Active funding opportunity

This document is the current version.

NSF 24-607: Molecular Foundations for Biotechnology (MFB)

Partnerships to Transform Emerging Industries - RNA Tools/Biotechnology

Program Solicitation

Document Information

Document History

Program Solicitation NSF 24-607

NSF Logo

U.S. National Science Foundation

Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences
     Division of Chemistry
     Division of Mathematical Sciences
     Division of Physics

Directorate for Biological Sciences
     Division of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences

Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering
     Division of Information and Intelligent Systems

NIH logo National Institutes of Health



National Institutes of Health

    National Human Genome Research Institute

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization’s local time):

     December 16, 2024

Important Information And Revision Notes

  • Research topic areas have been modified.
  • Letters of Intent (LOIs) requirement has been removed.
  • Additional solicitation specific review criteria have been included.
  • Budgetary guidance has been added.
  • Additional guidance for the Data Management and Sharing Plan has been added.

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:

Molecular Foundations for Biotechnology (MFB)
Partnerships to Transform Emerging Industries – RNA Tools/Biotechnology

Synopsis of Program:

This initiative supports fundamentally new approaches in molecular sciences to drive new directions in biotechnology, a critical and emerging technology of the 21st century. This is the fourth year of a campaign targeting broad themes to be pursued through collaborative high risk/high reward projects.

This MFB solicitation calls for creative, cross-disciplinary research and technology development proposals to accelerate understanding of RNA function in complex biological systems and to harness RNA research to advance biotechnology.

The funding opportunity will be coordinated by the National Science Foundation together with the National Institutes of Health, National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI). The focus on RNA science advances (1)  Biotechnology innovation for a sustainable, safe and secure American bioeconomy; (2) the  NSF 2022-2026 Strategic Plan to create new knowledge and benefit society by translating knowledge into solutions; (3) the  NHGRI 2020 Strategic Vision for improving human health at the Forefront of Genomics; and aligns with (4) the  NASEM Report calling for deeper understanding of RNA modifications and their role in biological processes. 

Award sizes must not exceed $1,500,000 in total costs (direct and indirect) for the entire project and a duration of up to 3 years. The project budget and duration must be commensurate with the scale and scope of the research.

Broadening Participation In Stem:

NSF recognizes the unique lived experiences of individuals from communities that are underrepresented and/or underserved in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and the barriers to inclusion and access to STEM education and careers. NSF highly encourages the leadership, partnership, and contributions in all NSF opportunities of individuals who are members of such communities supported by NSF. This includes leading and designing STEM research and education proposals for funding; serving as peer reviewers, advisory committee members, and/or committee of visitor members; and serving as NSF leadership, program, and/or administrative staff. NSF also highly encourages demographically diverse institutions of higher education (IHEs) to lead, partner, and contribute to NSF opportunities on behalf of their research and education communities. NSF expects that all individuals, including those who are members of groups that are underrepresented and/or underserved in STEM, are treated equitably and inclusively in the Foundation's proposal and award process.

NSF encourages IHEs that enroll, educate, graduate, and employ individuals who are members of groups underrepresented and/or underserved in STEM education programs and careers to lead, partner, and contribute to NSF opportunities, including leading and designing STEM research and education proposals for funding. Such IHEs include, but may not be limited to, community colleges and two-year institutions, mission-based institutions such as Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs), women's colleges, and institutions that primarily serve persons with disabilities, as well as institutions defined by enrollment such as Predominantly Undergraduate Institutions (PUIs), Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs), and Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs).

"Broadening participation in STEM" is the comprehensive phrase used by NSF to refer to the Foundation's goal of increasing the representation and diversity of individuals, organizations, and geographic regions that contribute to STEM teaching, research, and innovation. To broaden participation in STEM, it is necessary to address issues of equity, inclusion, and access in STEM education, training, and careers. Whereas all NSF programs might support broadening participation components, some programs primarily focus on supporting broadening participation research and projects. Examples can be found on the NSF Broadening Participation in STEM website.

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.

  • Sorin Draghici, Division of Information and Intelligent Systems, CISE Directorate, telephone: (703) 292-2232, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • Zhilan J. Feng, Division of Mathematical Sciences, MPS Directorate, telephone: (703) 292-7523, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • Angel E. Garcia, Division of Physics, MPS Directorate, telephone: (703) 292-8897, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • Manju M. Hingorani, Division of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences, BIO Directorate, telephone: (703) 292-7323, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • Pui S. Ho, telephone: (970)491-0569, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • John C. Jewett, telephone: (703) 292-5373, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • Marcia E. Newcomer, telephone: (703) 292-2357, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • Ian C. Nova, NIH National Human Genome Research Institute, telephone: (240) 987-2885, email: ian.nova@nih.gov

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

  • 47.049 --- Mathematical and Physical Sciences
  • 47.070 --- Computer and Information Science and Engineering
  • 47.074 --- Biological Sciences
  • 93.172 --- National Human Genome Research Institute

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant or R01 project (if the proposal is selected to be funded by NIH/NHGRI)

Estimated Number of Awards: 5

The number of awards depends on the availability of funds and the quality of the proposals.

Anticipated Funding Amount: $6,500,000

Contingent on availability of funds.

For NHGRI: Applications compete for funding with other applications submitted through regular NIH mechanisms to NHGRI.

Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following:

  • Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members. Special Instructions for International Branch Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal includes funding to be provided to an international branch campus of a US institution of higher education (including through use of subawards and consultant arrangements), the proposer must explain the benefit(s) to the project of performance at the international branch campus, and justify why the project activities cannot be performed at the US campus.
  • Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Independent museums, observatories, research laboratories, professional societies and similar organizations located in the U.S. that are directly associated with educational or research activities.

Who May Serve as PI:

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 1

An individual may be designated as senior/key personnel (which includes but is not limited to PI, co-PI, and subawardee) on at most one proposal submitted to this solicitation. In the event that an individual exceeds this limit, proposals will be accepted based on earliest date and time of submission, i.e., the first compliant proposal will be accepted, and the remainder will be returned without review.

There are no eligibility restrictions on unfunded collaborators.

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

  • Letters of Intent: Not required
  • Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required
  • Full Proposals:

B. Budgetary Information

  • Cost Sharing Requirements:

    Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

  • Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations:

    Not Applicable

  • Other Budgetary Limitations:

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

C. Due Dates

  • Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization’s local time):

         December 16, 2024

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:

Additional reporting requirements apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

I. Introduction

In recent years, fundamental discoveries and technological breakthroughs have revealed a rich landscape of coding and noncoding RNA functions in the cell. The variety and prominent roles of RNAs in enabling and regulating cellular growth, development, and a myriad of functions present exciting opportunities for mechanistic research coupled with technological development centered on this versatile nucleic acid.

II. Program Description

This solicitation seeks to catalyze synergies among researchers in the biological, chemical, computational, mathematical, and physical sciences to pursue creative technological approaches that address questions about RNA function in complex biological systems and harness RNA research to advance biotechnology. The program prioritizes research on how RNA processing, epitranscriptomic modification, or organization in macromolecular complexes or compartments such as condensates relates to its cellular activities.

Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation must aim to develop and provide proof-of-concept testing of tools, methodology and/or theory that accelerate fundamental discoveries about RNA structure, interactions, and functions at molecular or genome and transcriptome-wide scales. The proposed research and outcomes should have significant relevance to physiological conditions. The program will also prioritize projects with potential for biotechnology applications that impact economic sectors such as agriculture or energy production, or help mitigate the effects of climate change, improve environmental sustainability, and/or combat global pandemics, among other societal benefits. Examples of research include, but are not limited to, approaches that:

  • Identify, predict, detect, quantify, characterize and/or selectively manipulate RNA, including RNA isoforms, RNA modifications in sequence context, and non-natural RNAs;
  • Enable prediction and analysis of the molecular structure and function of RNA and its modified forms, and how they interact with other molecules (including proteins, DNA, small molecules), especially in complex assemblies and compartments such as membraneless condensates;
  • Develop novel computational methods, algorithms, and tools, including those that leverage machine learning/artificial intelligence, to enable data science-driven approaches to understanding RNA structure, interactions, and function; 
  • Discover or develop new chemical and biochemical tools, including small molecules or enzymes that target RNA and modulate its properties;
  • Advance the design and synthesis of RNAs with novel form and function by leveraging the power of biological diversity and evolution.

All proposals must include innovative, interdisciplinary approaches that have the potential to drive fundamentally new directions in biotechnology and enable the bioeconomy. The research must be motivated by questions or hypotheses about RNA function in biological systems, with an emphasis on molecular and cellular science. Research that scales to systems levels is also welcome. The program is especially interested in cross-disciplinary and collaborative research that is grounded in chemical and physical science disciplines, including chemical biology, computational, statistical, or machine learning/artificial intelligence methods, and draws heavily on molecular and cellular biology disciplines, such as genetics, genomics, molecular biophysics, and systems and synthetic biology. Proposals must detail in the Data Management and Sharing Plan how the outcomes, including any new tools, will be disseminated to relevant communities to ensure broad impact. Creation of new databases or infrastructure for data storage and processing is not in the scope of this program.

NHGRI will consider applications to this solicitation as described above that accelerate genomic research focused on the structure and biology of genomes and can demonstrate utility or relevance to human or disease-relevant model organisms. NHGRI is interested in approaches that are comprehensive across the genome or are generalizable across variants, tissues, diseases, or function and that address priority areas described in the NHGRI 2020 Strategic Vision. Applications for studies relevant only to a particular disease or organ system are not in scope for NHGRI. Similarly, applications whose primary scientific objective is to understand a single biological or behavioral process, the pathophysiology of a disease, the mechanism of action of an intervention, or the direct development of therapeutic research are not in scope. NHGRI recognizes the importance of diversity in the genomic workforce, without which the promise of genomics cannot be fully achieved. NHGRI strongly encourages potential applicants to contact program staff (see Section VIII) in the early stages of application development.

The program encourages participation from the full spectrum of diverse talent in society, as described in detail above. Proposals from  EPSCoR jurisdictions  are especially encouraged.

Research projects supported by this program could provide rich opportunities for professional training and workforce development. University-based opportunities for students and postdoctoral researchers may be augmented with internships or similar opportunities to work in non-academic settings for up to three months per year.

Investigators are encouraged to develop collaborations for complementary expertise where necessary to enable interdisciplinary research. Proposers should construct their teams consistent with the goals of the project and the resources available. The proposal must make a compelling case for the collaborative research project and the corresponding team. 

III. Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award:

Continuing Grant or Standard Grant

Estimated Number of Awards: 5

The number of awards depends on the availability of funds and the quality of the proposals.

Anticipated Funding Amount: $6,500,000

Contingent on the availability of funds.

For NHGRI: Applications compete with other applications submitted to NHGRI.

Limitation of Awards:

Award sizes must not exceed $1,500,000 in total costs (direct and indirect) for the entire project and a duration of up to 3 years. This budget limit is consistent with what has historically been funded in the MFB program. The project budget and duration must be commensurate with the scale and scope of the research.

Upon conclusion of the review process, meritorious research proposals may be recommended for funding by one of the participating funding organizations at the option of the funders, not the proposer. Subsequent grant administration procedures will be in accordance with the individual policies of the participating funding organizations managing the awards.

Further information about agency processes and agency-specific award information is provided in Section VI.B of this solicitation.

IV. Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following:

  • Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members. Special Instructions for International Branch Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal includes funding to be provided to an international branch campus of a US institution of higher education (including through use of subawards and consultant arrangements), the proposer must explain the benefit(s) to the project of performance at the international branch campus, and justify why the project activities cannot be performed at the US campus.
  • Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Independent museums, observatories, research laboratories, professional societies and similar organizations located in the U.S. that are directly associated with educational or research activities.

Who May Serve as PI:

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 1

An individual may be designated as senior/key personnel (which includes but is not limited to PI, co-PI, and subawardee) on at most one proposal submitted to this solicitation. In the event that an individual exceeds this limit, proposals will be accepted based on earliest date and time of submission, i.e., the first compliant proposal will be accepted, and the remainder will be returned without review.

There are no eligibility restrictions on unfunded collaborators.

Additional Eligibility Info:

Additional NIH/NHGRI eligibility information is provided below.

Eligible Individuals (Program Director/Principal Investigator)

Any individual(s) with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to carry out the proposed research as the Program Director(s)/Principal Investigator(s) (PD(s)/PI(s)) is invited to work with his/her organization to develop an application for support. Individuals from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups as well as individuals with disabilities are always encouraged to apply for NIH support.

For institutions/organizations proposing multiple PDs/PIs, visit the Multiple Program Director/Principal Investigator Policy and submission details in the Senior/Key Person Profile (Expanded) Component of the SF424 (R&R) Application Guide.

NIH/NHGRI and its staff are ineligible to be involved in any proposals submitted to this funding opportunity, including as unfunded collaborators, via letters of collaboration or support, or via any other means.

V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Instructions

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

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

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.

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

Collaborative Proposals. Of the two types of collaborative proposal formats described in the PAPPG, this solicitation allows either a single proposal submission with subawards administered by the lead organization (PAPPG Part I Chapter II.E.3.a) or separately submitted collaborative proposals from multiple organizations (PAPPG Part I Chapter II.E.3.b).

Note that proposals selected for funding consideration by NHGRI will be invited to submit reformatted applications to NIH's Center for Scientific Review.

The following information supplements the guidelines and requirements in the NSF PAPPG:

Proposal Title: The proposal title must indicate the MFB program, followed by a colon, then the title of the project (“MFB: Title”). 

Project Description:

Describe the proposed project activities within the 15 page-limit. The Project Description must include the following  subsections, specifically labeled as below.  Proposals that fail to include these sections will be returned without review, without exception.

  • Research Description: A list of all participating PIs/co-PIs, senior/key personnel and collaborators must be included on the first page. The Research Description section must describe the rationale and approach of the MFB project. It should describe the challenges that drive the research, the hypotheses, the tools/methods that will be developed and tested in order to address the hypotheses, and the anticipated outcomes. It should also highlight innovative, high risk/high reward aspects of the proposed work, cross-disciplinary synergies that enable the research, the significance of anticipated outcomes such as new technology and knowledge, and how they might advance the relevant field. For collaborative research, the roles and responsibilities of each partner should be made clear. Plans to ensure reproducibility and replicability in sample and data collection, experimental design and methodology, and data analysis that align with community best practices must be included.
  • Broader Impacts: This section must address how the research could lead to tools/methods and generalizable concepts that can be applied to systems beyond those directly addressed in the proposal. The description should highlight benefits to the scientific community from dissemination of the new tools/methods. It should also include the potential effects on future biotechnology, the education and training opportunities available through the project, and any other broader impacts.

Data Management and Sharing Plan:

See PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.i for guidance. The plan must also include a section describing how new tools/methods developed in the MFB project will be disseminated to ensure benefits to relevant research communities.

Proposal Budget:

Provide an itemized summary budget and yearly budgets for the duration of the proposed project, including subawards, if appropriate. The project budget and duration must be commensurate with the scale and scope of the research. A Budget Justification must be provided for each budget submitted, including any subaward budgets. It is recommended that the Budget Justification be structured with the same headings and subheadings shown in the Budget sheets. Funds for facility support, construction, or renovation may not be requested.

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing:

Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Other Budgetary Limitations:

Additional NIH/NHGRI Specific Information:

This funding opportunity announcement (FOA) does not require cost sharing as defined in the  NIH Grants Policy Statement.

C. Due Dates

  • Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization’s local time):

         December 16, 2024

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 1-800-381-1532 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/applicants. 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.

The NSF Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov informational page provides submission guidance to applicants and links to helpful resources including the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide, Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov how-to guide, and Grants.gov Submitted Proposals Frequently Asked Questions. Grants.gov proposals must pass all NSF pre-check and post-check validations in order to be accepted by Research.gov at NSF.

When submitting via Grants.gov, NSF strongly recommends applicants initiate proposal submission at least five business days in advance of a deadline to allow adequate time to address NSF compliance errors and resubmissions by 5:00 p.m. submitting organization's local time on the deadline. Please note that some errors cannot be corrected in Grants.gov. Once a proposal passes pre-checks but fails any post-check, an applicant can only correct and submit the in-progress proposal in Research.gov.

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 and Sharing Plan and the Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.

Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria

In addition to the standard NSF review criteria described above, proposals submitted in response to this solicitation will be assessed on:

  • The innovation in tools, methodology and/or theory to advance RNA biology;
  • The interdisciplinary approach employed to solve complex challenges;
  • The potential catalytic impact on driving new directions in biotechnology;
  • The prospect of the outcomes to be generalizable beyond the specific system under study; and
  • The plan for disseminating new tools/methods to ensure benefits to relevant research communities.

NIH Review Criteria

The mission of the NIH is to seek fundamental knowledge about the nature and behavior of living systems and the application of that knowledge to enhance health, lengthen life, and reduce illness and disability. In their evaluations of Intellectual Merit, reviewers will be asked to consider the following criteria that are used by NIH:

Overall Impact. Reviewers will provide an overall impact/priority score to reflect their assessment of the likelihood for the project to exert a sustained, powerful influence on the research field(s) involved, in consideration of the following five core review criteria, and additional review criteria (as applicable for the project proposed).

Significance. Does the project address an important problem or a critical barrier to progress in the field? Is there a strong scientific premise for the project? If the aims of the project are achieved, how will scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice be improved? How will successful completion of the aims change the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field?

Investigator(s). Are the PD/PIs, collaborators, and other researchers well suited to the project? If Early Stage Investigators or New Investigators, do they have appropriate experience and training? If established, have they demonstrated an ongoing record of accomplishments that have advanced their field(s)? If the project is collaborative or multi-PD/PI, do the investigators have complementary and integrated expertise; are their leadership approach, governance, and organizational structure appropriate for the project?

Innovation. Does the application challenge and seek to shift current research or clinical practice paradigms by utilizing novel theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions? Are the concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions novel to one field of research or novel in a broad sense? Is a refinement, improvement, or new application of theoretical concepts, approaches or methodologies, instrumentation, or interventions proposed?

Approach. Are the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses well-reasoned and appropriate to accomplish the specific aims of the project? Have the investigators presented strategies to ensure a robust and unbiased approach, as appropriate for the work proposed? Are potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success presented? If the project is in the early stages of development, will the strategy establish feasibility, and will particularly risky aspects be managed? Have the investigators presented adequate plans to address relevant biological variables, such as sex, for studies in vertebrate animals or human subjects?

If the project involves clinical research, are the plans for 1) protection of human subjects from research risks, and 2) inclusion of minorities and members of both sexes/genders, as well as the inclusion of children, justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed?

Environment. Will the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Are the institutional support, equipment and other physical resources available to the investigators adequate for the project proposed? Will the project benefit from unique features of the scientific environment, subject populations, or collaborative arrangements?

Where applicable, the following items will also be considered:

Protections for Human Subjects. For research that involves human subjects but does not involve one of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate the justification for involvement of human subjects and the proposed protections from research risk relating to their participation according to the following five review criteria: 1) risk to subjects, 2) adequacy of protection against risks, 3) potential benefits to the subjects and others, 4) importance of the knowledge to be gained, and 5) data and safety monitoring for clinical trials.

For research that involves human subjects and meets the criteria for one or more of the six categories of research that are exempt under 45 CFR Part 46, the committee will evaluate: 1) the justification for the exemption, 2) human subjects involvement and characteristics, and 3) sources of materials.

Inclusion of Women, Minorities, and Children. When the proposed project involves human subjects and/or NIH-defined clinical research, the committee will evaluate the proposed plans for inclusion (or exclusion) of individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity, as well as the inclusion (or exclusion) of children to determine if it is justified in terms of the scientific goals and research strategy proposed.

Vertebrate Animals. The committee will evaluate the involvement of live vertebrate animals as part of the scientific assessment according to the following criteria: (1) description of procedures involving animals including species, strains, ages, sex, and total number to be used; (2) justifications for the use of animals and for the appropriateness of the species proposed; (3) interventions to minimize discomfort, distress, pain and injury; and (4) justification for euthanasia method if NOT consistent with the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. Reviewers will assess the use of chimpanzees as they would any other application proposing the use of vertebrate animals. For additional information, see  https://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/VASchecklist.pdf.

Biohazards. Reviewers will assess whether materials or procedures proposed are potentially hazardous to research personnel and/or the environment, and if needed, determine whether adequate protection is proposed.

Budget and Period of Support. Reviewers will consider whether the budget and the requested period of support are fully justified and reasonable in relation to the proposed research.

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 Agency Specific Processes.

NSF will manage the review of proposals in consultation with NHGRI. Relevant information about proposals and unattributed reviews of proposals will be shared between the participating organizations as appropriate. Further information on the processes and requirements of participating funding organizations is detailed in this Section and in Section VIII of this solicitation.

NSF Process: Those proposals selected for funding by the NSF will be handled in accordance with standard NSF procedures. After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF strives to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new awardees may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation.

After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with an 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.

NIH Process: Proposals selected for funding consideration by NIH will be invited to submit reformatted applications to the Division of Receipt and Referral (DRR) in NIH's Center for Scientific Review (CSR:  http://www.csr.nih.gov/). PIs invited to submit to NIH will receive further information on submission procedures from NIH and a new receipt date will be determined for the NIH formatted applications. An applicant will not be allowed to increase the proposed budget or change the scientific content of the application in the reformatted submission to the NIH. NIH budgets must be less than $500,000 in direct costs per year, and the total costs requested for all years may not exceed the range specified in this NSF solicitation. Indirect costs on any foreign subawards/subcontracts will be limited to eight (8) percent. Applicants will be expected to utilize the Multiple Principal Investigator option at the NIH ( https://grants.nih.gov/grants/multi_PI/) as appropriate.  Applications selected for funding consideration by NIH will be subject to the NIH  Data Management and Sharing (DMS) policy (effective January 25, 2023). These NIH applications will be entered into the NIH IMPAC II system.

Following the NSF peer review, recommended applications that have been resubmitted to the NIH are required to go to second level review by the Advisory Council or Advisory Board of the awarding Institute or Center. The following will be considered in making funding decisions:

  • Scientific and technical merit of the proposed project as determined by scientific peer review.
  • Availability of funds.
  • Relevance of the proposed project to program priorities.
  • Adequacy of data management and sharing plans.

Subsequent grant administration procedures for NIH awardees, including those related to New and Early Stage Investigators ( https://grants.nih.gov/grants/new_investigators/), will be in accordance with the policies of NIH. Applications selected for NIH funding will use the NIH R01 funding mechanism. At the end of the project period, renewal applications for projects funded by the NIH are expected to be submitted directly to the NIH as Renewal Applications.

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 infrastructure projects under 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:

If any for-profit partners are involved in the proposed project, all partners should agree in advance how intellectual property (IP) rights will be handled. A signed partnership agreement on IP, addressing both publication and patent rights, must be submitted to NSF prior to the issuance of an award. NSF will review this agreement to ensure that the graduation of students will not be unduly affected. NSF is not responsible for the agreement reached nor the IP information exchanged between partners.

For Awards supported by NIH: Notification of award as well as award terms and conditions will be determined by the NIH.

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 annual project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.

Failure to provide the required annual or final annual 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 annual 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.

Publications will contain language acknowledging support from the MFB Solicitation. Attribution of support in publications must acknowledge the MFB program, as well as the agency and award number, by including a phrase such as, “as part of the NSF/NIH Molecular Foundations for Biotechnology Program.”

For Awards supported by NIH: Project Reporting requirements will be determined by the relevant agency and included in the relevant award Terms & Conditions.

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:

  • Sorin Draghici, Division of Information and Intelligent Systems, CISE Directorate, telephone: (703) 292-2232, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • Zhilan J. Feng, Division of Mathematical Sciences, MPS Directorate, telephone: (703) 292-7523, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • Angel E. Garcia, Division of Physics, MPS Directorate, telephone: (703) 292-8897, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • Manju M. Hingorani, Division of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences, BIO Directorate, telephone: (703) 292-7323, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • Pui S. Ho, telephone: (970)491-0569, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • John C. Jewett, telephone: (703) 292-5373, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • Marcia E. Newcomer, telephone: (703) 292-2357, email: mfb@nsf.gov

  • Ian C. Nova, NIH National Human Genome Research Institute, telephone: (240) 987-2885, email: ian.nova@nih.gov

For questions related to the use of NSF systems contact:

  • NSF Help Desk: 1-800-381-1532
  • 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.

For questions about NHGRI interests, contact: 

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.

ABOUT THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH 

The mission of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is to seek fundamental knowledge about the nature and behavior of living systems and the application of that knowledge to enhance health, lengthen life, and reduce illness and disability. NIH works toward that mission by conducting research in its own laboratories; supporting the research of non-Federal scientists in universities, medical schools, hospitals, and research institutions throughout the country and abroad; helping in the training of research investigators; and fostering communication of medical information.

For the latest information about NIH programs, visit the NIH website at  http://www.nih.gov/.

National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI)

The mission of the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI)is to accelerate scientific and medical breakthroughs that improve human health. We do this by driving cutting-edge research, developing new technologies, and studying the impact of genomics on society. More information can be found at our website at  https://www.genome.gov.

NHGRI supports resources, approaches, and technologies that accelerate genomic research focused on the structure and biology of genomes; the genomics of disease; the implementation and effectiveness of genomic medicine; computational genomics and data science; the impact of genomic technology, advances, and implementation on health disparities and health equity; and ethical, legal, and social issues related to genomic advances. NHGRI recognizes the  importance of diversity in the genomic workforce, without which the promise of genomics cannot be fully achieved. 

In general, NHGRI supports studies that provide generalizable methods and knowledge. Approaches that are comprehensive across the genome or are generalizable across variants, tissues, diseases, or function may be in scope for NHGRI to the extent they address priority areas described in the  NHGRI 2020 Strategic Vision and on the web pages for the research mission of NHGRI’s Extramural Divisions and Offices:

Applications for studies relevant only to a particular disease or organ system should be directed to the appropriate Institute or Center. Applications whose primary scientific objective is to understand a single biological or behavioral process, the pathophysiology of a disease, or the mechanism of action of an intervention, will not be in scope for NHGRI. 

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 proposers 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 proposers 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