Print

Archived funding opportunity

This document has been archived. The latest version is NSF 21-588.

NSF 12-542: Research in Disabilities Education (RDE)

Program Solicitation

Document Information

Document History

Download the solicitation (PDF, 0.7mb)
View the program page

Program Solicitation NSF 12-542

NSF Logo

National Science Foundation

Directorate for Education & Human Resources
     Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings
     Division of Human Resource Development

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

     June 01, 2012

RDE Model Building: Level 1, RDE Model Building: Level 2, RDE Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education: Level 1, RDE Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education: Level 2

Important Information And Revision Notes

A revised version of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG), NSF 13-1, was issued on October 4, 2012 and is effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after January 14, 2013. Please be advised that the guidelines contained in NSF 13-1 apply to proposals submitted in response to this funding opportunity. Proposers who opt to submit prior to January 14, 2013, must also follow the guidelines contained in NSF 13-1.

Please be aware that significant changes have been made to the PAPPG to implement revised merit review criteria based on the National Science Board (NSB) report, National Science Foundation's Merit Review Criteria: Review and Revisions. While the two merit review criteria remain unchanged (Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts), guidance has been provided to clarify and improve the function of the criteria. Changes will affect the project summary and project description sections of proposals. Annual and final reports also will be affected.

A by-chapter summary of this and other significant changes is provided at the beginning of both the Grant Proposal Guide and the Award & Administration Guide.

Please note that this program solicitation may contain supplemental proposal preparation guidance and/or guidance that deviates from the guidelines established in the Grant Proposal Guide.

The Research in Disabilities Education (RDE) program continues to advance the goal of broadening the participation of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM. In this solicitation RDE will support two types of projects: Model Building and Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education.

This solicitation represents minor revisions in the program's strategic investments in broadening the participation and achievement of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM. The former RDE Alliances for Students with Disabilities in STEM track, and the former Enrichment track (NSF 09-508), have been adapted to continue the broadening participation of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM through the RDE Model Building Track. This track incorporates the implementation and capacity building components that were previously developed in the RDE Alliances for Students with Disabilities in STEM track, and the former Enrichment track (NSF 09-508). Model building, translation and utilization will be addressed through the two levels of the RDE Model Building track.

The previous RDE Research and Demonstration tracks (NSF 09-508) have been modified to reflect the Directorate for Education and Human Resources Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education (BPR) emphasis. RDE has two levels for BPR. BPR can also be found in other solicitations in the Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings (DRL) and in the Division of Human Resource Development (HRD). DRL's Research and Evaluation on Education in Science and Engineering (REESE) solicitation has a strand called BPR that converges with elements of the Research on Gender in Science and Engineering (GSE) and RDE solicitations; the new BPR strand is jointly managed by DRL and HRD with coordination by the RDE, GSE and REESE programs.

Important Reminders

A revised version of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG), NSF 11-1, was issued on October 1, 2010 and is effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after January 18, 2011. Please be advised that the guidelines contained in NSF 11-1 apply to proposals submitted in response to this funding opportunity. Proposers who opt to submit prior to January 18, 2011, must also follow the guidelines contained in NSF 11-1.

Cost Sharing: The PAPPG has been revised to implement the National Science Board's recommendations regarding cost sharing. Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited. In order to assess the scope of the project, all organizational resources necessary for the project must be described in the Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources section of the proposal. The description should be narrative in nature and must not include any quantifiable financial information. Mandatory cost sharing will only be required when explicitly authorized by the NSF Director. See the PAPP Guide Part I: Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) Chapter II.C.2.g(xi) for further information about the implementation of these recommendations.

Data Management Plan: The PAPPG contains a clarification of NSF's long standing data policy. All proposals must describe plans for data management and sharing of the products of research, or assert the absence of the need for such plans. FastLane will not permit submission of a proposal that is missing a Data Management Plan. The Data Management Plan will be reviewed as part of the intellectual merit or broader impacts of the proposal, or both, as appropriate. Links to data management requirements and plans relevant to specific Directorates, Offices, Divisions, Programs, or other NSF units are available on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/dmp.jsp. See Chapter II.C.2.j of the GPG for further information about the implementation of this requirement.

Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan: As a reminder, each proposal that requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers must include, as a supplementary document, a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals. Please be advised that if required, FastLane will not permit submission of a proposal that is missing a Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan. See Chapter II.C.2.j of the GPG for further information about the implementation of this requirement.

Summary Of Program Requirements

General Information

Program Title:

Research in Disabilities Education (RDE)

Synopsis of Program:

The Research in Disabilities Education (RDE) program advances the goal of broadening the participation and achievement of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM. This effort is realized by making strategic investments in educational and institutional Model Building and in basic and applied Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education (BPR). Model Building projects develop, replicate, translate and utilize innovative educational and institutional capacity building models to broaden the participation of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM fields. Models employ evidence-based educational exemplars that improve the learning, participation, persistence and graduation of students with disabilities in associate, baccalaureate and graduate STEM degree programs. BPR projects promote efforts to understand the underlying issues contributing to the differential learning, participation and graduation rates of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM. Particular emphasis is placed on contributing to the knowledge base by investigating the STEM learning characteristics and differences of postsecondary students with disabilities. Educational research about students with disabilities in STEM is advanced by studying the educational and pre-professional experiences that influence student interest, academic performance, retention and persistence in degree programs, degree completion and career choices. RDE projects contribute to closing the achievement gaps for postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM fields, including students enrolled in community colleges, baccalaureate degree programs and graduate schools.

RDE-Model Building (RDE-MB) - These projects broaden the participation and achievement of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM by creating, replicating, translating and implementing innovative educational and institutional capacity building models. RDE-MB projects employ evidence-based educational exemplars that improve the learning, participation, persistence and graduation of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM degree programs. These projects must have a strong theoretical base and initiatives must be justified by the relevant educational, disability, and social science research.

RDE-Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education (RDE-BPR) These projects to investigate the underlying issues affecting the differential learning, participation, retention and graduation rates of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM. Proposed research may investigate learning and educational influences as well as organizational, institutional or systemic processes that broaden the participation of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM. Disability should be the main focus of the research and analysis, with race, ethnicity, gender, economic status, and/or veteran status as potential secondary foci. Projects catalyze the acquisition of knowledge that may inform interventions impacting learning, persistence, and graduation in STEM for postsecondary students with disabilities under certain conditions and in specific educational contexts. BPR can also be found in other solicitations in the Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings (DRL) and in the Division of Human Resource Development (HRD). DRL's Research and Evaluation on Education in Science and Engineering (REESE) solicitation has a strand called BPR that converges with elements of the Research on Gender in Science and Engineering (GSE) and RDE solicitations; the new BPR strand is jointly managed by DRL and HRD with coordination by the RDE, GSE and REESE programs.

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.

  • Mark H. Leddy, Program Director/HRD, telephone: (703) 292-4655, email: mleddy@nsf.gov

  • Mary Moriarty, Program Director/HRD, telephone: (703) 292-4684, email: mmoriart@nsf.gov

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

  • 47.076 --- Education and Human Resources

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant

Estimated Number of Awards: 12 to 17

RDE awards in FY 2012 with a mix of awards across the Model Building and Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education tracks.

Anticipated Funding Amount: $2,000,000

Approximately $2 million in FY2012 for new RDE awards.

Eligibility Information

Organization Limit:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following:

  • RDE Proposals:

    • Universities and Colleges - Universities and two- and four-year colleges (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members. Such organizations also are referred to as academic institutions.
    • Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Independent museums, observatories, research labs, professional societies and similar organizations in the U.S. associated with educational or research activities.

PI Limit:

None Specified

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

None Specified

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:

None Specified

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

  • Letters of Intent: Not Applicable
  • Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not Applicable
  • Full Proposals:
    • Full Proposals submitted via FastLane: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide, Part I: Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) Guidelines apply. The complete text of the GPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg.
    • Full Proposals submitted via Grants.gov: NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov Guidelines apply (Note: The NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide)

B. Budgetary Information

  • Cost Sharing Requirements: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.
  • Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Not Applicable
  • Other Budgetary Limitations: Not Applicable

C. Due Dates

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

         June 01, 2012

    RDE Model Building: Level 1, RDE Model Building: Level 2, RDE Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education: Level 1, RDE Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education: Level 2

Proposal Review Information Criteria

Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria apply.

Award Administration Information

Award Conditions: Standard NSF award conditions apply.

Reporting Requirements: Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.

I. Introduction

The Research in Disabilities Education (RDE) program supports efforts to broaden the participation and achievement of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM. This goal is advanced by strategic investments in model building awards to develop, replicate, translate and utilize innovative educational and institutional capacity building models to broaden the participation of undergraduate and graduate students with disabilities in STEM fields, and by research investments contributing to the knowledge base about the underlying issues contributing to the differential learning, participation and graduation rates of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM. RDE is particularly interested in advancing knowledge in the fields of disability research and STEM education, around areas related to the following broad questions:

  • How does our nation best educate and train postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM to become contributing members of the science and engineering workforce?
  • What advances in knowledge and tools are necessary to educate postsecondary STEM learners with disabilities so they effectively achieve academic and employment success?
  • How do institutions of higher education engage postsecondary students with disabilities in personalized STEM learning to pursue science and engineering careers?
  • What evidence-based practice and capacity building models are effective for transitioning students with disabilities from postsecondary STEM programs into the science and engineering workforce?

II. Program Description

The Research in Disabilities Education (RDE) program promotes efforts to broaden the participation and achievement of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM. The underrepresentation of undergraduate and graduate students with disabilities in STEM fields is better understood and addressed by investigating and improving the underlying learning and educational conditions negatively impacting the differential participation and graduation rates of this underrepresented group. By investing in awards through the two RDE program tracks, Model Building and Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education, the RDE program contributes to understanding and improving the educational conditions that reduce the academic achievement gaps of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM. The field's contributions to knowledge capital provide the basis for translating information to expand opportunities and advance the STEM achievement of this underrepresented group. By realizing these accomplishments the NSF enables innovation and discovery in STEM by educating and preparing a world class, broadly inclusive STEM workforce.

The RDE program's foundation is built upon basic and applied research about the underlying issues contributing to the differential learning, participation, persistence and graduation rates of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM. Findings from this research are the basis for creating evidence-based educational exemplars, which provide the foundation for developing, replicating, translating and implementing innovative educational and institutional capacity building models for broadening participation. Specific RDE program objectives:

  • To advance postsecondary STEM learning, participation, persistence and graduation for students with disabilities in the U.S.
  • To create mechanisms that improve sustainable practices at U.S. institutions of higher education that foster the broadening participation and success of undergraduate and graduate students with disabilities in STEM.
  • To advance understanding of the underlying learning and educational issues affecting the differential participation and graduation rates of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM.
  • To inform learning and educational theory relative to postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM.

A. RDE-Model Building (RDE-MB)

Innovative educational models that incorporate evidence-based mechanisms for improving and increasing the learning, participation, persistence and graduation of postsecondary STEM students with disabilities may be developed, tested, replicated and implemented. Successful proposals are founded on a sound theoretical base and activities within models are expected to be based on and justified by the relevant STEM education and disability research. The models must form feasible, logical, comprehensive and unified programs of change. The primary focus of RDE-MB projects is at the STEM undergraduate level, but may include the STEM graduate level. The goals of the proposed model building project may align with one or more of the following areas, although this list is not exhaustive, and innovative goals are encouraged:

  • Create an innovative model for improving the learning and education of postsecondary students with disabilities in a specific STEM discipline.
  • Discover and describe the effective institutional components of a model for increasing the persistence and graduation rates of students with disabilities in STEM.
  • Develop and investigate a model for transitioning students with disabilities from undergraduate STEM degree programs into graduate STEM education and into the science and engineering workforce.
  • Translate and implement the most effective components of a model for improving the retention and graduation rates of students with disabilities in STEM developed for one type of university or college to a different type of institution of higher education.
  • Replicate an evidence based model for improving the learning, participation and graduation of postsecondary students with disabilities participating in NSF-funded Center projects.

Proposers have flexibility for developing, replicating, translating, and implementing postsecondary STEM education models for students with disabilities. The models may focus on STEM education involving any of the fields supported by the NSF or multi-, cross-, inter-, or emerging-disciplinary fields, at the postsecondary level. The model may involve one STEM field or multiple fields. It may involve one postsecondary institutional type such as a community college or a minority-serving institution, or multiple types of institutions of higher education. A model could focus on the STEM education of one group of students with a specific disability type or it may address students with disparate disabilities. An established model might also be replicated at, or translated to, an NSF-funded Center or a minority serving institution of higher education. The logic for the model scope selection should be clearly articulated in the proposal. Models are expected to be implemented and evaluated using rigorous research and evaluation methodology. All RDE-MB proposals must include specific information on Project Evaluation plans. Please see C. PROJECT EVALUATION of the solicitation for more detail. There are two RDE-MB levels:

RDE-MB Level 1: Designing, developing and testing models of evidence-based STEM education for improving and increasing the learning, participation and graduation of postsecondary students with disabilities. Models should have a strong theoretical base and model building must be justified by the relevant STEM education and disability research. Models should be studied to validate their efficacy in impacting students with disabilities in STEM. Funding may be requested for up to $800,000 total budget and up to 48 months duration.

RDE-MB Level 2: Replicating, translating and implementing models of STEM education for improving and increasing the learning, participation and graduation of postsecondary students with disabilities. Projects study the replication, translation and implementation of successful models of evidence-based STEM education for postsecondary students with disabilities in NSF-funded Centers, at minority serving institutions of higher education, and/or at other institutions of higher education. Funding may be requested for up to $1,000,000 total budget, and up to 48 months duration, and is expected to include costs for activities at more than one institution.

B. RDE-Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education (RDE-BPR)

Research projects investigate the underlying issues affecting the differential learning, participation, persistence and graduation rates of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM. Proposed research may study the learning and educational influences as well as organizational, institutional or systemic processes that broaden the participation of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM. Successful proposals are grounded in appropriate theory and incorporate advances in research methodologies, conceptual frameworks and/or data gathering and analytic techniques. Methods from education research, as well as sociology, psychology, statistics, and other social and behavioral science and education disciplines, are welcome. Disability should be the main focus of the research and analysis, with race, ethnicity, gender, economic status, and/or veteran status as potential secondary foci. Proposals that explore the competing influences of an individual's identity in multiple groups are particularly encouraged (e.g., disability and race status). The goals of the proposed research project may align with one or more of the following areas, although this list is not exhaustive, and innovative goals are encouraged:

  • Discover and describe differences and preferences in learning STEM and the factors that affect interest, performance, and choice of study and careers in STEM fields where people with disabilities are underrepresented.
  • Discover and describe how experiences in informal and formal educational settings affect the postsecondary learner with a disability's participation, interest and performance in STEM.
  • Investigate organizational factors that promise to lead to more equitable and inviting postsecondary STEM educational environments for students with disabilities.

The RDE-BPR track will catalyze acquisition of knowledge that may inform interventions impacting learning, participation, persistence, and graduation in STEM for postsecondary students with disabilities under specific conditions and in disparate contexts. Proposers have the broad flexibility under RDE-BPR to design innovative projects to investigate improvements in the learning, participation, persistence and graduation of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM if theory-driven and strong research components are proposed. Successful proposals should include a discussion of the theory, or theories, grounding the research and specify testable hypotheses. The proposal should discuss in detail the methods used to test the hypotheses, and if a population sample is used, this should be described along with the rationale for sample selection, and the project's access to the sample population. The proposal should include a data analysis and interpretation plan.

The RDE-BPR track does not fund intervention or education projects that directly serve students as the primary purpose. Research projects may involve an intervention with students as subjects only if findings from the intervention will substantially answer the research questions posed within the context of theory, concepts or frameworks of interest. There should be meaningful control or comparison groups included in the design when appropriate. Innovative proposals are encouraged from individual institutions and organizations as well as from collaborative groups with multiple partners. RDE is interested in supporting potentially transformative research that may be high risk and non-traditional with the potential to significantly advance the knowledge base and impact innovative educational model building, translation and implementation. All RDE-BPR proposals must include specific information on Project Evaluation plans. Please see C. PROJECT EVALUATION of the solicitation for more detail. There are two RDE-BPR levels:

RDE-BPR Level 1: Fundamental learning and educational research, early-stage studies, and design and development research. These projects enhance the understanding of the basic underlying issues affecting differential learning, participation, persistence and graduation rates of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM education. Funding may be requested for up to $500,000 total budget and up to 36 months duration.

RDE-BPR Level 2: Efficacy and replication research to inform learning and educational theory, and advance postsecondary STEM learning and education for students with disabilities. There should be strong empirical evidence that supports the promise for efficacy study or research replication. Populations, environments and research conditions being replicated or studied should be strongly justified by previous studies, theory and a robust conceptual framework. Funding may be requested for up to a $600,000 total budget, and up to 48 months duration.

C. PROJECT EVALUATION: Every RDE proposal must include an evaluation plan that describes how an independent evaluator will conduct formative and summative assessments of the project's intellectual merit and broader impacts. A project is expected to track and report in detail the accomplishment of proposed targets for broader impacts and intellectual merit. The budget must include sufficient resources for evaluation and assessment. The evaluation plan must be appropriate for the scope of the project, include evaluation questions that relate to project goals, and propose evaluation activities, indicators and outcomes aligned to the evaluation questions. The evaluation processes should rely on a suitable mix of qualitative and quantitative measures. When appropriate and affordable, a project is encouraged to use experimental and/or quasi-experimental designs that may include control, treatment or comparison groups. The proposal should include a plan to communicate information to the field about the project components the independent evaluation finds to be effective and ineffective.

Formative evaluation of a RDE-BPR project may include, but is not limited to, such activities as documenting and describing the operations of the project; appropriate selection of research subjects; and the fidelity and integrity of the research design and measures. Summative evaluation of a RDE-BPR project should include an assessment of the contribution of project results to the field's knowledge base.

In addition to standard evaluation questions, a RDE-MB project evaluation should demonstrate a clear definition of the model development or replication being evaluated, the expected project outcomes, and the potential for model replication. Formative evaluation of a RDE-MB project should include methods for documenting progress and for providing feedback to the project personnel that allows for continuous improvement of project activities. Summative evaluation of a RDE-MB project focuses on the influence of the project on the expected outputs, outcomes and impacts, and should include an assessment of the contribution of the project to the field.

An independent evaluator is expected to adhere to the American Evaluation Association's Guiding Principles for Evaluators (www.eval.org/Publications/GuidingPrinciples.asp) and project evaluations are expected to be consistent with the standards established by the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (www.jcsee.org/program-evaluation-standards/program-evaluation-standards-statements). The following references may be helpful in designing an evaluation plan:

D. PROGRAM MONITORING AND EVALUATION: Individual projects funded by the RDE program are expected to cooperate with third-party program evaluators and to respond to inquiries, interviews and other approaches for collecting evaluation data across individual awards. All projects should respond to and provide process information and findings, current data, and outcome data elements that may be summarized across projects to third-party program evaluators, to NSF-funded contractors collecting project level data for the RDE program, and to the RDE program staff.

E. REVIEWING PROPOSALS: The Research in Disabilities Education (RDE) program seeks to expand its reviewer pool. If you would like to volunteer, please send the appropriate information to Mr. Corey Hynson at chynson@nsf.gov, or to Dr. Mary Moriarty at mmoriart@nsf.gov. Include a curriculum vitae and a brief description of your research expertise in your e-mail. RDE staff will contact you if your area of expertise is relevant and reviews are needed in your area.

F. INFORMATION ABOUT PREVIOUS RDE AWARDS: NSF's web site provides abstracts for, and other information about, awards made by this program under the current and prior program name ("Program for Persons with Disabilities"). NSF's web site provides the ability to search awards using custom queries. A customize query to find RDE awards includes the use of the RDE Element Code, which is 1545. To find more specific awards, it is possible to narrow the search by, for example, using:

  • Element Code: 1545 and Keyword: "mentoring
  • Element Code: 1545 and Keyword: "learning community"

III. Award Information

Anticipated funding for new grants in all RDE program tracks is $2,000,000 in FY 2012.

RDE-BPR Level 1: Fundamental learning and educational research, early-stage study, and design and development research proposals may request up to a total of $500,000 for 36 months.

RDE-BPR Level 2: Efficacy and replication research proposals may request up to a total of $600,000 for 48 months.

RDE-MB Level 1: Model design, development and testing proposals may request up to a total of $800,000 for 48 months.

RDE-MB Level 2: Model replication, translation and implementation proposals may request up to a total of $1,000,000 for 48 months.

Depending on the quality of the submissions, NSF expects to fund 6-8 RDE-BPR Level 1 proposals, 3-4 RDE-BPR Level 2 proposals, 2-3 RDE-MB Level 1 proposals, and 1-2 RDE-MB Level 2 proposals.

IV. Eligibility Information

Organization Limit:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following:

  • RDE Proposals:

    • Universities and Colleges - Universities and two- and four-year colleges (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members. Such organizations also are referred to as academic institutions.
    • Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Independent museums, observatories, research labs, professional societies and similar organizations in the U.S. associated with educational or research activities.

PI Limit:

None Specified

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

None Specified

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:

None Specified

Additional Eligibility Info:

The RDE program does not offer individual stipends, scholarships, or living expenses in direct support of individuals with disabilities. Instead the RDE program funds eligible organizations to conduct research and development.

Funding is offered for special assistance or equipment to enable people with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects through Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED). Refer to the NSF Grant Proposal Guide for instructions to prepare FASED requests as part of a competitive proposal or as a separate award supplement.

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 Grants.gov or via the NSF FastLane system.

  • Full proposals submitted via FastLane: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG). The complete text of the GPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg. Paper copies of the GPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov. Proposers are reminded to identify this program solicitation number in the program solicitation block on the NSF Cover Sheet For Proposal to the National Science Foundation. Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing.
  • 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) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov.

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

Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from multiple organizations must be submitted via the NSF FastLane system. Chapter II, Section D.4 of the Grant Proposal Guide provides additional information on collaborative proposals.

Important Proposal Preparation Information: FastLane will check for required sections of the proposal, in accordance with Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) instructions described in Chapter II.C.2. The GPG requires submission of: Project Summary; Project Description; References Cited; Biographical Sketch(es); Budget; Budget Justification; Current and Pending Support; Facilities, Equipment & Other Resources; Data Management Plan; and Postdoctoral Mentoring Plan, if applicable. If a required section is missing, FastLane will not accept the proposal.

Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the GPG instructions. If the solicitation instructions do not require a GPG-required section to be included in the proposal, insert text or upload a document in that section of the proposal that states, "Not Applicable for this Program Solicitation." Doing so will enable FastLane to accept your proposal.

PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

On the COVER PAGE select this Program Solicitation and then select the Research in Disabilities Education (Res in Disabilities Ed) as the Program for the NSF Unit Consideration. The Program selection will automatically identify the Division.

The TITLE on the COVER PAGE should be prefaced with an abbreviation identifying the type of RDE proposal being submitted:

  • RDE-MB1 - for RDE Model Building Level 1 proposals
  • RDE-MB2 - for RDE Model Building Level 2 proposals
  • RDE-BPR1 - for RDE Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education Level 1 proposals
    •
  • RDE-BPR2 - for RDE Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education Level 2 proposals

The one-page PROJECT SUMMARY should

  • Restate the project Title, PI and PI Institution;
  • Address each of the NSF review criterion under separate headings: INTELLECTUAL MERIT and BROADER IMPACTS;
  • Briefly describe the proposed activities.
    • For RDE-MB proposals identify the theory grounding the model building, the specific project goal(s) and objective(s), the components of the model, the STEM education and disability research underlying the model, and the target population(s) of students with disabilities.
  • For RDE-BPR proposals identify the theory grounding the research, the research question(s) and hypotheses, the target research population(s), the research methods, and the data analysis and interpretation plan.

    • REFERENCES CITED: All references cited in the Project Summary and Project Description must be listed in this section. If no references are cited please submit "No References Cited" in this section.

    BIOSKETCHES: Biosketches for the PI, Co-PI(s) and senior project personnel are required. Biosketches must follow the NSF guidelines outlined in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide, or NSF Grants.gov Application Guide, and may not be longer than 2 pages. A biosketch for the independent evaluator(s) is requested and may be added as SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS.

    BUDGET AND BUDGET JUSTIFICATION: Budgets should be in NSF format and include up to three pages of budget justification. The budget justification should be in narrative form and include detailed explanations for each line item with budget resources listed in the budget. Each partner in a collaborative proposal must submit a separate budget and budget justification. A separate budget and budget justification must also be submitted for each proposed subaward. Information about what may or may not be included in the budget or budget justification is outlined in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide and NSF Grants.gov Application Guide. The budget should include estimated costs for the principal investigator to attend a four-day grantee meeting, held in the Washington, D.C. area, each award year. Office equipment for project staff is expected to come from other sources and should not appear as a budgeted item.

    FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT AND OTHER RESOURCES: This section should include details about facilities, equipment, or any other resources necessary for completion of the project. As per the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG), the description of facilities, equipment and resources should be narrative in nature and must not include quantifiable financial information. In order to assess the scope of the project, all organizational resources necessary for the project must be described in the Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources section, and these will be reviewed as part of the merit review process.

    SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS: Required supplementary documents listed in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) must be added in the Supplementary Documentation section. Please note the following:

    • General letters of support for the project will not be accepted. All RDE proposals may include letters of commitment from significant partners in the proposal. The letters of commitment must indicate what the writer is committing to do and/or to contribute as part of the proposed project.
    • Data Management Plans: All NSF proposals are required to include a Data Management Plan (DMP) of no more than two pages, and the DMP should be submitted as part of the Supplementary Documentation section with the heading, "Data Management Plan." The DMP will be reviewed as part of the intellectual merit or broader impacts of the proposal or both. See Chapter II.C.2.j of the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) for further information on the implementation of this requirement. Additional guidance on the DMP, from the Directorate for Education and Human Resources, can be found at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/dmpdocs/ehr.pdf
    • A biosketch for the independent evaluator(s) is requested and may be added to the Supplementary Documentation section. The biosketch must follow standard NSF format.

    PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The details for the 15 page project description for each type of RDE proposal are below. Note that all NSF proposals must address both NSF review criterion in the text of the project description: INTELLECTUAL MERIT and BROADER IMPACTS.

    1. RDE Model Building Level 1 (RDE-MB1)

    • Describe the STEM education and disability research, intellectual and scientific context, rationale and theory grounding the design, development and/or testing of the model.
    • Explain how the proposed educational model could lead to improving and increasing the learning, participation and graduation of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM.
    • Define the questions and hypotheses that guide the model design, development and/or testing.
    • Explain the characteristics of the target population(s), criteria for study inclusion and evidence the proposed project will have access to necessary data.
    • Describe the design, development and/or testing methods and include an analysis and interpretation plan.
    • Explain the project goals, objectives and activities to conduct the work, along with a management plan and timeline.
    • Describe how the project model(s) will be studied to validate their efficacy in impacting students with disabilities in STEM.
    • Include an evaluation plan following the guidelines found in section II.C of this solicitation.
    • Provide a clear and detailed education, outreach, communication and/or dissemination plan, identifying the expected products and/or publications.
    • Summarize any prior NSF-funded work during the past five years following the guidelines from the NSF Grant Proposal Guide, section II.C.2.d.(i).

    2. RDE Model Building Level 2 (RDE-MB2)

    • Describe the STEM education and disability research, intellectual and scientific context, rationale and theory grounding the replication, translation and implementation of the educational model(s).
    • Explain how the proposed work will inform STEM educational models, and contribute to postsecondary STEM learning, participation and graduation for students with disabilities.
    • Describe the strong empirical evidence that supports the promise for replication or translation study.
    • Define the research question(s) and hypotheses.
    • Explain the characteristics of the target population(s), centers, Alliance projects, institutions or higher education, and/or STEM organizations.
    • Describe the criteria for target inclusion and evidence the proposed project will have access to necessary data.
    • Describe the replication, translation and/or implementation methods and include a data analysis and interpretation plan.
    • Explain the project goals, objectives and activities to conduct the model replication, translation and/or implementation, along with a management plan and timeline.
    • Include an evaluation plan following the guidelines found in section II.C of this solicitation.
    • Provide a clear and detailed education, outreach, communication and/or dissemination plan, identifying the expected products and/or publications.
    • Summarize any prior NSF-funded work during the past five years following the guidelines from the NSF Grant Proposal Guide, section II.C.2.d.(i).

    3. RDE Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education Level 1 (RDE-BPR1)

    • Describe the background, intellectual and scientific context, rationale and theory grounding the research.
    • Explain how the proposed work will advance the knowledge base about underlying issues affecting the differential learning, participation and graduation rates of postsecondary students with disabilities in STEM.
    • Describe how the proposed project represents fundamental learning and educational research, and/or early-stage studies, and/or design and development research.
    • Define the research question(s) and hypotheses.
    • Explain the characteristics of the target research population(s), criteria for subject inclusion and evidence the proposed project will have access to subjects and/or subject data.
    • Describe the research methods and include a data analysis and interpretation plan.
    • Explain the project goals, objectives and activities to conduct the research, along with a management plan and timeline.
    • Include an evaluation plan following the guidelines found in section II.C of this solicitation.
    • Provide a clear and detailed education, outreach, communication and/or dissemination plan, identifying the expected products and/or publications.
    • Summarize any prior NSF-funded work during the past five years following the guidelines from the NSF Grant Proposal Guide, section II.C.2.d.(i).

    4. RDE Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education Level 2 (RDE-BPR2)

    • Describe the background, intellectual and scientific context, rationale and theory grounding the research.
    • Explain how the proposed work will inform learning and educational theory, and advance postsecondary STEM learning and education for students with disabilities.
    • Describe the strong empirical evidence that supports the promise for the efficacy or research replication study.
    • Define the research question(s) and hypotheses.
    • Explain the characteristics of the target research population(s), criteria for subject inclusion and evidence the proposed project will have access to subjects and/or subject data.
    • Describe the research methods and include a data analysis and interpretation plan.
    • Explain the project goals, objectives and activities to conduct the research, along with a management plan and timeline.
    • Include an evaluation plan following the guidelines found in section II.C of this solicitation.
    • Provide a clear and detailed education, outreach, communication and/or dissemination plan, identifying the expected products and/or publications.
    • Summarize any prior NSF-funded work during the past five years following the guidelines from the NSF Grant Proposal Guide, section II.C.2.d.(i).

    B. Budgetary Information

    Cost Sharing: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited

    C. Due Dates

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

           June 01, 2012

      RDE Model Building: Level 1, RDE Model Building: Level 2, RDE Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education: Level 1, RDE Broadening Participation Research in STEM Education: Level 2

    D. FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements

    • For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane:

      Detailed technical instructions regarding the technical aspects of preparation and submission via FastLane are available at: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm. For FastLane user support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail fastlane@nsf.gov. The FastLane Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the FastLane system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.

      Submission of Electronically Signed Cover Sheets. The Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must electronically sign the proposal Cover Sheet to submit the required proposal certifications (see Chapter II, Section C of the Grant Proposal Guide for a listing of the certifications). The AOR must provide the required electronic certifications within five working days following the electronic submission of the proposal. Further instructions regarding this process are available on the FastLane Website at: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/fastlane.jsp.

    • 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: http://www07.grants.gov/applicants/app_help_reso.jsp. In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide provides additional technical guidance regarding 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 the NSF FastLane system for further processing.

    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 the GPG as Exhibit III-1.

    A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: http://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 Empowering the Nation Through Discovery and Innovation: NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2011-2016. 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 core strategies 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 provide abundant opportunities where individuals may concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators, and students, and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through the variety of learning perspectives.

    Another core strategy in support of NSF's mission is broadening 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. (GPG 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 GPG 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:

    • 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 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.

    B. Review and Selection Process

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

    Reviewers will be asked to formulate a recommendation to either support or decline each proposal. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.

    After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF is striving to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director accepts the Program Officer's recommendation.

    A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and submitted by each reviewer. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.

    In all cases, after programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements for review of business, financial, and policy implications and the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.

    VII. Award Administration Information

    A. Notification of the Award

    Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)

    B. Award Conditions

    An NSF award consists of: (1) the award letter, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award letter; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1); * or Research Terms and Conditions * and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award letter. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.

    *These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf.gov.

    More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.

    C. Reporting Requirements

    For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer at least 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). Within 90 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 Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.

    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:

    • Mark H. Leddy, Program Director/HRD, telephone: (703) 292-4655, email: mleddy@nsf.gov

    • Mary Moriarty, Program Director/HRD, telephone: (703) 292-4684, email: mmoriart@nsf.gov

    For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:

    For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:

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

    IX. Other Information

    The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "My NSF" 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. "My NSF" also is available on NSF's website at https://www.nsf.gov/mynsf/.

    Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this new mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at http://www.grants.gov.

    About The National Science Foundation

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

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

    NSF receives approximately 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 provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See Grant Proposal Guide Chapter II, Section D.2 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

    The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.

    The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.

    The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering.

    To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov

    • Location:

    4201 Wilson Blvd. Arlington, VA 22230
    • 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) 292-7827
    • To Locate NSF Employees:

    (703) 292-5111

    Privacy Act And Public Burden Statements

    The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports submitted by awardees will be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies or other entities needing information regarding applicants or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency, court, or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See Systems of Records, NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004). Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award.

    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding the burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:

    Suzanne H. Plimpton
    Reports Clearance Officer
    Division of Administrative Services
    National Science Foundation
    Arlington, VA 22230



    Top