NSF 23-563: Historically Black Colleges and Universities Undergraduate Program (HBCU-UP)

Program Solicitation NSF 23-563

National Science Foundation Directorate for STEM Education      Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM

Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

     July 25, 2023

     Fourth Tuesday in July, Annually Thereafter

Research Initiation Awards

     September 12, 2023

     Second Tuesday in September, Annually Thereafter

Targeted Infusion Projects, Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects, Implementation Projects

Preliminary Proposal Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

     March 26, 2024

     Fourth Tuesday in March, Every Other Year Thereafter

Broadening Participation Research Centers

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

     October 03, 2023

     First Tuesday in October, Annually Thereafter

Research Initiation Awards

     November 09, 2023

     Second Thursday in November, Annually Thereafter

Targeted Infusion Projects, Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects, Implementation Projects

     November 26, 2024

     Fourth Tuesday in November, Every Other Year Thereafter

Broadening Participation Research Center

Important Information And Revision Notes

To better serve the needs of the HBCU community the following changes were made.

• Implementation and ACE Implementation tracks have been redesigned and incorporated into one track called Implementation Projects.
• For the Research Initiation Awards the funding limit has been increased to $450,000 and the percentage limit for equipment has been increased to 30% of the total budget.
• The Broadening Participation Research Centers track was updated to clarify the length of time an institution can host a center and the maximum budget for renewal proposals from a center.

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:

Historically Black Colleges and Universities - Undergraduate Program (HBCU-UP)

Synopsis of Program:

HBCU-UP provides awards to strengthen STEM undergraduate education and research at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). Support is available through the following tracks:

• Targeted Infusion Projects (TIP), which provide support to achieve a short-term, well-defined goal for enhancing and innovating undergraduate STEM education at an HBCU.
• Research on Broadening Participation in STEM projects (BPR), which provide support for research that seeks to create and study new theory-driven models and innovations related to the participation and success of underrepresented groups in STEM undergraduate education, especially African Americans.
• Research Initiation Awards (RIA), which provide support for STEM faculty with no prior or recent research funding to pursue research at the home institution, another research-intensive institution, an NSF-funded research center, or a national laboratory.
• Implementation Projects (IMP), which provide support to design, implement, study, and assess comprehensive institutional efforts for increasing the number of students receiving undergraduate degrees in STEM and enhancing their preparation by strengthening STEM education and research.
• Broadening Participation Research Centers (BPRC), which provide support to create centers that conduct research on STEM education and broadening participation and build the intellectual infrastructure to facilitate the creation, integration, and transfer of new knowledge.
• Other Funding Opportunities include EArly-Concept Grants for Exploratory Research (EAGER), Rapid Response Research (RAPID), conference, and planning grants.

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.

• Carleitta L. Paige-Anderson, Lead Program Director, EDU/EES, telephone: (703) 292-2816, email: cpaigean@nsf.gov
• Joyce Y. Belcher,telephone: (703) 292-8221, email: jbelcher@nsf.gov
• Toni Edquist, Program Specialist, EDU/EES, telephone: (703) 292-4649, email: tedquist@nsf.gov
• LeRoy Jones II, Program Director, EDU/EES, telephone: (703) 292-4684, email: ljones@nsf.gov
• Tori R. Smith, Program Director, EDU/EES, telephone: (703) 292-2315, email: tosmith@nsf.gov
• Alfred Hall, Program Director, EDU/EES, telephone: (703) 292-4895, email: alfhall@nsf.gov

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

• 47.076 --- STEM Education

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant

Estimated Number of Awards: 136

Up to 136 awards are expected to be made over a two-year period as follows:

HBCU-UP awards are made as Standard Grants or Continuing Grants. In FY 2024 and FY 2025, the estimated number of awards each year will be:

• Up to 25 Research Initiation Awards,
• Up to 25 Targeted Infusion Projects,
• Up to 6 Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects,
• Up to 10 Implementation Projects,
• 4 to 6 other awards (Planning Grants, Conferences, EAGER, or RAPID proposals) based on the availability of funds.

Additionally, in FY 25, up to two Broadening Participation Research Centers will be funded.

Anticipated Funding Amount: $62,250,000

$62.25 million, pending availability of funds, are expected to be spent for new awards over the two-year period as follows:

Approximately $30 million, pending availability of funds, for new awards in FY 2024 for Targeted Infusion Projects, Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects, Implementation Projects, and Research Initiation Awards.

Approximately $32.25 million, pending availability of funds, for new awards in FY 2025 for Targeted Infusion Projects, Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects, Implementation Projects, Research Initiation Awards, and Broadening Participation Research Centers.

Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following:

• Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) that are accredited and offer undergraduate educational degree programs in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM). Proposals from HBCUs actively engaged in the process of developing undergraduate STEM education programs are encouraged. Potential PIs should contact an HBCU-UP Program Officer to discuss the suitability of their institution/program for this program.

Who May Serve as PI:

• The Principal Investigator for a Targeted Infusion Project must be the individual who will direct the implementation of the project activities.
• The Principal Investigator for a Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Project must be the individual responsible for managing the project and must be one of the primary researchers.
• The Principal Investigator for a Research Initiation Award must be a faculty member in a STEM or STEM education discipline at the HBCU. Co-Principal Investigators and senior personnel are not permitted.
• The Principal Investigator and Co-Principal Investigators for an Implementation Project or a Broadening Participation Research Center must be the individuals that will be responsible for guiding the implementation of the project or Center. A PI or Co-PI of an active BPRC may not be a PI or Co-PI on a proposal under this track if the Center would still be active at the start of the new award.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

• An eligible institution can submit no more than two Targeted Infusion Project proposals per year and can only have one active Targeted Infusion Project for any given department or unit.
• An eligible institution can submit no more than two Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Project proposals per year.
• An eligible institution can submit no more than two Research Initiation Award proposals per year.
• An eligible institution can submit only one Implementation Project proposal per year. An institution may have only one active Implementation Project award. However, a new proposal can be submitted by an institution with an active project if that project is due to expire before a new award would start.
• The lead institution of a proposal for a Broadening Participation Research enter should have been awarded three rounds of an Implementation or ACE Implementation Project. Institutions that do not meet this criterion but have received funding for broadening participation research projects, must consult with a Program Director to determine the eligibility of the institution to serve as lead institution in a BPRC project. An eligible lead institution can submit only one Broadening Participation Research Center proposal per funding cycle and can have only one active center. However, a renewal proposal can be submitted by the lead institution with an active project if that project is due to expire before new awards are made.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 2

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

• Letters of Intent: Submission of Letters of Intent is required. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
• Preliminary Proposals: Submission of Preliminary Proposals is required. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
• Full Proposals:
  • Full Proposals submitted via Research.gov: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) guidelines apply. The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg.
  • Full Proposals submitted via Grants.gov: NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov guidelines apply (Note: The NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide).

B. Budgetary Information

• Cost Sharing Requirements:

  Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

• Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations:

  Not Applicable

• Other Budgetary Limitations:

  Other budgetary limitations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

C. Due Dates

• Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

       July 25, 2023

       Fourth Tuesday in July, Annually Thereafter

  Research Initiation Awards

       September 12, 2023

       Second Tuesday in September, Annually Thereafter

  Targeted Infusion Projects, Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects, Implementation Projects

• Preliminary Proposal Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

       March 26, 2024

       Fourth Tuesday in March, Every Other Year Thereafter

  Broadening Participation Research Centers

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

       October 03, 2023

       First Tuesday in October, Annually Thereafter

  Research Initiation Awards

       November 09, 2023

       Second Thursday in November, Annually Thereafter

  Targeted Infusion Projects, Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects, Implementation Projects

       November 26, 2024

       Fourth Tuesday in November, Every Other Year Thereafter

  Broadening Participation Research Center

Proposal Review Information Criteria

Merit Review Criteria:

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

Award Administration Information

Award Conditions:

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

Reporting Requirements:

Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.

I. Introduction

The Historically Black Colleges and Universities Undergraduate Program (HBCU-UP) is managed by the Division of Equity for Excellence in STEM in the Directorate for STEM Education. HBCU-UP is committed to enhancing undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education and research at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) to broaden participation in the nation's STEM workforce. HBCUs are a critical resource for efforts aimed at increasing diversity in the STEM enterprise. In 2018, HBCUs conferred bachelor's degrees in science and engineering fields to 14.9% of African American students.¹ In addition, 23.2% of African American graduates who earned a doctorate degree in science and engineering between 2015-2019 earned their bachelor's degrees from an HBCU. During the same time (2015-2019), nine of the top fifteen baccalaureate institutions of African American STEM doctoral degree recipients are HBCUs. As such, HBCUs have an essential role in efforts to broaden the participation of underrepresented groups in STEM and promote the diversity of perspectives that drive innovation and discovery to advance the nation's global impact.

To meet the nation's need to strengthen, expand and diversify its STEM-capable workforce, higher education needs more rapid gains in achievement and successful degree completion in STEM for students from underrepresented populations.² HBCU-UP seeks to work towards this goal by providing awards to develop, implement, and study innovative approaches for enhancing the preparation and success of HBCU undergraduate students so that they may participate successfully in graduate programs and/or careers in STEM disciplines. HBCU-UP supports NSF efforts in all research areas and welcomes proposals that increase HBCUs' strategic positioning for competitive opportunities supported by NSF's newest Technology, Innovation and Partnerships (TIP) directorate. HBCU-UP welcomes proposals that will pair well with the efforts of the NSF Eddie Bernice Johnson INCLUDES Initiative to develop STEM talent from all sectors and groups in our society. Collaborations are encouraged between HBCU-UP proposals and existing INCLUDES Initiative projects, provided the collaboration strengthens both projects. Additionally, HBCU-UP has identified the following priority areas: innovation in teaching and curriculum development; access to STEM research experiences for undergraduate students; recruitment and retention, especially retention in STEM fields during and after the freshman year; critical transitions from K-12 to undergraduate, 2-year to 4-year, and undergraduate to graduate school; increased research capacity of STEM faculty; broadening participation research; evidence-based leadership and professional development for faculty; research capacity building; and STEM teacher preparation.

---

¹ National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. 2021. Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2021. Special Report NSF 21-321. Alexandria, VA: National Science Foundation. Available at https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf21321/.

² National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2019. Minority Serving Institutions: America's Underutilized Resource for Strengthening the STEM Workforce. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25257.

II. Program Description

The Historically Black Colleges and Universities - Undergraduate Program provides support for Targeted Infusion Projects, Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects, Research Initiation Awards, Implementation Projects, and Broadening Participation Research Centers.

1. TARGETED INFUSION PROJECTS (TIP): Projects of two to three years targeted for short-term, well-defined goals to enhance and innovate undergraduate STEM education at HBCUs.

Targeted Infusion Projects are expected to build knowledge concerning STEM education. The proposal must describe and make a strong case for how a project advances the knowledge base in STEM education through research, evaluation, or a combination of research and evaluation processes. The theoretical and empirical justification for the proposed project must be clearly articulated.

Competitive proposals will clearly describe the innovation in undergraduate STEM education the project will realize. Appropriate short-term goals should be easily measurable and attainable within the project time frame, and relevant, proper metrics should be identified. The proposal also should include activities for the dissemination of project results.

There are several approaches for Targeted Infusion Projects to achieve their goals. Some examples are listed below. This list is not meant to be prescriptive nor inclusive of all possible project activities/plans:

• Adapt evidence-based learning experiences and pedagogies in STEM fields.
• Develop creative uses of cyberlearning.
• Enhance academic infrastructure by updating curricula, modernizing laboratory research equipment, or improving the computational network supporting research and education.
• Enhance existing degree programs, establish new degree programs or concentrations, secure specialized accreditation, or certification, or infuse STEM programs with disciplinary field advances and evolving workforce requirements.
• Develop faculty expertise, promote the implementation of educational innovations, or focus on the preparation of future K-12 teachers.

HBCUs that currently have a five-year Implementation Project must address how the Targeted Infusion Project differs from the Implementation Project activities and how the HBCU-UP funded projects will be leveraged, integrated, or synergized to produce more significant outcomes that could not be achieved separately.

2. RESEARCH ON BROADENING PARTICIPATION IN STEM PROJECTS (BPR): Projects of up to three years to investigate topics that impact the recruitment, retention, and success of African Americans in STEM education and the workforce.

Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Project proposals may investigate behavioral, cognitive, affective, learning and social differences (to include the intersection of social factors), as well as organizational, institutional, or systemic processes that may impact participation and success in STEM education. Successful proposals will be grounded in appropriate theory and incorporate recent innovations and advances in research methodologies, conceptual frameworks, and/or data gathering and analytic techniques. Proposals should reflect relevant advances in quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods research and evaluation methodologies and provide a compelling argument about how the proposed methodologies are appropriately matched with the strategic research questions of the project. Additionally, proposals should demonstrate how the methods chosen will result in rigorous, cumulative, reproducible, and usable findings to merit peer-review and publication.

Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Project proposals must include PIs with demonstrable expertise in education research and/or social science research methods and knowledge about STEM programs at HBCUs. Proposers are encouraged to establish collaborations to strengthen the research project and describe in the proposal the nature of the collaboration and the anticipated benefits. As appropriate, proposals should describe mechanisms to transfer findings into educational practice for use by other researchers and policymakers.

3. RESEARCH INITIATION AWARDS (RIA): Projects of up to three years to perform scientific research.

Research Initiation Awards provide support for a STEM faculty member at the HBCU to pursue research at either the home institution, another research-intensive institution, an NSF-funded Center, or at a national laboratory. The project description should contain all of the elements of a standard NSF research proposal. The project should further the faculty member's research capability and effectiveness and help improve research and teaching at the home institution. If appropriate, the project may involve undergraduate students in research experiences. Research Initiation Awards are for faculty who are starting to build or are rebuilding a research program. Faculty members who hold or have held an external research award within the last three years are not eligible for the Research Initiation Award. Potential PIs should consult with a Program Officer to clarify whether a previous external research grant would preclude the PI from qualifying for this track.

4. IMPLEMENTATION PROJECTS (IMP): Projects up to five years to advance undergraduate STEM education and research institution wide.

Implementation Projects provide support to design, implement, study, and assess comprehensive institutional efforts to increase the numbers of students pursuing STEM degrees and the quality of their preparation. Implementation projects should create and/or adapt and assess evidence-based models and materials for teaching and learning in STEM, embody knowledge about how students learn most effectively in STEM teaching and learning activities, and bring STEM disciplinary advances into the undergraduate experience. Before submitting a proposal for an Implementation Project, proposers are encouraged to analyze the strengths and potential of the institution to advance STEM education. Based on this analysis, they should design and/or adapt innovative educational strategies that are appropriate in content and context for increasing the capacity and effectiveness of the institution to attract, retain, educate, and train students from groups underrepresented in STEM and prepare them to succeed in graduate school or the workforce. Transferability and dissemination of successful models, effective methods, and innovative materials for educating undergraduate STEM students are critical aspects of Implementation Projects.

Innovative models and tools for STEM teaching and learning developed through an Implementation Project should be part of comprehensive institutional reform to enhance STEM teaching and learning and improve student access and retention in STEM areas. The implementation design should apply research-based practices to produce significant improvements in undergraduate STEM education and research programs at the institution. Project components may include, but are not limited to: developing and assessing innovative STEM curriculum teaching and learning techniques; using cyberinfrastructure for anytime, anywhere, anyone learning; providing novel undergraduate student development activities and educational enrichment activities; enhancing undergraduate student research experiences; providing activities that promote the development of a globally engaged workforce, including international research experiences for undergraduate students and faculty; creating new approaches to recruit and retain undergraduate STEM students; providing faculty professional development in effective STEM teaching, pedagogy, and research; providing opportunities and mechanisms for faculty, especially new faculty, to establish a research program; preparing K-12 STEM teachers; addressing the critical transitions from K-12 to undergraduate, 2-year to 4-year, and undergraduate to graduate; and implementing other activities that enhance the quality and competitiveness of undergraduate STEM programs. Implementation Projects should establish sustainable practices that prepare students to compete successfully for graduate research fellowships. Efforts should be made to increase the number of students submitting competitive applications to the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program, and other competitive fellowship programs. The recruitment and retention of veterans in STEM fields to diversify and increase the STEM workforce is encouraged.

NSF expects that the activities and strategies included in Implementation Project proposals will be consistent with and complementary to the institution's STEM needs, long-term goals, and mission. NSF, therefore, allows maximum flexibility in the design of Implementation Projects under HBCU-UP. The proposal, however, must fully substantiate the rationale for choosing the desired approach. The project scope should depend on the size and number of STEM departments or programs at the institution and be defined by the complexity of the proposed activities in the project design. Ideally, an Implementation Project would impact all STEM undergraduate programs, STEM students, and STEM faculty at the institution. The project plan should be clearly described, detailing measurable outcomes for STEM students (e.g., number and types of high-quality research experiences, number of students going on to graduate school or the workforce) and faculty (e.g., number of publications) of the proposed HBCU-UP activities. The proposal should include compelling arguments for why the proposed practices and strategies implemented in the specific institutional environment are expected to result in the anticipated outcomes. The proposal also should include activities for scholarly dissemination of project results and processes to inform the broader community about the effectiveness of specific implementation strategies.

If an institution has previously received an Implementation Project or an ACE Implementation grant, it is critical that the proposal for a new Implementation Project provides complete information on the outcomes and impact of the previous Implementation project(s), including a description of what was learned from the previous activities, how these findings were disseminated to the broader community, and how successful activities are being sustained at the institution. Implementation Project proposals from past awardees must not simply propose continuing the previous Implementation Project grant activities. The new proposal should be based on a thorough evaluation of the previous Implementation Projects and an assessment of the institution's current state so that a new project can build on progress and achievements and identify new innovations undertaken to move the institution to the next level of STEM program competitiveness. The proposal should include a component that outlines a strategy for the creative integration of NSF-funded awards at the institution that are related to the proposed project's goals and scope.

Proposals for a second round or subsequent Implementation Project must include a research project that is linked to the proposed interventions and strategies to formally study such strategies in the unique setting of the HBCU. Projects may offer a postdoctoral research fellowship to a social science or educational researcher to provide opportunities early in their career and to work with this research project.

5. BROADENING PARTICIPATION RESEARCH CENTERS (BPRC): Five-year projects that build the intellectual infrastructure to facilitate the creation, integration, and transfer of new knowledge in broadening participation research.

Broadening Participation Research Centers are expected to engage in broadening participation research that will add to the research knowledge base and enhance understanding of the barriers that hinder and factors that enhance the ability to broaden participation in STEM. The results of these efforts will inform approaches to increase access and involvement of underrepresented groups in STEM and strengthen the national STEM capabilities and competitive advantage. NSF expects Broadening Participation Research Centers to demonstrate leadership in the involvement of groups historically underrepresented in STEM at all levels, including students, postdoctoral researchers, and faculty. BPRCs conduct research through partnerships, as appropriate.

Centers will offer the HBCU community a venue for interaction and an effective mechanism to undertake long-term integrated research and education activities focused on broadening participation research. Centers will also develop approaches to ensure the effective transfer of knowledge of research and education outcomes. BPRC partner institutions work together with the lead institution as an integrated whole to achieve the shared research, education, outreach, and knowledge-transfer goals of the Center.

The National Academies Report³ states that "HBCUs by their very mission, purpose, and environment are more likely to achieve success" in recruiting, retaining, and graduating African American students in STEM fields and lists the reasons for this success. Therefore, Centers are expected to gather and represent the collective intelligence of HBCU STEM higher education and serve as a national hub for the rigorous study and broad dissemination of the critical pedagogies and culturally sensitive interventions that contribute to the success of HBCUs in educating students from underrepresented populations in STEM fields, particularly African American STEM undergraduates. Centers that meaningfully incorporate and promote broad and systemic connections to mainstream STEM higher education reform efforts are especially encouraged. These connections are critical, because, according to the above-cited report, "only a small number of institutions (including HBCUs) serve the needs of underrepresented minority students." Planning proposals that describe the activities necessary to develop full-scale proposals are strongly encouraged and should be submitted in accordance with Section II.E.1 of the PAPPG.

Lead institutions that have received a BPRC award are eligible to submit a renewal proposal for a maximum of 5 years (up to 10 years of total support). It is essential that the renewal proposal describes the outcomes and impact of the previous BPRC award, including insights from previous activities, how the findings were disseminated to the broader STEM community, and how successful activities are being sustained at the institution. BPRC proposals from past awardees must describe strategies and approaches that build on previous awards. If there is a need to continue activities initially described in the previous award, the renewal proposal must demonstrate that this decision is based on a thorough evaluation of the previous BPRC award and an assessment of the center's current state such that the new proposal raises the national profile of the center.

---

³ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2019. Minority Serving Institutions: America's Underutilized Resource for Strengthening the STEM Workforce. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25257.

6. OTHER FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES

HBCU-UP funds planning grants of twelve to twenty-four months to establish sustainable practices to assist faculty, particularly new faculty, in establishing a research program, to undertake an institutional STEM program self-analysis in preparation for submitting an Implementation Project, a Broadening Participation Research Center Project, or a proposal that focuses on establishing a new department or program. Planning grants are also accepted from institutions that want to undertake an analysis in preparation for submitting a center grant or institutional transformation grant to other NSF divisions for studying institutional preparedness and setting up the needed collaborations among stakeholders. Planning grants should be submitted in accordance with Section II.E.1 of the PAPPG. PIs are advised to discuss the planning grant proposal with an HBCU-UP program director before submission.

III. Award Information

HBCU-UP Proposals: (pending the availability of funds)

1) Targeted Infusion Projects

• Number of awards: Up to 25 in FY 2024 and up to 25 in FY 2025
• Project Length: From two to three years
• Award size: Up to $400,000
• Restrictions: Equipment costs may not exceed 30% of the total budget requested.
• Grant Administration: Targeted Infusion Projects will be managed by NSF as continuing or standard grants.

2) Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects

• Number of awards: Up to 6 in FY 2024 and up to 6 in FY 2025
• Project Length: Up to three years
• Award Size: Up to $350,000
• Restrictions: Equipment costs are not normally allowed for Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects.
• Grant Administration: Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects will be managed by NSF as continuing or standard grants.

3) Research Initiation Awards

• Number of awards: Up to 25 in FY 2024 and up to 25 in FY 2025
• Project Length: Up to three years
• Award Size: Up to $450,000
• Restrictions: Equipment cost may not exceed 30% of the total budget.
• Grant Administration: Research Initiation Awards will be managed by NSF as standard grants or continuing grants.

4) Implementation Projects

• Number of awards: Up to 10 in FY 2024 and up to 10 in FY 2025
• Project Length: Up to 4 years for 1st round Implementation Project; up to five years thereafter
• Award Size: Up to $1.25 million for 1st round Implementation Projects; up to $2.25 million for 2nd and 3rd round Implementation Projects; up to $3 million for 4th round implementation projects and beyond.
• Restrictions: Equipment costs may not exceed 30% of the total budget request
• Grant Administration: Implementation Projects will be managed by NSF as continuing grants.

5) Broadening Participation Research Centers

• Number of awards: Up to 2 in FY 2025
• Project Length: Up to five years
• Award Size: Up to $9 million
• Restrictions: BPRCs can be funded for a maximum of 10 years. The initial award will be for five years. Subsequent funding for years six to ten (maximum budget up to $1,000,000 per year) will only be considered based on competitive review of a renewal proposal.
• Grant Administration: Broadening Participation Research Centers will be managed by NSF as continuing grants.

IV. Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following:

• Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) that are accredited and offer undergraduate educational degree programs in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM). Proposals from HBCUs actively engaged in the process of developing undergraduate STEM education programs are encouraged. Potential PIs should contact an HBCU-UP Program Officer to discuss the suitability of their institution/program for this program.

Who May Serve as PI:

• The Principal Investigator for a Targeted Infusion Project must be the individual who will direct the implementation of the project activities.
• The Principal Investigator for a Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Project must be the individual responsible for managing the project and must be one of the primary researchers.
• The Principal Investigator for a Research Initiation Award must be a faculty member in a STEM or STEM education discipline at the HBCU. Co-Principal Investigators and senior personnel are not permitted.
• The Principal Investigator and Co-Principal Investigators for an Implementation Project or a Broadening Participation Research Center must be the individuals that will be responsible for guiding the implementation of the project or Center. A PI or Co-PI of an active BPRC may not be a PI or Co-PI on a proposal under this track if the Center would still be active at the start of the new award.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

• An eligible institution can submit no more than two Targeted Infusion Project proposals per year and can only have one active Targeted Infusion Project for any given department or unit.
• An eligible institution can submit no more than two Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Project proposals per year.
• An eligible institution can submit no more than two Research Initiation Award proposals per year.
• An eligible institution can submit only one Implementation Project proposal per year. An institution may have only one active Implementation Project award. However, a new proposal can be submitted by an institution with an active project if that project is due to expire before a new award would start.
• The lead institution of a proposal for a Broadening Participation Research Center should have been awarded three rounds of an Implementation or ACE Implementation Project. Institutions that do not meet this criterion but have received funding for broadening participation research projects, must consult with a Program Director to determine the eligibility of the institution to serve as lead institution in a BPRC project. An eligible lead institution can submit only one Broadening Participation Research Center proposal per funding cycle and can have only one active center. However, a renewal proposal can be submitted by the lead institution with an active project if that project is due to expire before new awards are made.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 2

Additional Eligibility Info:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following institutions: Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) that are accredited and offer undergraduate educational degree programs in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM). Proposals from HBCUs actively engaged in the process of developing undergraduate STEM education programs are encouraged. Potential PIs should contact an HBCU-UP Program Officer to discuss the suitability of their institution/program for this program.

V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Instructions

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

Letters of Intent (required):

Letters of intent are required for HBCU-UP submissions, except for proposals for the Broadening Participation Research Centers track.

All letters of intent must be submitted via Research.gov. A separate letter of intent is requested for each proposal for Targeted Infusion Projects, Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects, Research Initiation Awards, or Implementation Project proposals that will be submitted from an eligible institution. Letters of Intent are not required for Broadening Participation Research Center proposals.

Letters of intent must contain the following information:

• The type of proposal that will be submitted (Targeted Infusion Project, Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Project, Research Initiation Award, or Implementation Project).
• The project title.
• The PI name and Co-PI names, department, institution, phone, fax and email, and the PI listed as point of contact. It is important that the PI be listed as point of contact, not the sponsored research representative.
• The submitting institution's name.
• A project synopsis (no more than 500 words) that describes the proposed research and/or implementation activities.

Note:

• Proposals for the Research Initiation Award track do not allow the inclusion of Co-PIs or Senior Personnel; hence Letters of Intent for RIA should only list the PI.

Technical assistance will be offered by program directors after the deadline to submit Letters of Intent has passed.

Letter of Intent Preparation Instructions:

When submitting a Letter of Intent through Research.gov in response to this Program Solicitation please note the conditions outlined below:

• Submission by an Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) is required when submitting Letters of Intent.
• A Minimum of 1 and Maximum of 4 Other Senior Project Personnel are permitted
• Proposal Type is required when submitting Letters of Intent
• Submission of multiple Letters of Intent is permitted

Preliminary Proposals (required): Preliminary proposals are required and must be submitted via Research.gov, even if full proposals will be submitted via Grants.gov.

Preliminary proposals are required only for Broadening Participation Research Center proposals. Submission of a preliminary proposal is required to be eligible for invitation for a full BPRC proposal. Preliminary proposals that are not compliant with the guidelines may be returned without review, thus making the proposing team automatically ineligible for submitting a full BPRC proposal.

Preliminary BPRC proposals must contain the items listed below and adhere strictly to the specified page limitations. No additional information may be provided as an appendix or by links to web pages. Figures and tables must be included within the applicable page limit.

Preliminary BPRC proposals will contain an overview of the proposed vision, strategic plan, partnerships, research, education, outreach, and knowledge transfer activities with sufficient detail to allow assessment of the intellectual merit and broader impacts of the proposed Center.

Preliminary Proposal Contents

The preliminary proposal should consist of the following elements:

• Project Summary (1 page maximum): Provide an overview of the proposed Center, addressing separately the intellectual merit and broader impacts.
• Project Description (12 pages maximum): The Project Description should articulate a vision for the proposed Center that clearly outlines the challenges being addressed. The proposed research should be sufficiently complex and long-term to justify a Center and flexible enough to permit change as the research proceeds. In addition to an outline of research themes, some illustrative examples of specific research directions with sufficient detail to be evaluated by reviewers should be included. The Project Description must describe how the integration of research, education, outreach, and knowledge transfer in a Center-level activity will advance the proposed research in a way that other funding mechanisms cannot. A description of each team member's contribution to the project should be included, as well as a description of their efforts to facilitate coordination across collaborating institutions. Describe activities to facilitate coordination across collaborating institutions, discussing how all institutions will support a collaborative infrastructure and the extent to which leadership, communication, and integration of activities will be addressed.

  Results from Prior NSF support for relevant broadening participation research must be included.

• References Cited (2-page limit): See NSF PAPPG instructions for format.
• Biographical Sketches (3-page limit per person): Biographical Sketches are required for the PI and Co-PIs only.
• Supplementary Documents: a) List all project personnel who have a role in the management, research, education, outreach, and knowledge transfer components of the Center. Provide the last name, first name, and institution/organization. b) Include a one-page table indicating an estimate of funds that will be allocated to each participating institution broken down by category, i.e., research, education, outreach, and knowledge transfer.
• Collaborators & Other Affiliations (COA) information specified in the PAPPG should be submitted using the instructions and spreadsheet template found on the Collaborators and Other Affiliations Information website at https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/coa.jsp.

Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Research.gov or Grants.gov.

• Full Proposals submitted via Research.gov: 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: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg. Paper copies of the PAPPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov. The Prepare New Proposal setup will prompt you for the program solicitation number.
• Full proposals submitted via Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via Grants.gov should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov. The complete text of the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: (https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide). To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov site, then click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Application Instructions link and enter the funding opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of the Grants.gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov.

In determining which method to utilize in the electronic preparation and submission of the proposal, please note the following:

Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from multiple organizations must be submitted via Research.gov. 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.

For HBCU-UP PROJECTS

TITLE

Adhere to the following instructions for the title:

• Targeted Infusion Project proposals
  • Begin the project title with "Targeted Infusion Project:"
• Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Project proposals
  • Begin the project title with "Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Project:"
• Research Initiation Award proposals
  • Begin the project title with "Research Initiation Award:"
• Implementation proposals
  • Begin the project title with "Implementation Project:"
• Broadening Participation Research Center proposals
  • Begin the project title with "Broadening Participation Research Center:"

COVER SHEET

Review the regulations regarding Human Subjects (45 CFR 690.101-124 https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/human.jsp). Please note that Human Subjects regulations also govern activities that have to do with safeguarding individually identifiable information such as student and faculty surveys and data. Therefore, many Implementation Projects, Research on Broadening Participation in STEM, and possibly Targeted Infusion Projects may need to be reviewed by the Human Subjects Internal Review Board (IRB) for the institution. If the project will be IRB reviewed, please indicate on the cover sheet that the review is pending. If the proposal has already been IRB reviewed and found to be exempt, please indicate so on the cover sheet. If the IRB has already given approval of the activities include a letter from the IRB and indicate the expiration date of the IRB approval on the cover sheet. Please note that an award cannot be made unless the IRB process has been completed and documentation has been received by the program director prior to recommending the award.

REQUIRED COMPONENTS FOR ALL PROPOSALS

Follow all PAPPG guidelines as well as the additional guidelines given below for the required student mentoring plans, project evaluation and guidelines pertinent to each track.

STUDENT MENTORING PLAN(S)

HBCU-UP requires that proposals requesting funding to support students must include, as a supplementary document, a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals. Mentoring plans for undergraduate students should be separate and different from mentoring plans for any graduate students that are involved in the project. Mentoring plans should not only speak to research mentoring for the students, but how the PIs will mentor and work with the students to achieve the next level in their scholastic or professional careers.

LETTERS OF COLLABORATION

All letters of collaboration should follow PAPPG guidelines.

PROJECT EVALUATION

Evaluation of the HBCU-UP projects is a high priority for this program. Proposals for Targeted Infusion Projects, Implementation Projects, and Broadening Participation Research Centers should include an evaluation section that describes how the project will be evaluated in determining the accomplishment of project goals and impact. The project evaluation should be designed to serve as a valuable source of information on how the project is being implemented, specifically, what works and what should be modified. The evaluation plan should be based on benchmarks, indicators, or expected outcomes related to project goals and activities. Evaluation plans should include a logic model or other tool that connects the project goals to the specific activities, and outputs, as well as the outcomes.

Evaluation plans should be appropriate to the size and scope of the project, and usually include both formative and summative components based on the evaluation questions of interest along with a proposed timeline. The purpose of a formative evaluation is to provide information for project improvement. The purpose of a summative evaluation is to assess the quality and impact of a fully implemented project. Formative evaluation plans outline methods for documenting progress toward project goals and should include a feedback feature that allows for continuous improvement of the project activities. In some cases, formative evaluation may be internal to the project. A summative evaluation collects information about outcomes and related processes, strategies, and activities that have led to the demonstrated outcomes.

The budget MUST include adequate resources for the project evaluation. Project evaluation should be led by an expert independent evaluator or evaluation team, depending on the size and scope of the project. Evaluators are expected to adhere to the American Evaluation Association's Guiding Principles for Evaluators (https://www.eval.org/About/Guiding-Principles). Project evaluations are expected to be consistent with standards established by the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (https://jcsee.org/program/).

The following references may be helpful in designing an evaluation plan:

• AAAS Measuring Diversity: An Evaluation Guide for STEM Graduate School Leaders, available at: https://nsf-gov-resources.nsf.gov/2022-03/MeasuringDiversity-EvalGuide.pdf.
• Common Guidelines for Research & Development, available at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf13126.
• The 2010 User-Friendly Handbook for Project Evaluation, available at: https://www.informalscience.org/sites/default/files/TheUserFriendlyGuide.pdf
• Framework for Evaluating Impacts of Informal Science Education Projects, available at: https://www.informalscience.org/sites/default/files/Eval_Framework.pdf
• User-Friendly Handbook for Mixed Method Evaluations, available at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf97153.
• Framework for Evaluating Impacts of Broadening Participation Projects, available at: Framework for Evaluating Impacts of Broadening Participation Projects: Report from a National Science Foundation Workshop | STELAR - STEM Learning and Research Center (edc.org).
• AGEP Evaluation Tools, available at: http://www.nsfagep.org/evaluation-resources/.

Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects and Research Initiation Awards should include a strategy for ongoing objective external feedback using benchmarks, indicators, logic models, road-maps or other evaluative methods to document progress toward goals, objectives and outcomes defined in the proposal. All projects are expected to track and report their accomplishment of proposal targets for broader impacts and intellectual merit. This objective external feedback can be provided in different forms such as an advisory board, experts in the field, or through a formal evaluation, if appropriate. A plan for soliciting objective external feedback must be documented in the proposal.

ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES PERTINENT TO EACH TRACK

1) Targeted Infusion Projects

The project description should include the following information.

Background and Context

• Describe the overall goals and objectives of the project. The objectives must be clearly stated, measurable, and achievable within the proposed timeline.
• Describe the benefits of achieving the goal to STEM education and research at the institution.
• Include baseline data to provide the context for the impact of the Targeted Infusion Project.
• Provide information on the extent to which evidence-based instructional practices in the department(s) involved in the proposed project are used. Be specific about what these practices are, in what departments and specific courses they are employed, and how many students are typically enrolled in these courses.

Proposed Activities

• Describe the specific activities that will be undertaken to achieve the goals and objectives of the project.
• Describe and make a strong case for how the project advances knowledge in STEM education through research, evaluation, or a combination of research and evaluation processes. The theoretical and empirical justification for the proposed project must be clearly articulated.
• Explain how the project timeline reflects all institutional requirements, given that institutions have different policies and procedures (e.g., new degree program approval). If appropriate, include evidence in the letter of support (see below) indicating that institutionally required procedures are being followed and preliminary approvals have been secured.
• Equipment and supplies:
  • Explain how recurring costs, such as lab supplies for a newly created laboratory course, or recurring software license/maintenance fees, will be supported after the project ends.
  • Include quotes or estimates for major equipment purchases (equipment with cost over $5000) in the supplementary documents section.
  • Explain how long-term maintenance of new equipment will be supported after the project ends.

Dissemination

• Describe the plans to communicate the knowledge gained (including the results and outcomes of the project) to other professionals in STEM education and research, both during and after the project. Describe the nature of the information to be disseminated, the means of dissemination, and the procedures for determining the success of the dissemination efforts.

Project Management

• Provide a management plan for the project that ensures that the activities and the required reporting will be implemented on time and within budget.
• Provide a timeline for the activities to be implemented - including measurable objectives and outcomes, and the personnel responsible for carrying out the activities.

Project Evaluation

• Include a formative and summative evaluation plan, to be conducted by an evaluator external to the project, referencing the objectives, goals, and baseline data presented in the project description.
• Include benchmarks and progress indicators in the formative evaluation to assess the project's implementation.
• Discuss the summative evaluation assessing whether the project achieved the overall goals, as well as identify any unexpected results.

A letter of support from the appropriate administrator indicating specific institutional support for the project activities must be included and uploaded in the supplementary documents section.

2) Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects

The project description should include the following information.

Background and Context

• Describe the research question(s) to be investigated and explain the significance and importance of answering the proposed research question(s). Discuss the base of research/theory that motivates the question(s).
• Explain how the project will contribute to the knowledge base of broadening participation research and how it has the potential to be replicated at other HBCUs, and other institutions seeking to increase the success of underrepresented students in STEM.

Proposed Research Activities

• Describe the research plan (design, data collection, data analysis, etc.) that will be undertaken to answer the research question(s).
• Address the validity and reliability of new or previously validated survey instruments.
• Provide a timeline for the research plan - include measurable objectives and outcomes and identify who will be responsible for completing each task.
• A study of a promising intervention and effectiveness studies is permitted.
• In general, implementation activities are not recommended under Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects. In some cases, implementation activities may be appropriate, but these activities must clearly be required in order to answer the proposed research question(s) and must be significantly different from implementation activities undertaken in other projects. If implementation activities are included, clearly explain why the activities are needed to answer the research question(s).

Dissemination

• Describe the plans to communicate the results and outcomes of the project to other professionals in STEM education and research and the higher education community, both during and after the project.
• Describe the nature of the information to be disseminated, the means of dissemination, and the procedures for determining the success of the dissemination efforts.
• Indicate the need for policy changes (where appropriate) that facilitate increased persistence of African American or other underrepresented groups in STEM.

Project Management

• Provide a management plan for the project that will ensure that the activities and the required reporting will be implemented on time and within budget.
• At least one of the PIs on the project must have formal training or significant professional experience in education or social science research.

Project Evaluation

• It is expected that each Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Project proposal will include an evaluation plan that includes benchmarks and quantitative and qualitative indicators of progress for the research project. The plan should address the assessment of project outcomes and contributions to the research knowledge base and/or educational practice. The evaluator should be someone external to the project.

3) Research Initiation Awards

In addition to following the general format for research proposals as described in the PAPPG, Research Initiation Award (RIA) proposals submitted must also adhere to the following special instructions.

The PI must identify a research collaborator and explain the rationale for the selection. The collaborator could be from the PI's home institution; an NSF-funded research center, a national laboratory; or an active researcher and faculty member at another university. Examples of research centers include a Center for Research Excellence in Science and Technology, Engineering Research Center, Materials Research Science and Engineering Center, Physics Frontier Center, Science and Technology Center, Science of Learning Center, and Broadening Participation Research Center.

Proposals may request support for release time during the academic year, summer salary for the PI, and travel and housing at the research site for the PI. Additionally, if students are participating in research activities under the guidance of the PI, travel expenses, housing allowance, and stipends for the students may be requested.

The Project Description should provide a detailed statement of the proposed research to be undertaken and should contain the following.

• Provide a brief description of the PI's overall research and education goals.
• Provide a clear outline of the general plan of work, including the research questions or hypotheses, the broad design of activities to be undertaken, and, where appropriate, a clear description of experimental methods and procedures. Proposers should address what they 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. The project activities may be based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must be well justified.
• Clearly articulate the nature of the collaboration and the extent to which the collaborator's expertise may advance the project's research goals yet ensures that the PI is leading the project's design and implementation.
• Identify the relationship of the proposed activities to the PI's long term research goals.
• Provide a discussion of how the proposed activities will benefit the research capacity at the institution.
• If appropriate, provide a description of how undergraduate and/or graduate students will be involved in the research.
• Describe the plan for dissemination of the research findings.
• Describe the plan for assessing the research progress.

Special Information and Supplementary Documentation

Include the following.

• A letter of support from the PI's Department Chair or Dean stating that the PI will have institutional support in terms of allowance for release time, travel for research purposes, and access to existing research facilities.
• A mentoring plan for the PI from the Department Chair, Dean, or a senior faculty member. Note: if the letter of support and the mentoring plan are written by the same person, one document can be submitted.
• A letter of collaboration from the PI's research collaborator.
• If the proposal involves undergraduate or graduate students, a mentoring plan from the PI for the students that are involved in the project must be included.

4) Implementation Projects

The project description must include the following elements.

Background and Context:

• State the problem(s) to be addressed.
• Articulate current knowledge of the problem(s) and some of the causes as understood from documented sources.
• Provide information on the institution's current STEM education and research capability (baseline data). Examples of information and data include a description of STEM degree programs, student enrollment, retention, graduation rates, number of students going to graduate schools, gatekeeper course performance, STEM faculty demographics, and STEM infrastructure resources at the institution and collaborating organizations.
• Provide information on the extent and use of evidence-based instructional practices in STEM degree programs at the institution. Be specific as to what these practices are, in what departments and specific courses they are employed, and how many students are typically enrolled in these courses.
• Describe prior efforts and the results of those efforts. Provide information on STEM-related programs that have been implemented or are currently active. This should include previous HBCU-UP awards and awards from other NSF programs, other federal programs, state programs, and institution programs. Explain the outcomes of these efforts. Institutions that have received an HBCU-UP Planning Grant must describe the planning grant activities and the findings of those activities.
• Identify the areas that have not been understood, determined, verified, tested, or resolved by previous efforts. Highlight the areas that need improvement and will be addressed with the proposed project activities.

Goals and Objectives:

• Clearly state the goals and objectives of the project.
• Describe the information and knowledge that will be obtained from the project.
• Describe the expected results and student outcomes.
• Explain the expected significance of the project and the compatibility with the mission and environment of the institution.

Detailed Project Plan:

• Describe the research-based or evidence-based practices selected for implementation and why and how they could improve undergraduate STEM education at the institution and under the current setting and conditions.
• Describe, as necessary, the demographic, social, cultural, and economic environment in which the project is situated and how this environment may affect implementation, operations, and results. Describe adjustments that must be made to adapt this project's documented practices and strategies.
• Implementation Design: Present the conceptual model of the project and describe each of the components (i.e., each of the educational activities and interventions being implemented) and their links to the project goals and objectives.
• Implementation/Intervention Study: Define the procedures and methods for analyzing and assessing each of the educational activities and interventions of the project in producing the desired effects.
• Define the expected measurable outcomes and explain the relationships with the components of the implementation linked to project goals and objectives. Include indicators and benchmarks with timelines that will determine which implementation strategies are proving to be effective in the environment.

Dissemination:

• Describe plans to communicate the knowledge gained, results and outcomes of the project to other professionals in STEM education and research, both during and after the project. Describe the information to be disseminated, the means of dissemination, and the procedures for determining the success of the dissemination efforts.

Project Management Plan:

• Implementation of evidence-based practices and programs almost always requires organizational change. Define the organizational structure for the project and explain its institutional alignment for achieving the project goals and objectives. Define the roles and responsibilities of key personnel who will carry out project activities.
• Define the processes and systems that will be applied to operate the project, including budget management, data management and reporting.
• Define the plans for sustainability or institutionalization of any project components.
• The Principal Investigator should be an academic leader with authority to lead a project that crosses several STEM schools, departments, or units. The co-Principal Investigators should be STEM educational leaders, scientists, and faculty members who carry-out the project work plan. Implementation Projects should have an Internal Steering or Advisory Committee to help manage the project implementation, resolve project issues, and ensure that the project is on track for meeting project goals. Implementation Projects also should have an external advisory committee that meets at least once a year.
• Define the support of institutional leadership by providing a letter of support from an appropriate institutional administrator.
• Letters of commitment from collaborators to the proposed project activities can be included as supplementary documents.
• Note: General letters of support or collaboration from individuals not involved in the implementation of project activities should not be included.

Evaluation plan

• Provide a formative evaluation plan with strategies to monitor operations and activities of the project as they evolve and inform and guide these efforts.
• Describe the criteria to evaluate the quality and impact of the project and the process for collecting and analyzing information at the institution.
• Provide a summative evaluation plan with strategies to assess the effectiveness and impact of the project in achieving its goals and for identifying positive and negative findings when the project is completed.
• Include the capability statement and credentials of the external evaluator as supplementary documents.

Research Project

Second round and subsequent Implementation Project proposals are required to include a five-page supplementary document that describes, in detail, the research project. The research must be linked to the proposed approaches and interventions to formally study why and if such approaches work in the unique setting of the HBCU. Research that investigates novel aspects of the proposal is especially encouraged. It should be evident in the proposal, which team members, and/or consultants will undertake the research and their relevant qualifications should be included. The supplemental document must include information relevant to the proposed study, such as: The research question(s) to be investigated; the conceptual framework for the project; and a discussion of the theory or theories grounding the research and testable hypotheses. The research plan must include the research design, including underlying methodological assumptions, targeted population and sampling, measures and instruments, and data gathering and analysis plan. Data collection procedures should be specified, particularly with information on the reliability, validity, and appropriateness of proposed measures and instruments or specific plans for establishing them if not initially known. Quantitative research should include statistical methods to be used. Qualitative studies should include procedures to collect, code, reduce, and analyze data and specific conceptual frameworks that will guide analysis.

Implementation Projects may offer a postdoctoral research fellowship to a social science or educational researcher to provide opportunities early in their career. The postdoctoral research fellowship is intended to provide beginning investigators with research experiences that will broaden perspectives, facilitate interdisciplinary interactions and establish them in positions of leadership within the scientific community, specifically in the area of broadening participation research.

A letter of support indicating specific institutional support for the project activities from the appropriate administrator should be included.

5) Broadening Participation Research Centers

The Project Description must contain the sections described below and cannot exceed 25 pages including tables and illustrations. The broader impacts resulting from the proposed project must be addressed and described as an integral part of the narrative.

• Introduction and Rationale for the Center (suggested 4-page limit): Describe the background for the Center and its expected significance. Explain the unique opportunities that a Center will provide and describe what will be achieved in the center mode that could not be achieved otherwise. Describe how the Center will build a community of scholars in the science of broadening participation. Show how the Center will contribute to incorporating and promoting the connection of HBCUs to mainstream STEM higher education reform. Discuss the goals and objectives of the Center. Include appropriate baseline data to provide the context for the impact of the Center. Describe the potential legacy of the Center.
• Description of the Research Objectives of the Center (up to 10 pages): State the overall vision and long-range research goals of the Center. Describe the proposed research areas/themes and how they integrate with each other to realize the Center's research vision. Indicate the lead role of each partner organization or participant in each research topic/goal area. The research focus should be sufficiently long-term to justify a center form of organization and flexible enough to permit change as the research proceeds. Provide a research plan with sufficient detail to allow assessment of the scientific merit and to justify the necessity for the center mode of operation. Indicate the potential impact or expected significance the Center's research will have.
• Description of the Education Objectives of the Center (suggested 2-page limit): Present an education plan that describes how the Center will integrate research and education. The education activities should be evidence-based practices developed in the context of current education research. Describe plans for the mentoring and professional development of junior faculty, post-doctoral fellows, and students involved in the Center's education activities. Describe plans for recruiting students and describe the proposed activities in sufficient detail.
• Description of the Outreach and Knowledge Transfer Objectives of the Center (suggested 1.5-page limit for each): Present a plan that describes how the Center will conduct outreach to the scientific and academic communities and the general public; will provide technical assistance to Historically Black Colleges and Universities and other institutions; and will communicate the results and outcomes of the Center to the scientific community in STEM education and research. Describe how the Center will be a hub for dissemination of research on broadening participation and will connect the research community in this field. Describe other ways of knowledge transfer unique to the Center's mission and goals.
• Description of the Management Plan for the various components of the Center (suggested 3-page limit): Develop and present a management plan for the Center. Identify key members of the Center Management Team and explain their specific roles and areas of responsibility. At least one of the PIs on the project must have formal training or significant professional experience in education or social science research. The Center Director must have the capacity to develop and lead a team to fulfill the vision of the Center. Key members of the Center Management Team must have management experience and qualifications to administer their component of the Center. It is expected that the lead institution partners with other HBCUs; additional partnering organizations are chosen to complement the lead institution. The responsibilities of the lead institutions and partner organizations must be clearly described. Describe the processes that will be used to prioritize Center activities; to select and integrate research projects with one another and with other Center activities; to allocate funds and equipment across Center activities and among partners; and to select a replacement for the Center Director if needed. Describe the plans for sustainability or institutionalization of the Center. An external advisory committee is required for all Centers.
• Description of Coordination/Collaboration (suggested 1.5-page limit): Describe activities to facilitate coordination across collaborating institutions, discussing how all institutions will support a collaborative infrastructure and the extent to which leadership, communication and integration of activities will be addressed.
• Description of the Evaluation Plan (suggested 3-page limit): Provide a formative evaluation plan with strategies to monitor operations and activities of the Center as they evolve and to inform and guide these efforts. Describe the criteria to be used in evaluating the quality and impact of the Center's activities and the process for collecting and analyzing information. Provide a summative evaluation plan with strategies to assess the effectiveness and impact of the Center in achieving its goals. Include the capability statement and credentials of the evaluator(s) as supplementary documents.

Budget and Budget Justification.

• Provide a budget for each of the five years. The budget and budget justification should reflect start-up activities at the commencement of the Center activities. Submit a separate budget and budget justification for each participating institution.

Additional Special Information and Required Supplementary Documents:

• The list of Partner Institutions and Project Personnel that were required in the preliminary proposal must be updated to reflect any changes occurring since the time of preliminary proposal submission. Up to two pages in the proposal may be used to briefly describe the partnering institutions.
• A timeline for all activities (limit 2 pages).
• A letter of support indicating specific institutional support for the project activities from the president or appropriate leader at the lead institution should be included.

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing:

Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Other Budgetary Limitations:

• Required Meeting Travel: All proposals should budget for the PI to attend a two day grantee meeting in the Washington, DC area every year of the project.
• PIs who include a postdoctoral fellow may add the salary and fringe benefits, as well as an annual travel allowance of $2,000, for the postdoctoral fellow to the maximum allowed award size.
• Equipment Limitations:
  • Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects and Broadening Participation Research Centers are not intended to support activities that would require research equipment; therefore major equipment is not normally included. However, minimal equipment costs are allowed if required to perform the research activities.
  • Research Initiation Awards - Equipment cost cannot exceed 30% of the total budget.
  • Targeted Infusion Projects and Implementation Projects - Equipment costs cannot exceed 30% of the total NSF budget requested.

C. Due Dates

• Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

       July 25, 2023

       Fourth Tuesday in July, Annually Thereafter

  Research Initiation Awards

       September 12, 2023

       Second Tuesday in September, Annually Thereafter

  Targeted Infusion Projects, Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects, Implementation Projects

• Preliminary Proposal Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):

       March 26, 2024

       Fourth Tuesday in March, Every Other Year Thereafter

  Broadening Participation Research Centers

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

       October 03, 2023

       First Tuesday in October, Annually Thereafter

  Research Initiation Awards

       November 09, 2023

       Second Thursday in November, Annually Thereafter

  Targeted Infusion Projects, Research on Broadening Participation in STEM Projects, Implementation Projects

       November 26, 2024

       Fourth Tuesday in November, Every Other Year Thereafter

  Broadening Participation Research Center

D. Research.gov/Grants.gov Requirements

For Proposals Submitted Via Research.gov:

To prepare and submit a proposal via Research.gov, see detailed technical instructions available at: https://www.research.gov/research-portal/appmanager/base/desktop?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=research_node_display&_nodePath=/researchGov/Service/Desktop/ProposalPreparationandSubmission.html. For Research.gov user support, call the Research.gov Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail rgov@nsf.gov. The Research.gov Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the Research.gov system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.

For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:

Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources webpage: https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants.html. In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide (see link in Section V.A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: support@grants.gov. The Grants.gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation.

Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The completed application will be transferred to Research.gov for further processing.

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

VI. NSF Proposal Processing And Review Procedures

Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1.

A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/.

Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in 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.

Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria

In addition to the two NSF criteria for Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts, unique review criteria for Implementation projects are listed below.

• Does the proposal describe a convincing rationale and appropriate methods for the project activities that are research-based/evidence-based?
• How appropriate are the project design and methods to the project's scope, scale, and setting, and are they linked to measurable outcomes?
• What is the likelihood that the project will produce high-quality results that contribute to the undergraduate STEM education knowledge base? How probable is it that the project will positively impact STEM education, student learning, and faculty practice at the institution?
• How adequate is the project management plan and does it include clear roles and responsibilities of the personnel who will contribute to the project? How suitable is the plan for effective and scholarly dissemination of results?
• What evidence is provided that the institutional leadership is committed to the implementation process of the project?
• How well does the evaluation plan define indicators and benchmarks to inform the project team and others about the operations and effectiveness of the implementation?

In addition to the two NSF criteria for Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts, additional review criteria for Broadening Participation Research Centers are listed below.

• Does the proposal convey a vision for how the Center will establish a culture in broadening participation research that will produce work that adds to the research knowledge base?
• How are the research, education, outreach, and knowledge transfer efforts strategically embedded and integrated in the proposed Center?
• To what extent are the research, educational, outreach, and knowledge transfer activities innovative and how do they contribute to the unifying mission of the proposed Center?
• To what extent does the proposed Center management have the vision, experience, and capacity to manage a complex and innovative enterprise that integrates research, education, outreach, and knowledge transfer?
• How well does the evaluation plan define indicators and benchmarks to inform the project team and others about the operations and effectiveness of the implementation?

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 Site Visit Review.

HBCU-UP proposals are evaluated by ad hoc reviews, panel reviews, or both. For Broadening Participation Research Centers, site visits may be used in addition to ad hoc and/or panel reviews. Separate review panels are assembled for Implementation Projects, Broadening Participation Research Projects, Research Initiation Awards, Targeted Infusion Projects and Broadening Participation Research Centers. For highly rated Broadening Participation Research Centers, site visits will be conducted before an award recommendation is made.

Proposals for a Broadening Participation Research Center will be evaluated in a multi-phase merit review process. Preliminary proposals are required and will be evaluated by a panel of experts in broadening participation research. Proposing institutions whose preliminary proposals are judged most promising by the panel and program directors will be invited to submit full proposals that will be evaluated by ad hoc and/or panel review. Only those full proposals that were invited will be accepted. The full proposal review panel will identify those full proposals deemed worthy of site visit reviews. For proposals selected for a site visit, the site visit review will consider the review criteria, the vision and potential legacy of the proposed center, and institutional commitment to the proposed center. Following the site visit, NSF staff will analyze reviews and discussion summaries. The final decision concerning recommendations is based upon the proposal, the reviews and discussion summaries, and the site visit report. Centers selected for site visit but that are not recommended for a center grant after the site visit, may be considered for a collaborative project award.

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 https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 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 Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg.

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.

Special Award Conditions:

Reverse Site Visits: Participation in a Reverse Site Visit (RSV) can be requested by NSF at any time during the grant period. The RSV is a presentation on the outcomes and progress of the grant activities at NSF in front of a peer review panel. Participation in the RSV is required by the appropriate grant management team and institutional administration.

Site Visits: NSF staff may visit the site of the grant project at anytime during the grant period. Reasonable accommodation of the site visit by NSF program staff is required by the grantee. NSF staff and/or a visiting committee will conduct site visits at Broadening Participation Research Centers annually.

Implementation Project, Targeted Infusion Project, Broadening Participation Research, and Broadening Participation Research Center awardees are required to submit the annual evaluation of the project.

Cooperation with NSF evaluation projects: NSF, an NSF contractor, or a grantee on behalf of NSF, may conduct program evaluations of HBCU-UP projects. These may occur at anytime during the grant period and sometimes after the grant period has ended. Reasonable cooperation with these efforts is required by the grantee.

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 Research.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final project reports. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.

More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg.

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:

• Carleitta L. Paige-Anderson, Lead Program Director, EDU/EES, telephone: (703) 292-2816, email: cpaigean@nsf.gov
• Joyce Y. Belcher, telephone: (703) 292-8221, email: jbelcher@nsf.gov
• Toni Edquist, Program Specialist, EDU/EES, telephone: (703) 292-4649, email: tedquist@nsf.gov
• LeRoy Jones II, Program Director, EDU/EES, telephone: (703) 292-4684, email: ljones@nsf.gov
• Tori R. Smith, Program Director, EDU/EES, telephone: (703) 292-2315, email: tosmith@nsf.gov
• Alfred Hall, Program Director, EDU/EES, telephone: (703) 292-4895, email: alfhall@nsf.gov

For questions related to the use of NSF systems contact:

• NSF Help Desk: 1-800-673-6188
• Research.gov Help Desk e-mail: rgov@nsf.gov

For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:

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

IX. Other Information

The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences. Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website.

Grants.gov 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 Grants.gov may be obtained at https://www.grants.gov.

The National Science Foundation and the Institute of Education Sciences in the U.S. Department of Education developed Common Guidelines for Education Research and Development. The Guidelines describe six types of research studies that can generate evidence about how to increase student learning. Research types include those that generate the most fundamental understandings related to education and learning; examinations of associations between variables; iterative design and testing of strategies or interventions; and assessments of the impact of a fully-developed intervention on an education outcome. For each research type, there is a description of the purpose and the expected empirical and/or theoretical justifications, types of project outcomes, and quality of evidence.

The Guidelines publication can be found on the NSF website with the number NSF 13-126 (https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf13126). A set of FAQs regarding the Guidelines are available with the number NSF 13-127 (https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf13127). Grant proposal writers and PIs are encouraged to familiarize themselves with both documents and use the information therein in the preparation of proposals to NSF.

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 https://www.nsf.gov 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: nsfpubs@nsf.gov 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