Print

Archived funding opportunity

This document has been archived.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

NSF 06-537: Research and Evaluation on Education in Science and Engineering (REESE)

Program Solicitation

Document Information

Document History

Download the solicitation (PDF, 0.5mb)
View the program page

Research and Evaluation on Education in Science and Engineering (REESE)

Program Solicitation
NSF 06-537
Replaces Document NSF 05-529 and NSF 04-553

NSF Logo

National Science Foundation
Directorate for Education and Human Resources
      Division of Research, Evaluation and Communication



Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required):

    March 28, 2006

      Required Letter of Intent for Synthesis Research and Evaluation Projects and Empirical Research and Evaluation Projects

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

    May 15, 2006

      Due Date for Empirical Research and Evaluation Project proposals

    May 29, 2006

      Due Date for Synthesis Research and Evaluation Project proposals

Revisions And Updates

In furtherance of the President's Management Agenda, in Fiscal Year 2006, NSF has identified programs that will offer proposers the option to utilize Grants.gov to prepare and submit proposals. Grants.gov provides a single Government-wide portal for finding and applying for Federal grants online.

Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Grants.gov or via the NSF Fastlane system.

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

  1. Collaborative proposals. All collaborative proposals must be submitted via the NSF FastLane system. This includes collaborative proposals submitted:
  • by one organization (and which includes one or more subawards); or
  • as separate submissions from multiple organizations;

Proposers are advised that collaborative proposals submitted in response to this Program Solicitation via Grants.gov will be requested to be withdrawn and proposers will need to resubmit these proposals via the NSF FastLane system. (Chapter II, Section D.3 of the Grant Proposal Guide provides additional information on collaborative proposals.)

  1. All Other Types of Proposals That Contain Subawards. All other types of proposals that contain one or more subawards also must be submitted via the NSF Fastlane system. (Chapter II, Section C.2.g.(vi)(e) of the Grant Proposal Guide provides additional information on subawards.)

The Division of Research, Evaluation, and Communication in the Directorate for Education and Human Resources of NSF has revised two former solicitations the Evaluative Research and Evaluation Capacity Building and Research on Learning and Education (NSF 05-529) and the Interagency Education Research Initiative (NSF 04-553) into a single solicitation with a strong emphasis on promoting research and evaluation on learning in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines supported by the National Science Foundation.

Summary Of Program Requirements

General Information

Program Title:

Research and Evaluation on Education in Science and Engineering (REESE)

Synopsis of Program:

The Division of Research, Evaluation and Communication (REC) in the Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR) of the National Science Foundation (NSF) supports basic and applied research and evaluation that enhances science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) learning and teaching. This solicitation calls for two types of proposals—synthesis and empirical.

  • Synthesis Research and Evaluation Project proposals should identify areas where the knowledge base in either evaluation or research is sufficiently robust to support strong scientific claims, identify areas of importance to education research and practice, and propose rigorous methods for synthesizing findings and drawing conclusions. Proposals for workshops and other meetings are permitted.
  • Empirical Research and Evaluation Project proposals should identify areas that have the potential for advancing discovery and innovation at the frontiers of STEM learning. These proposals are expected to be based deeply in the STEM disciplines and be theoretically and methodologically strong with the potential of contributing to theory, methodology, and practice.

For either type of proposal, areas of interest include behavioral, cognitive, social, and technological aspects of learning and education; learning in formal and informal settings; diffusion, implementation, and the role of context in educational and learning innovations; and theoretical, methodological, and statistical issues of importance in advancing research and evaluation. Investigators from across the broad range of disciplines supported by the NSF are invited to submit proposals. Interdisciplinary proposals are particularly welcome.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

  • Elizabeth VanderPutten, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5147, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: evanderp@nsf.gov

  • John C. Cherniavsky, Senior EHR Advisor for Research, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5136, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: jchernia@nsf.gov

  • Gabriel M. Della-Piana, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5141, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: gdellapi@nsf.gov

  • James Dietz, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5156, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: jdietz@nsf.gov

  • Janice M. Earle, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 885 S, telephone: (703) 292-5097, fax: (703) 292-9044, email: jearle@nsf.gov

  • Elmima C. Johnson, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5137, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: ejohnson@nsf.gov

  • David McArthur, Program Director (SOC), Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Undergraduate Education, 840 N, telephone: (703) 292-4622, fax: (703) 292-9015, email: dmcarthu@nsf.gov

  • N. Hari Narayanan, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5182, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: nnarayan@nsf.gov

  • Gregg Solomon, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-8333, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: gesolomo@nsf.gov

  • Larry E. Suter, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5144, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: lsuter@nsf.gov

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

  • 47.076 --- Education and Human Resources

Eligibility Information

  • Organization Limit: None Specified.
  • PI Eligibility Limit: None Specified.
  • Limit on Number of Proposals: None Specified.

Award Information

  • Anticipated Type of Award: Standard or Continuing Grant
  • Estimated Number of Awards: 25 to 32 - It is anticipated that between 15 and 20 Synthesis Research and Evaluation Project awards will be made and between 10 and 12 Empirical Research and Evaluation Project awards will be made.
  • Anticipated Funding Amount: $10,000,000 The maximum award for Synthesis Research and Evaluation projects is $200,000 with a duration of 1 to 3 years. The maximum award size for Empirical Research and Evaluation Projects is $1,000,000 with a duration of 3 to 5 years.

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
  • Letters of Intent: Submission of Letters of Intent is required. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
  • Full Proposal Preparation Instructions:

    The standard Grant Proposal Guide and NSF Grants.gov Application Guide guidelines apply to this solicitation.

    • Full proposals submitted via FastLane:

      • Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) Guidelines apply

    • 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/bfa/dias/policy/docs/grantsgovguide.pdf) To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package: click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov website, 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.

B. Budgetary Information
  • Cost Sharing Requirements: Cost Sharing is not required by NSF.
  • Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Not Applicable.
  • Other Budgetary Limitations: Not Applicable.
C. Due Dates
  • Letters of Intent (required):
      March 28, 2006
        Required Letter of Intent for Synthesis Research and Evaluation Projects and Empirical Research and Evaluation Projects
  • Full Proposal Deadline Date(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitter's local time):
      May 15, 2006
        Due Date for Empirical Research and Evaluation Project proposals
      May 29, 2006
        Due Date for Synthesis Research and Evaluation Project proposals

Proposal Review Information

  • 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

About the National Science Foundation and the Directorate for Education and Human Resources

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is charged with promoting the vitality of the nation's science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) research and education enterprises. As one part of that mission, the Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR) has primary responsibility for NSF's efforts to provide national and research-based leadership in STEM. EHR promotes four goals in fulfilling this responsibility:

  1. Prepare the next generation of STEM professionals and attract more U.S. citizens and permanent residents to these careers.

  2. Increase the technological and scientific literacy of all U.S. citizens and residents so that they can participate responsibly in an increasingly technological society and acquire knowledge of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics that is appropriate to the development of workforce skills and life-long career opportunities.

  3. Broaden participation of all groups and increase achievement in STEM.

  4. Attend to critical workforce needs requiring significant math and science skills and knowledge, by attracting new people to these STEM careers and by providing support for the development of the current workforce.

To reach these goals, the Directorate sponsors programs in the Divisions of Elementary, Secondary, and Informal Education (ESIE), Undergraduate Education (DUE), Graduate Education (DGE), Human Resource Development (HRD), the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR), and the Division of Research, Evaluation, and Communication (REC). The Directorate also supports the Math and Science Partnerships (MSP).

About the Division of Research, Evaluation, and Communication

The mission of the Division of Research, Evaluation, and Communication (REC) is: (1) to advance discovery and innovation at the frontiers of STEM learning; (2) to serve as the intellectual hub that unites education research and evaluation activities across the Foundation; and (3) to help coordinate the Foundation’s education research and evaluation efforts with those of other government agencies. REC advances its mission by developing an interdisciplinary research and evaluation portfolio focusing on core scientific questions of learning in real and emerging educational contexts, from preschool through adulthood.

REC has funded research and evaluation projects on learning and education in STEM in order to enhance the knowledge base and improve educational practice, to increase the capacity of these communities to conduct and communicate the results of their research, and to broaden participation and promote equity. Its principal grant programs have been Research on Learning and Education (ROLE), Evaluative Research and Evaluation Capacity Building (EREC), Interagency Education Research Initiative (IERI), and Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER). Projects supported by these REC programs have made significant contributions to a broad range of important educational research areas.

Through the present solicitation for Research and Evaluation on Education in Science and Engineering (REESE), REC seeks to lay the foundation for advancing its program portfolio. Proposals are solicited in two general categories:

  • Synthesis Research and Evaluation Projects
  • Empirical Research and Evaluation Projects

II. Program Description

Synthesis Research and Evaluation Projects

REESE seeks proposals that synthesize research and evaluation with the aims of accumulating knowledge generated by past studies and identifying new research and evaluation opportunities in STEM education and learning. Progress in fields such as education research and evaluation requires the integration of insights from a broad range of research traditions and literatures. Unfortunately, this integration too rarely occurs. As a result, research efforts are fragmented so that, for example, expert knowledge of specific disciplinary content (such as resides in a department of physics) may not be brought into contact with expert knowledge about the development of learning (such as resides in a department of cognitive science) which, in turn, may not be brought into contact with expert knowledge of classroom implementation (such as resides in a department of teacher development). The fragmentation of research efforts also impedes efforts to explore, systematically and productively, the various research and evaluation methods considered appropriate for investigating questions across disciplines.

In order to address the challenges such fragmentation poses, REESE is providing an opportunity, through this solicitation, for researchers to synthesize knowledge on topics of national importance and to identify new research and evaluation opportunities. Proposals should identify areas where the existing research-based knowledge is compelling, appropriate for synthesis, and important to research and/or practice. It must describe the methodology that will be used to synthesize the existing research and to ensure conclusions and recommendations are rigorously derived from the work. Finally, the proposal must explain how the proposed synthesis has implications, whether direct or indirect, for the enhancement of STEM learning and education.

The syntheses invited under this program may be produced by a number of mechanisms. These include (but are not limited to): meta-analyses or new analyses of extant data; the identification and explanation of divergent research findings; literature surveys and other activities resulting in white papers that consolidate the state of research knowledge and identify gaps in it; and other activities, such as workshops or conferences, that address the consolidation of STEM educational research and evaluation and that yield visible, high-quality contributions to the literature.

A successful proposal will identify and justify why the area of study is of national importance, how the study might lay the groundwork for future research and evaluation that will lead to new discoveries in learning and education in STEM, and how it might enhance practice. Syntheses may also help to identify unproductive areas of study, theoretical claims, methodologies, or means of analysis that have been undermined empirically or logically, especially if such areas or approaches continue to exert undue influence on educational research or practice.

Below are some examples of the type of work that is welcomed under this solicitation. These examples do not constitute an exhaustive or mutually exclusive set of priorities.

  • Syntheses of behavioral, cognitive, social, and technological aspects of the foundations of learning and education in STEM disciplines and across different populations. The synthesized research could identify compelling and innovative bridges between research in the cognitive and social sciences and research on learning and education within STEM content domains.
  • Syntheses of learning in formal and informal settings could address what is known about learning and teaching in specific content areas, the development of expertise in an area over time, or the effectiveness of teaching practices, including technologically supported instruction. Results of these syntheses should provide a strong evidentiary base to support sustained improvement in STEM educational practice.
  • Syntheses in the diffusion of educational innovations. Projects could examine demographic or contextual factors that affect how successfully innovations are spread, adopted, and implemented across changes in scale – whether such change is from individual to group, laboratory to field, classroom to higher organizational levels, or across place and time. Syntheses should further indicate which specific findings are ready for broad implementation, which findings remain to be tested in different contexts, and which findings should be re-examined.
  • Syntheses may also address topics concerning theoretical, methodological, and statistical issues important to research and evaluation in education and learning in the context of STEM. Synthesis efforts may focus on where specific methodological, statistical, and measurement advancements have yielded valuable insights and discoveries. In addition, such work could examine various approaches used to study a particular problem with the aim of contributing insights about how that problem might be advanced by further developments and applications in method and theory.
  • Syntheses addressing factors that contribute to broadening the participation of members of groups underrepresented in education research and evaluation are welcome. Investigators are encouraged to consider these factors in other synthesis areas as well.

Successful synthesis projects will explain why the topic is of importance to the enhancement of STEM learning; describe a rigorous methodology for synthesizing the research, and for validating conclusions and recommendations; and have clear plans for publications in peer reviewed journals as well as for widespread dissemination of materials of use to policy-makers and practitioners.

Empirical Research and Evaluation Projects

REESE seeks strategically important research studies that advance discovery and innovation at the frontiers of STEM learning. Advances in many related fields have transformed research on STEM learning and education in recent years. These developments have contributed to an emerging, multidisciplinary science of learning that bears directly on the educational and research goals of NSF. REESE welcomes proposals that seek to understand how to produce significant improvements in STEM learning through a comprehensive approach that contributes to research frontiers in both human learning and in the educational environments and systems that are structured to support STEM teaching and learning. REESE also seeks projects to increase the capacity and breadth of the research and evaluation communities contributing to these frontiers.

REESE encourages projects that reconcile basic research, evaluation, and educational practice, and that generate hypotheses from one disciplinary area that can be tested and refined in another in the support of content learning in the STEM disciplines. Funded research and evaluation projects are expected to enable the community to integrate investigations of learning into educational contexts effectively, to build and strengthen cross-disciplinary communities of research, and to advance the knowledge base within and across the relevant disciplines.

Examples of the type of work invited under this solicitation follow. They do not constitute an exhaustive or mutually exclusive set of priorities.

  • Studies of behavioral, cognitive, social, and technological aspects of the foundations of learning and education in STEM disciplines and across different populations. Proposed projects could build compelling and innovative bridges between research in the cognitive and social sciences and research on learning and education within STEM content domains.
  • Studies of learning in formal and informal settings through traditional and alternative media/technologies could address the learning and teaching of specific content areas, the development of expertise in an area over time, or the effectiveness of teaching practices, including technologically supported instruction. Results of these studies should significantly contribute to an evidentiary base to support sustained improvement in STEM educational practice.
  • Studies of the diffusion of educational innovations. Projects could explore demographic or contextual factors that affect how successful innovations are spread, adopted, and implemented across changes in scales– whether such change is from individual to group, laboratory to field, classroom to higher organizational levels, or across place and time.
  • Studies may also address topics concerning theoretical, methodological, and statistical issues important to advancing research and evaluation in education and learning in the context of STEM. Such projects must have important implications for research and evaluation methodological practice drawn from empirical foundations.

Successful empirical proposals must meet, as appropriate to the goals of the project, the following requirements:

  • The project must advance the frontiers of knowledge and discovery. Proposals should rigorously address core research or evaluation questions that will enable the research and education communities to make advancements of national importance in improving STEM learning, from preschool through adulthood.
  • Projects must be deeply rooted in one or more specific STEM content domains. Proposals should describe how the project will exploit significant scientific research questions at the intersection of specific STEM domains and the domains of education and learning. Appropriate expertise in the relevant STEM domains and in education or social science research and evaluation should be clearly represented on the proposed project team.
  • Projects must advance theory and method. Proposals should show a logical and coherent union of theory and method based on appropriate literatures. In addition, proposals should describe how the proposed research or evaluation could result in significant advancements in theory, method, and practice that could be built upon by others in the STEM education communities.
  • Projects must advance human resource development and promote efforts to broaden participation in science and engineering. Proposals should describe how the project will further the nation’s capacity to educate future generations of scientists, engineers, educators, and evaluators.

Evaluation Plan

Both Synthesis Research and Evaluation Projects, and Empirical Research and Evaluation Projects must have an evaluation plan, including performance indicators and other specific measures, that will be used by the project team to assess the project's success in meeting its goals and objectives. Although each project should propose its own measures, some later standardization is anticipated so that NSF can conduct a program-wide evaluation of the quality and effectiveness of programs.

III. Eligibility Information

The categories of proposers identified in the Grant Proposal Guide are eligible to submit proposals under this program announcement/solicitation.

IV. Award Information

Estimated program budget, number of awards and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds.

NSF expects to make standard or continuing grant awards. The estimated number of awards will be 25 to 32. It is anticipated that between 15 and 20 Synthesis Research and Evaluation Project awards will be made. It is anticipated that between 10 and 12 Empirical Research and Evaluation Project awards will be made. The anticipated funding amount is $10,000,000. The maximum award for Synthesis Research and Evaluation projects is $200,000 with a duration of 1 to 3 years. The maximum award size for Empirical Research and Evaluation Projects is $1,000,000 with a duration of 3 to 5 years.

V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Instructions

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

Letters of Intent (required):

Letters of Intent must be submitted via FastLane using the Letter of Intent module in FastLane, even if the full proposal will be submitted via Grants.gov. Letters of Intent are required for Synthesis Research and Evaluation Projects, and Empirical Research and Evaluation Projects. A letter of intent normally contains the PI and co-PI's names, a proposed title, a list of possible participating organizations (if applicable), and a synopsis that describes the work in sufficient detail to permit an appropriate selection of reviewers.

Full Proposal Instructions:

In furtherance of the President's Management Agenda, in Fiscal Year 2006, NSF has identified programs that will offer proposers the option to utilize Grants.gov to prepare and submit proposals. Grants.gov provides a single Government-wide portal for finding and applying for Federal grants online.

Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Grants.gov or via the NSF FastLane system.

  • Proposals submitted via the FastLane system:

Proposals submitted in response to this Program Solicitation via FastLane 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 electronicall on the NSF Webside 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 pubs@nsf.gov.

  • 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/bfa/dias/policy/docs/grantsgovguide.pdf). 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, i.e, the Program Solicitation Number, 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 pubs@nsf.gov.

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

  1. Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals must be submitted via the NSF FastLane system. This includes collaborative proposals submitted:
  • by one organization (and which includes one or more subawards); or
  • as separate submissions from multiple organizations.

Proposers are advised that collaborative proposals submitted in response to this Program Solicitation via Grants.gov will be requested to be withdrawn and proposers will need to resubmit these proposals via the NSF FastLane system. (Chapter II, Section D.3 of the Grant Proposal Guide provides additional information on collaborative proposals.)

  1. All Other Types of Proposals That Contain Subawards. All other types of proposals that contain one or more subawards also must be submitted via the NSF Fastlane system. (Chapter II, Section C.2.g.(vi)(e) of the Grant Proposal Guide provides additional information on subawards.)

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing:

Cost sharing is not required by NSF in proposals submitted under this Program Solicitation.

C. Due Dates

Proposals must be submitted by the following date(s):

Letters of Intent (required):

    March 28, 2006
      Required Letter of Intent for Synthesis Research and Evaluation Projects and Empirical Research and Evaluation Projects

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

    May 15, 2006
      Due Date for Empirical Research and Evaluation Project proposals
    May 29, 2006
      Due Date for Synthesis Research and Evaluation Project proposals

D. FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements

  • For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane:

Detailed technical instructions for proposal 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 solicitation.

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. Proposers are no longer required to provide a paper copy of the signed Proposal Cover Sheet to NSF. Further instructions regarding this process are available on the FastLane Website at: http://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/

  • 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. The Grants.gov’s Grant Community User Guide is a comprehensive reference document that provides technical information about Grants.gov. Proposers can download the User Guide as a Microsoft Word document or as a PDF document. The Grants.gov User Guide is available at: http://www.grants.gov/CustomerSupport. 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. Proposal Review Information

A. NSF Proposal Review Process

Reviews of proposals submitted to NSF are solicited from peers with expertise in the substantive area of the proposed research or education project. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with the oversight of the review process. NSF invites the proposer to suggest, at the time of submission, the names of appropriate or inappropriate reviewers. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts with the proposer. Special efforts are made to recruit reviewers from non-academic institutions, minority-serving institutions, or adjacent disciplines to that principally addressed in the proposal.

The National Science Board approved revised criteria for evaluating proposals at its meeting on March 28, 1997 (NSB 97-72). All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.

On July 8, 2002, the NSF Director issued Important Notice 127, Implementation of new Grant Proposal Guide Requirements Related to the Broader Impacts Criterion. This Important Notice reinforces the importance of addressing both criteria in the preparation and review of all proposals submitted to NSF. NSF continues to strengthen its internal processes to ensure that both of the merit review criteria are addressed when making funding decisions.

In an effort to increase compliance with these requirements, the January 2002 issuance of the GPG incorporated revised proposal preparation guidelines relating to the development of the Project Summary and Project Description. Chapter II of the GPG specifies that Principal Investigators (PIs) must address both merit review criteria in separate statements within the one-page Project Summary. This chapter also reiterates that broader impacts resulting from the proposed project must be addressed in the Project Description and described as an integral part of the narrative.

Effective October 1, 2002, NSF will return without review proposals that do not separately address both merit review criteria within the Project Summary. It is believed that these changes to NSF proposal preparation and processing guidelines will more clearly articulate the importance of broader impacts to NSF-funded projects.

The two National Science Board approved merit review criteria are listed below (see the Grant Proposal Guide Chapter III.A for further information). The criteria include considerations that help define them. These considerations are suggestions and not all will apply to any given proposal. While proposers must address both merit review criteria, reviewers will be asked to address only those considerations that are relevant to the proposal being considered and for which he/she is qualified to make judgments.

    What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?
    How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields? How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of the prior work.) To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative and original concepts? How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity? Is there sufficient access to resources?
    What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity?
    How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning? How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society?

NSF staff will give careful consideration to the following in making funding decisions:

    Integration of Research and Education
    One of the principal strategies in support of NSF's goals is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions provide abundant opportunities where individuals may concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators, and students and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through the diversity of learning perspectives.
    Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities
    Broadening opportunities and enabling the participation of all citizens -- women and men, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities -- is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

B. Review Protocol and Associated Customer Service Standard

All proposals are carefully reviewed by at least three other persons outside NSF who are experts in the particular field represented by the proposal. Proposals submitted in response to this announcement/solicitation will be reviewed by Ad Hoc 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.

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 Director. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.

NSF is striving to be able to tell proposers whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. The time interval begins on the closing date of an announcement/solicitation, or the date of proposal receipt, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director accepts the Program Officer's recommendation.

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 Division 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.A. 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 (NSF-GC-1); * or Federal Demonstration Partnership (FDP) Terms and Conditions * and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award letter. Cooperative agreement awards are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC). Electronic mail notification is the preferred way to transmit NSF awards to organizations that have electronic mail capabilities and have requested such notification from the Division of Grants and Agreements.

Consistent with the requirements of OMB Circular A-16, Coordination of Geographic Information and Related Spatial Data Activities, and the Federal Geographic Data Committee, all NSF awards that result in relevant geospatial data must be submitted to Geospatial One-Stop in accordance with the guidelines provided at: www.geodata.gov.

More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions is contained in the NSF Grant Policy Manual (GPM) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpm. The GPM is also for sale through the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office (GPO), Washington, DC 20402. The telephone number at GPO for subscription information is (202) 512-1800. The GPM may be ordered through the GPO Website at http://www.gpo.gov/.

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

C. Reporting Requirements

For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the PI must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer at least 90 days before the end of the current budget period.

Within 90 days after the expiration of an award, the PI also is required to submit a final project report. Failure to provide final technical reports delays NSF review and processing of pending proposals for the PI and all Co-PIs. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.

PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project reporting system, available through FastLane, for preparation and submission of annual and final project reports. This system permits electronic submission and updating of project reports, including information on project participants (individual and organizational), activities and findings, publications, and other specific products and contributions. PIs will not be required to re-enter information previously provided, either with a proposal or in earlier updates using the electronic system.

VIII. Contacts For Additional Information

General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

  • Elizabeth VanderPutten, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5147, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: evanderp@nsf.gov

  • John C. Cherniavsky, Senior EHR Advisor for Research, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5136, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: jchernia@nsf.gov

  • Gabriel M. Della-Piana, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5141, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: gdellapi@nsf.gov

  • James Dietz, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5156, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: jdietz@nsf.gov

  • Janice M. Earle, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 885 S, telephone: (703) 292-5097, fax: (703) 292-9044, email: jearle@nsf.gov

  • Elmima C. Johnson, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5137, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: ejohnson@nsf.gov

  • David McArthur, Program Director (SOC), Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Undergraduate Education, 840 N, telephone: (703) 292-4622, fax: (703) 292-9015, email: dmcarthu@nsf.gov

  • N. Hari Narayanan, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5182, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: nnarayan@nsf.gov

  • Gregg Solomon, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-8333, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: gesolomo@nsf.gov

  • Larry E. Suter, Program Director, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5144, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: lsuter@nsf.gov

For questions related to Grants.gov, contact:

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

For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:

  • DeMonica L. Parks, Program Specialist, Directorate for Education & Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation & Communication, 855 S, telephone: (703) 292-5167, fax: (703) 292-9046, email: dparks@nsf.gov

IX. Other Programs Of Interest

The NSF Guide to Programs is a compilation of funding for research and education in science, mathematics, and engineering. The NSF Guide to Programs is available electronically at https://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?gp. General descriptions of NSF programs, research areas, and eligibility information for proposal submission are provided in each chapter.

Many NSF programs offer announcements or solicitations concerning specific proposal requirements. To obtain additional information about these requirements, contact the appropriate NSF program offices. Any changes in NSF's fiscal year programs occurring after press time for the Guide to Programs will be announced in the NSF E-Bulletin, which is updated daily on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/home/ebulletin, and in individual program announcements/solicitations. Subscribers can also sign up for NSF's MyNSF News Service (https://www.nsf.gov/mynsf/) to be notified of new funding opportunities that become available.

About The National Science Foundation

The National Science Foundation (NSF) funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. Awardees are wholly responsible for conducting their project activities and preparing the results for publication. Thus, the Foundation does not assume responsibility for such findings or their interpretation.

NSF welcomes proposals from all qualified scientists, engineers and educators. The Foundation strongly encourages women, minorities and persons with disabilities to compete fully in its programs. In accordance with Federal statutes, regulations and NSF policies, no person on grounds of race, color, age, sex, national origin or disability shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving financial assistance from NSF, although some programs may have special requirements that limit eligibility.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities (investigators and other staff, including student research assistants) to work on NSF-supported projects. See the GPG Chapter II, Section D.2 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

а

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; 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 applicant 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 needing information as part of the review process or in order to coordinate programs; 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," 63 Federal Register 267 (January 5, 1998), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records," 63 Federal Register 268 (January 5, 1998). 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 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 this burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Suzanne Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, Division of Administrative Services, National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA 22230.

OMB control number: 3145-0058.

Top