug. 9, 2007.) As specified in the ACA, each proposal that requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers must include a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals. Proposals that do not comply with this requirement will be returned without review (see the PAPP Guide Part I: Grant Proposal Guide Chapter II for further information about the implementation of this new requirement).
As announced on May 21, 2009, proposers must prepare and submit proposals to the National Science Foundation (NSF) using the NSF FastLane system at http://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/. This approach is being taken to support efficient Grants.gov operations during this busy workload period and in response to OMB direction guidance issued March 9, 2009. NSF will continue to post information about available funding opportunities to Grants.gov FIND and will continue to collaborate with institutions who have invested in system-to-system submission functionality as their preferred proposal submission method. NSF remains committed to the long-standing goal of streamlined grants processing and plans to provide a web services interface for those institutions that want to use their existing grants management systems to directly submit proposals to NSF.
Summary Of Program Requirements
General Information
Program Title:
Joint DMS/NIGMS Initiative to Support Research in the Area of Mathematical Biology (DMS/NIGMS)
Synopsis of Program:
The Division of Mathematical Sciences in the Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences at the National Institutes of Health plan to support research in mathematics and statistics related to mathematical biology research. Both agencies recognize the need and urgency for additional research at the boundary between the mathematical sciences and the life sciences. This competition is designed to encourage new collaborations at this interface, as well as to support existing ones.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
-
Mary Ann Horn, Program Director, NSF/DMS, telephone: (703) 292-4879, email: mhorn@nsf.gov
-
David Stoffer, telephone: (703) 292-4862, email: dstoffer@nsf.gov
-
Tanya Vassilevska, Program Director, NSF/DMS, telephone: (703) 292-5043, email: tvassile@nsf.gov
-
Grace Yang, telephone: (703) 292-8584, email: gyang@nsf.gov
-
John Whitmarsh, Program Director, NIH/NIGMS, telephone: (301) 451-6446, email: whitmarj@nigms.nih.gov
-
James Anderson, Program Director, NIH/NIGMS, telephone: (301) 594-0943, email: andersoj@nigms.nih.gov
-
Karin Remington, Director, NIH/NIGMS/CBCB, telephone: (301) 451-6446, email: remingka@nigms.nih.gov
-
Janna Wehrle, Program Director, NIH/NIGMS, telephone: (301) 594-0828, email: wehrlj@nigms.nih.gov
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
- 47.049 --- Mathematical and Physical Sciences
- 93.859 --- National Institute of General Medical Sciences
Award Information
Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant or Cooperative Agreement
Estimated Number of Awards: 15 to 20 awards from this competition, which may be made by either NSF or NIGMS, at the option of the agencies, not the grantee.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $5,000,000 per year ($2 million from NSF, $3 million from NIGMS), subject to availability of funds. Award sizes are expected to range from $100,000 to $400,000 per year with durations of 3-5 years.
Eligibility Information
- The categories of proposers identified in the Grant Proposal Guide are eligible to submit proposals under this program solicitation. This includes scientists at Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs). Scientists at foreign organizations may also be supported, but proposals must be submitted by a US organization.
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:
None Specified
Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
- Letters of Intent: Not Applicable
- Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not Applicable
- Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: This solicitation contains information that deviates from the standard NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide, Part I: Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) proposal preparation guidelines. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
B. Budgetary Information
- Cost Sharing Requirements: Cost Sharing is not required under this solicitation.
- 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):
December 15, 2006
October 01, 2007
October 01, 2008
October 01, 2009
Proposal Review Information Criteria
Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review considerations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Award Administration Information
Award Conditions: Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Reporting Requirements: Additional reporting requirements apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
I. Introduction
This competition is designed to support research on mathematical problems related to biological problems in areas supported by NSF/DMS and NIH/NIGMS. A direct relationship between a biological application and the mathematics is expected. Research teams that include scientists from both the life sciences community and the mathematical sciences community are encouraged. Both new and existing collaborations will be supported. Proposals from individual investigators will need to make the case that the individual has expertise in both areas.
Successful proposals will identify innovative mathematics or statistics needed to solve an important biological problem. Research that would apply standard mathematics or statistics to solve biological problems is not appropriate for this competition and should be submitted directly to NIH. Similarly, proposals with research in mathematics or statistics that is not tied to a specific biological problem should be submitted to the appropriate DMS program at NSF. Proposals designed to create new software tools based on existing models and methods will not be accepted in this competition.
II. Program Description
The Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS) within the Directorate of Mathematical and Physical Sciences (MPS) and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) anticipate supporting research in the mathematical sciences with biological applications. Appropriate application areas are those currently supported by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (see http://www.nigms.nih.gov/Research/).
Proposals that are not appropriate for funding by NIGMS or NSF will be returned without review. Investigators are strongly encouraged to talk with an NIGMS or NSF contact person before submitting a proposal. Other questions should be addressed to the appropriate person in the list of contacts.
Examples of areas of research that are appropriate under this competition include the following:
- Evolutionary theory and practice arising from genomic advances;
- Statistical and other approaches to the discovery of genes contributing to complex behavior, and their environmental interactions;
- Explanatory and predictive models of the cellular state;
- Growth, motility, cell division, membrane trafficking, and other cellular behavior;
- Metabolic circuitry and dynamics;
- Population dynamics;
- Signal transduction;
- Development of new algorithms for phylogenetic analysis;
- Design principles and dynamics of pattern formation in development and differentiation;
- New approaches to the prediction of molecular structure;
- Improved algorithms for structure determination by x-ray crystallography, NMR and electron microscopy;
- Simulations of the human systemic responses to burn, trauma and other injury;
- New approaches to understanding system-wide effects of pharmacological agents and anesthetics, and their genetic and environmental modifiers.
These areas of research are examples only. They are not meant to be inclusive. Mathematical scientists, both pure and applied, and others capable of developing the mathematical and statistical tools envisioned are encouraged to apply. The work that is supported under this initiative must impact biology and advance mathematics or statistics. Thus, collaborations between the mathematical scientists and appropriate biological scientists are expected. Other mechanisms to ensure impact are also possible and should be specified in the proposal.
III. Award Information
It is estimated that approximately $5 million ($2 million from NSF, $3 million from NIGMS) will be available for each year of this competition. Award sizes are expected to range from $100,000 to $400,000 per year (total costs) with durations of 3-5 years. Estimated program budget, number of awards and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds.
Upon conclusion of the review process, meritorious proposals may be recommended for funding by either NIGMS or NSF, at the option of the agencies, not the proposer. Subsequent grant administration procedures will be in accordance with the individual policies of the awarding agency.
IV. Eligibility Information
- The categories of proposers identified in the Grant Proposal Guide are eligible to submit proposals under this program solicitation. This includes scientists at Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs). Scientists at foreign organizations may also be supported, but proposals must be submitted by a US organization.
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:
None Specified
Additional Eligibility Info:
V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Instructions
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
Full Proposal Instructions: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the guidelines specified 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-PUBS (7827) or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov.
Th NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) includes revised guidelines to implement the mentoring provisions of the America COMPETES Act (ACA) (Pub. L. No. 110-69, Aug. 9, 2007.) As specified in the ACA, each proposal that requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers must includea description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals. Examples of mentoring activities include, but are not limited to: career counseling; training in preparation of grant proposals, publications and presentations; guidance on ways to improve teaching and mentoring skills; guidance on how to effectively collaborate with researchers from diverse backgrounds and disciplinary areas; and training in responsible professional practices. The proposed mentoring activities will be evaluated as part of the merit review process under the Foundation's broader impacts merit review criterion. Proposals that do not comply with this requirement will be returned without review (see the PAPP Guide Part I: Grant Proposal Guide Chapter II for further information about the implementation of this new requirement).
The following instructions deviate from guidelines in the GPG.
Biographical Sketches are limited to THREE PAGES each (in contrast to the two page limit in the GPG) and are required for all senior personnel. In addition to the information required by the GPG, each Biographical Sketch MUST INCLUDE a paragraph describing that person's role in the project. In particular, the additional page permitted in each biographical sketch may be used to include information addressing the following NIH requirement:
- Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan: For applications designating multiple PD/PIs, a rationale for choosing a multiple PD/PI approach should be described. This description may be incorporated into the biosketches, where the role of each investigator must be discussed. The governance and organizational structure of the leadership team and the research project should be described, including communication plans, process for making decisions on scientific direction, and procedures for resolving conflicts. The roles and administrative, technical, and scientific responsibilities for the project or program should be delineated for the PD/PIs and other collaborators. If budget allocation is planned, the distribution of resources to specific components of the project or the individual PD/PIs must be delineated in the Leadership Plan. In the event of an award, the requested allocation may be reflected in a footnote on the Notice of Grant Award (NOGA).
Both NSF and NIH have rules regarding the use of human subjects and/or vertebrate animals in research. Proposals MUST INCLUDE the information required by both agencies. See the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (Proposal Preparation, Special Guidelines) AND the NIH PHS Form 398 for additional information. This information is considered in the review of the proposals.
Proposers are reminded to identify the program solicitation number (NSF 06-607) 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.
B. Budgetary Information
Cost Sharing: Cost sharing is not required under this solicitation.
C. Due Dates
- Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
December 15, 2006
October 01, 2007
October 01, 2008
October 01, 2009
D. FastLane Requirements
Proposers are required to prepare and submit all proposals for this program solicitation through use of the NSF FastLane system. Detailed instructions regarding the technical aspects of proposal preparation and submission via FastLane are available at: http://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.
VI. NSF Proposal Processing And Review Procedures
Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program where they will be reviewed if they meet NSF proposal preparation requirements. 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 who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with the 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.
A. NSF Merit Review Criteria
All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board (NSB)-approved merit review criteria: intellectual merit and the broader impacts of the proposed effort. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.
The two NSB-approved merit review criteria are listed below. The criteria include considerations that help define them. These considerations are suggestions and not all will apply to any given proposal. While proposers must address both merit review criteria, reviewers will be asked to address only those considerations that are relevant to the proposal being considered and for which the reviewer is qualified to make judgements.
What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?
How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields? How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of the prior work.) To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts? How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity? Is there sufficient access to resources?
What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?
How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning? How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society?
Examples illustrating activities likely to demonstrate broader impacts are available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf.
Mentoring activities provided to postdoctoral researchers supported on the project, as described in a one-page supplementary document, will be evaluated under the Broader Impacts criterion.
NSF staff also will give careful consideration to the following in making funding decisions:
Integration of Research and Education
One of the principal strategies in support of NSF's goals is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions provide abundant opportunities where individuals may concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators, and students and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through the diversity of learning perspectives.
Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities
Broadening opportunities and enabling the participation of all citizens -- women and men, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities -- is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.
Additional Review Criteria:
Both NIH and NSF review criteria will be used in evaluating proposals. See the next section on the Review and Selection Process for further details related to current NIH review criteria.
B. Review and Selection Process
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review, or Internal NSF Review.
The review will be conducted jointly by NSF and NIH. Awards may be made by either NSF or NIH, at the option of the agencies, not the grantee.
Proposals submitted to this competition will be evaluated based on their value in advancing mathematical or statistical theory or methodology, as well as their impact on important biological problems. Both NIH and NSF review criteria will be used. Main considerations that are used by NIH to assess the merit of applications and assign priority scores include the following:
- Significance: Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge or clinical practice be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?
- Approach: Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well integrated, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics?
- Innovation: Is the project original and innovative? For example: Does the project challenge existing paradigms or clinical practice; address an innovative hypothesis or critical barrier to progress in the field? Does the project develop or employ novel concepts, approaches, methodologies, tools, or technologies for this area?
- Investigators: Are the investigators appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal investigator and other researchers? Does the investigative team bring complementary and integrated expertise to the project (if applicable)?
- Environment: Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Do the proposed studies benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, or subject populations, or employ useful collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support?
- Multiple PD/PI Leadership Plan: For applications designating multiple PD/PIs, a rationale for choosing a multiple PD/PI approach should be described. This description may be incorporated into the biosketches, where the role of each investigator must be discussed. The governance and organizational structure of the leadership team and the research project should be described, including communication plans, process for making decisions on scientific direction, and procedures for resolving conflicts. The roles and administrative, technical, and scientific responsibilities for the project or program should be delineated for the PD/PIs and other collaborators. If budget allocation is planned, the distribution of resources to specific components of the project or the individual PD/PIs must be delineated in the Leadership Plan. In the event of an award, the requested allocation may be reflected in a footnote on the Notice of Grant Award (NOGA).
Where relevant, applications will also be reviewed with respect to the following:
- The adequacy of the plans to include both genders, minorities and their subgroups, and children as appropriate to the scientific goals of the research. If the proposed research includes human subjects plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects should be included. (see http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_update.htm and http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/children/children.htm)
- The reasonableness of the proposed budget and duration in relation to the proposed research.
- The adequacy of the proposed protection for humans, animals, or the environment, to the extent they may be adversely affected by the project proposed in the application.
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.
Special Award Conditions:
Grants made by NSF will be subject to NSF's award conditions. Grants made by NIH will be subject to NIH's award conditions (see
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/awardconditions.htm).
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 before the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require more frequent project reports). Within 90 days after expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final project report.
Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for that PI. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.
PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through FastLane, for preparation and submission of annual and final project reports. Such reports provide information on activities and findings, project participants (individual and organizational) publications; and, other specific products and contributions. PIs will not be required to re-enter information previously provided, either with a proposal or in earlier updates using the electronic system. Submission of the report via FastLane constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete.
Grants made by NSF will be subject to NSF's reporting requirements. Grants made by NIH will be subject to NIH's reporting requirements.
VIII. Agency Contacts
General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:
-
Mary Ann Horn, Program Director, NSF/DMS, telephone: (703) 292-4879, email: mhorn@nsf.gov
-
David Stoffer, telephone: (703) 292-4862, email: dstoffer@nsf.gov
-
Tanya Vassilevska, Program Director, NSF/DMS, telephone: (703) 292-5043, email: tvassile@nsf.gov
-
Grace Yang, telephone: (703) 292-8584, email: gyang@nsf.gov
-
John Whitmarsh, Program Director, NIH/NIGMS, telephone: (301) 451-6446, email: whitmarj@nigms.nih.gov
-
James Anderson, Program Director, NIH/NIGMS, telephone: (301) 594-0943, email: andersoj@nigms.nih.gov
-
Karin Remington, Director, NIH/NIGMS/CBCB, telephone: (301) 451-6446, email: remingka@nigms.nih.gov
-
Janna Wehrle, Program Director, NIH/NIGMS, telephone: (301) 594-0828, email: wehrlj@nigms.nih.gov
For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:
- FastLane Help Desk, telephone: 1-800-673-6188; e-mail: fastlane@nsf.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, National Science Foundation Update is a free e-mail subscription service 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 Regional Grants Conferences. Subscribers are informed through e-mail when new publications are issued that match their identified interests. Users can subscribe to this service by clicking the "Get NSF Updates by Email" link on the NSF web site.
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 40,000 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 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
Division of Administrative Services
National Science Foundation
Arlington, VA 22230
