NSF 20-569: Inclusion across the Nation of Communities of Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science (NSF INCLUDES)
Program Solicitation
Document Information
Document History
- Posted: May 4, 2020
- Replaces: NSF 18-529
- Replaced by: NSF 22-622
Program Solicitation NSF 20-569
Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time): October 05, 2020 October 04, 2021 Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time): January 26, 2021 January 25, 2022 Important Information And Revision Notes
Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the revised NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 20-1), which is effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after June 1, 2020. Summary Of Program RequirementsGeneral InformationProgram Title:
Synopsis of Program:
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.
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
Award InformationAnticipated Type of Award: Cooperative Agreement Estimated Number of Awards: 1 to 3 NSF INCLUDES anticipates funding up to three Alliances with a duration of five years, contingent upon the availability of funds and receipt of competitive proposals. Awards will range from $1,000,000 - $2,000,000 per year. Anticipated Funding Amount: $2,000,000 to $3,000,000 In FY 2021, approximately $3,000,000 is available to fund the first year of Alliance cooperative agreements. NSF INCLUDES expects to provide up to $10 million in support for each Alliance over a five-year period of performance, contingent upon the availability of funds. Eligibility InformationWho May Submit Proposals:
Who May Serve as PI:
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI:
Proposal Preparation and Submission InstructionsA. Proposal Preparation Instructions
B. Budgetary Information
C. Due Dates
Proposal Review Information CriteriaMerit 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 InformationAward 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. IntroductionThe vision of the NSF INCLUDES Big Idea is to catalyze the STEM enterprise to work collaboratively for inclusive change, resulting in a STEM workforce that reflects the population of the Nation. More specifically, NSF INCLUDES seeks to broaden participation in STEM fields through a National Network that will inspire collaborative efforts aimed at increasing the active participation of those who have been historically underrepresented and underserved in STEM. The NSF INCLUDES National Network is composed of NSF INCLUDES Alliances, Design and Development Launch Pilots, Coordination Hub, NSF funded projects (such as centers, facilities and networks, and other projects with broadening participation components), scholars engaged in broadening participation research, Federal Coordination in STEM (FC-STEM) agencies, and organizations that support the goals of NSF INCLUDES. NSF INCLUDES is distinguished by its focus on new networks, systems, and partnerships; its approach to using data for change; and its focus on communicating impacts and results at scale. The initiative is fostering the creation of exemplars for designing, implementing, studying, and refining collaborative change models that are based on collective impact-style approaches, and networks that support adoption and adaptation at scale. With this solicitation, NSF is continuing to offer opportunities to propose an NSF INCLUDES Alliance that has the potential to substantially broaden the participation of individuals from underrepresented and underserved groups in STEM, especially in STEM fields that lack diversity. Alliances use lessons learned, promising practices, evidence-based mechanisms, the science of broadening participation, and the research and evaluations from past and present efforts related to broadening participation in STEM. Alliances bring together programs, people, organizations, technologies, and institutions to achieve results at scale, provide new research, and leverage NSF’s broadening participation investments. Each Alliance is committed to collectively achieving common goals through a well-defined set of common objectives. The NSF INCLUDES approach requires that each Alliance focus not only on its own vision and goals, but also work with other organizations within the NSF INCLUDES National Network (includesnetwork.org). This is a shift from current practice, which often involves highly successful but locally concentrated efforts. The NSF INCLUDES Big Idea aims to systematically build a network that is mobilizing communities with evidence-based strategies for broadening participation in STEM, bringing renewed emphasis and resources to increase diversity across and within STEM fields at scale. Inclusion of talent from all sectors of American society is necessary for the health and vitality of science and engineering and its societal relevance. This solicitation seeks to support diverse perspectives and new networks, systems, partnerships, and approaches. While the inclusion of previously supported NSF INCLUDES Design and Development Launch Pilots is encouraged, it is not required. This solicitation is open to organizations and established networks across the educational continuum (e.g., preK-12, higher education, general public) and contexts (e.g., formal, informal) with the expertise, partnerships, and capacity to address a critical broadening participation challenge in STEM at scale through an NSF INCLUDES Alliance. Researchers and practitioners at minority serving institutions are strongly encouraged to consider this opportunity given their experience and expertise in broadening participation contexts. II. Program DescriptionThe NSF INCLUDES Big Idea is a strategic addition to the NSF portfolio that provides a distinctive approach to addressing broadening participation challenges faced by underrepresented and underserved groups in STEM through collaborative networks and partnerships. NSF INCLUDES builds on and amplifies other investments that NSF has made in broadening participation over many decades. Aligned with the White House five-year strategic plan for STEM education, Charting a Course for Success: America's Strategy for STEM Education, projects funded by this Big Idea help to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEM through strategic partnerships and convergent approaches. The Alliances are integral to NSF INCLUDES and bring together new partners from many academic and professional disciplines and leverage the five design elements of collaborative infrastructure to address a broadening participation challenge at scale. In FY 2018 and FY 2019, NSF INCLUDES funded a total of eight Alliances. For more information on funded NSF INCLUDES Alliances, visit includesnetwork.org. With this solicitation, NSF continues to invest in the important work of the NSF INCLUDES Big Idea and invites proposals for NSF INCLUDES Alliances. NSF INCLUDES Alliances build the infrastructure necessary to foster collaboration and broaden participation in STEM by emphasizing the following five design elements of collaborative infrastructure: (1) Shared Vision, (2) Partnerships, (3) Goals and Metrics, (4) Leadership and Communication, and (5) the Potential for Expansion, Sustainability and Scale. The five design elements of collaborative infrastructure are critical for each NSF INCLUDES Alliance and require Alliances to:
Collectively, NSF INCLUDES Alliances:
In addition to addressing the five design elements of collaborative infrastructure, Alliances connect and contribute to the NSF INCLUDES National Network through the Alliance backbone support organization, the NSF INCLUDES Coordination Hub, current and potential partnerships, capacity building, resource sharing and/or other mechanisms. Proposals are especially encouraged that address broadening participation challenges not yet represented in the NSF INCLUDES portfolio of Alliances. For more information on funded NSF INCLUDES projects, see: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/simpleSearchResult?queryText=nsf+includes. NSF INCLUDES is one of the NSF 10 Big Ideas for future investment. Broadening participation challenges that connect to the other NSF 10 Big Ideas might also be considered. The other Big Ideas include: Future of Work at the Human-Technology Frontier, Growing Convergence Research, Harnessing the Data Revolution, Mid-scale Research Infrastructure, Navigating the New Arctic, NSF 2026, Quantum Leap, Understanding the Rules of Life, and Windows on the Universe. For more information regarding the NSF 10 Big Ideas, see: https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/big_ideas/. III. Award InformationNSF anticipates making up to three Alliance awards with a duration of five years, contingent on availability of funds and receipt of competitive proposals. Awards will range from $1.0 to $2.0 million per year for five years depending on the goals, objectives, and the size of the communities involved. Awards will be made as Cooperative Agreements, with ongoing support contingent upon satisfactory performance as assessed through reviews of annual progress reports, biennial site (or reverse site) visits, annual reviews of the NSF INCLUDES Alliances' strategic plans, and the availability of funds. The total amount of NSF's investment in any one NSF INCLUDES Alliance will depend upon the needs, plans, and opportunities offered by the Alliance. In reviewing an NSF INCLUDES Alliance's progress and assessing future plans, NSF will emphasize the NSF INCLUDES Alliance's performance in the following areas: (1) establishing an Alliance-wide shared broadening participation agenda and coordinating the Alliance's collaborative change activities and infrastructure, including the establishment of a “backbone” or support organization; (2) facilitating the Alliance's ability to work collectively (3) effectively managing the Alliance's shared goals and metrics, including providing evidence that the activities of the Alliance have increased participation in STEM for the target population(s); (4) demonstrating leadership across all Alliance partners and collaborating with the NSF INCLUDES Coordination Hub to engage with the broader NSF INCLUDES National Network; and (5) enhancing the potential for the Alliance to expand and sustain activities over time, and have an impact on a broad scale. Oversight for NSF INCLUDES Alliances is the responsibility of all NSF Directorates and Offices supporting NSF INCLUDES. Estimated program budget, number of awards and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds. IV. Eligibility InformationWho May Submit Proposals:
Who May Serve as PI:
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI:
V. Proposal Preparation And Submission InstructionsA. Proposal Preparation InstructionsLetters of Intent (required): Letters of Intent must be submitted through FastLane by an Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) and the project title must begin with “NSF INCLUDES Alliance LOI:”. Any full proposals received that did not submit a Letter of Intent by the required deadline will be returned without review. The Letter of Intent should identify the name and organizations of the PI, Co-PIs and other key personnel who will be involved with the project. The lead organization should be explicitly identified. The Letter of Intent should include a brief synopsis (less than 2,500 characters) of:
Letters of Intent are required but not binding. They will be used by NSF program staff to gauge the number of proposals likely to be submitted and to identify the types of reviewer expertise that will be required. Letter of Intent Preparation Instructions: When submitting a Letter of Intent through FastLane in response to this Program Solicitation please note the conditions outlined below:
Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via FastLane or Grants.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 Fastlane. PAPPG Chapter II.D.3 provides additional information on collaborative proposals. See PAPPG Chapter II.C.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. Special instructions for submitting to this Big Idea solicitation
Cover Sheet: Entries on the Cover Sheet are described in the PAPPG and NSF Grants.gov Application Guide. For planning purposes, July 1, 2021 or July 1, 2022, should be shown as the start date. Projects are limited to one Principal Investigator and a maximum of four co-Principal Investigators. Title of Proposed Project: The title of the proposed project should begin with the term: "NSF INCLUDES Alliance:" Project Summary (1 page): Provide an overview of the proposed NSF INCLUDES Alliance and separately address the Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts. The summary should be written in the third person, informative to those working in the same or related field(s), and insofar as possible, understandable to a broad audience within the scientific domain. Provide a clear and concise description of the NSF INCLUDES Alliance's target population(s), vision and its plans for partnerships; shared goals and metrics; leadership and communication; and expansion, sustainability, and scale. Project Description. The project description should provide a clear statement of the work to be undertaken and must include the objectives for the period of the proposed work and expected significance. Each proposal must explain how they will build the infrastructure to foster collaboration and achieve impact by emphasizing the following five design elements of collaborative infrastructure: (1) Shared Vision, (2) Partnerships, (3) Goals and Metrics, (4) Leadership and Communication, and (5) the Potential for Expansion, Sustainability, and Scale. Within the context of the five design elements of collaborative infrastructure, proposals should discuss (a) objectives and significance of the proposed activity; (b) the suitability of the methods to be used; (c) the qualifications of the investigators and the participating organizations; and (d) the effect of the effort on collaborative infrastructure for broadening the participation of the target population(s) in STEM. Project descriptions are a maximum of 20 pages and must contain separate section within the narrative labeled "Broader Impacts." Results of prior NSF support must be discussed if applicable (see PAPPG for guidelines). This solicitation also has additional review criteria outlined in Section VI below. The most competitive proposals will address the questions and considerations below regarding the five design elements of collaborative infrastructure:
NSF INCLUDES National Network: In addition to addressing the five design elements of collaborative infrastructure, Alliance proposals should present a reasonable and appropriate plan to connect and contribute to the NSF INCLUDES National Network through the NSF INCLUDES Coordination Hub in the project description. The NSF INCLUDES Coordination Hub works collaboratively with Alliances to promote success and elevate expertise through shared models, measurement practices, tools and resources that support learning, action, and sustainability. It communicates the discoveries of Alliances and other National Network members, builds capacity, and advances expansion and scale by connecting expertise from multiple sectors. The proposal should address how the Alliance will engage with the Coordination Hub using these and other mechanisms to advance the National Network. Potential benefits to the Alliance by participating in the National Network should also be described. Supplementary Documents: Supplementary documents listed in the PAPPG or NSF Grants.gov Application Guide as required should be appended in the Supplementary Document section. In addition, please provide the following:
Additional Guidance - Proposers are reminded to consult the PAPPG for guidance on additional information and documentation (e.g., biographical sketches, budget, data management plan, etc.) that must be included with the proposal submission. B. Budgetary InformationCost Sharing: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited. C. Due Dates
D. FastLane/Research.gov/Grants.gov RequirementsFor Proposals Submitted Via FastLane or Research.gov:
For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:
Proposers that submitted via FastLane or 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 ProceduresProposals 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 Building the Future: Investing in Discovery and Innovation - NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2018 – 2022. 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 CriteriaThe 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:
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.C.2.d(i). contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including PAPPG Chapter II.C.2.d(i), prior to the review of a proposal. When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:
The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:
Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education. Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as appropriate. Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria In addition to the NSF Merit Review Criteria, reviewers will be asked to consider the ability of the proposed NSF INCLUDES Alliance to provide the collaborative infrastructure necessary to support the Alliance's partners and activities within the context of the five design elements of collaborative infrastructure and the NSF INCLUDES National Network. Questions to be considered include:
B. Review and Selection ProcessProposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review, or Reverse Site Review. Letters of Intent Letters of Intent submitted in response to the NSF INCLUDES Alliance program solicitation will be reviewed and used internally by NSF program staff to gauge the number of proposals likely to be submitted and to identify the types of reviewer expertise that will be required. Full Proposals Full proposals may be reviewed in two phases including: (1) review of proposals by ad hoc review or panel, and (2) potentially a reverse site visit with an expert review panel comprised of internal or external reviewers. The Program Officer and NSF INCLUDES Team will consider the pool of recommendations and using several factors will either make a funding decision or invite proposers for proposals under consideration to NSF to participate in a reverse site visit before a final funding decision is made. Proposing teams invited for a reverse site visit may be asked to further articulate the Alliance’s vision and plans, provide additional clarity, address concerns, and or respond to specific inquiries posed by NSF and or an internal or external expert panel. The feedback from the panel, strength of the proposal, and potential for success will be considered. 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 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 InformationA. Notification of the AwardNotification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.) B. Award ConditionsAn 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. Special Award Conditions: NSF INCLUDES Alliance awards will be made in the form of Cooperative Agreements. The Cooperative Agreement will have an extensive section of Special Conditions relating to the period of performance, detailed work description, awardee responsibilities, NSF responsibilities, joint NSF awardee responsibilities, funding and funding schedule, reporting and evaluation requirements, key personnel, and other conditions. NSF will provide general oversight and monitoring of the NSF INCLUDES Alliances and external evaluation of the NSF INCLUDES program and National Network, to help assure effective performance and administration, as well as facilitating any coordination necessary to further the objectives of the NSF INCLUDES initiative. Within the first 90 days of the award, the lead organization of the Alliance should submit to NSF an integrated and coordinated strategic plan for addressing the identified broadening participation challenge(s), including a virtual infrastructure to facilitate collaborative activities and the accomplishment and implementation of a set of specified activities and targeted outcomes. Grantees will be required to include appropriate acknowledgment of NSF support under the NSF INCLUDES Big Idea in any publication (including World Wide Web pages) of any material based on or developed under the project, in the following terms: “This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation NSF INCLUDES Big Idea under Grant No. (Grantee enters NSF grant number.)” Grantees also will be required to orally acknowledge NSF support using the language specified above during all news media interviews, including popular media such as radio, television and news magazines. C. Reporting RequirementsFor 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. The NSF INCLUDES Alliance will be required to submit annual and evaluation reports on progress and plans, which will be used as a basis for performance review and determining the obligation of continuing grant increments. Biennial reviews of progress will also take the form of site visit(s) or reverse site visit(s). The NSF INCLUDES Alliance will also be required to develop a set of management and performance indicators for submission annually to NSF. Part of this reporting will include adding to a database that will be kept by the NSF INCLUDES Coordination Hub, for the purpose of developing shared measures for the National Network, and by an NSF INCLUDES evaluator for performance monitoring and evaluation. These data will capture the information required to demonstrate progress towards achieving the goals of the NSF INCLUDES National Network. VIII. Agency ContactsPlease 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:
For questions related to the use of FastLane or Research.gov, contact:
For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:
IX. Other InformationThe 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 Science FoundationThe 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.E.6 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.
Privacy Act And Public Burden StatementsThe 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 |
