Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
NSF Proposal Preparation NSF Proposal Preparation HighlightsHighlights
Hosted by:Hosted by:
Ask Early, Ask OftenAsk Early, Ask Often
Jean FeldmanJean Feldman
BFA/DIASBFA/DIAS
(703) 292-8243(703) [email protected]
Richard NaderRichard Nader
OD/OISEOD/OISE
(703) 292-7221(703) [email protected]
Jacqueline Jacqueline MeszarosMeszaros
SBE/SESSBE/SES
(703) 292-7261(703) [email protected]
What to Look for in an NSF What to Look for in an NSF Funding OpportunityFunding Opportunity
Goal of programGoal of program
EligibilityEligibility
Special proposal preparation and/or Special proposal preparation and/or award requirementsaward requirements
Electronic Submission RequirementsElectronic Submission Requirements
Types of NSF SubmissionsTypes of NSF Submissions
No deadlinesNo deadlines
DeadlinesDeadlines
Target datesTarget dates
Submission Submission WindowsWindows
Preliminary Preliminary proposalsproposals
Letter of IntentLetter of Intent
NSF Proposal Preparation NSF Proposal Preparation GuidesGuides
Grant Proposal GuideGrant Proposal Guide
Grants.gov Application GuideGrants.gov Application Guide
Grant Proposal Guide (GPG)Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) Provides guidance for preparation of proposalsProvides guidance for preparation of proposals
Specifies process for deviations including:Specifies process for deviations including: individual program announcements; and individual program announcements; and by written approval of cognizant AD or designeeby written approval of cognizant AD or designee
Describes process -- and criteria -- by which proposals will Describes process -- and criteria -- by which proposals will be reviewed be reviewed
Describes process for withdrawals, returns & declinationsDescribes process for withdrawals, returns & declinations
Describes the award process and procedures for requesting Describes the award process and procedures for requesting continued supportcontinued support
Identifies significant grant administrative highlightsIdentifies significant grant administrative highlights
Sections of an NSF ProposalSections of an NSF Proposal
Cover SheetCover Sheet Project SummaryProject Summary Table of ContentsTable of Contents Project DescriptionProject Description References CitedReferences Cited Biographical Sketch(es)Biographical Sketch(es) BudgetBudget Current & Pending SupportCurrent & Pending Support Facilities, Equipment & Other ResourcesFacilities, Equipment & Other Resources Special Information & Supplementary Special Information & Supplementary
DocumentationDocumentation
A Good ProposalA Good Proposal
A good proposal is a good idea, well A good proposal is a good idea, well expressed, with a clear indication of expressed, with a clear indication of methods for pursuing the idea, methods for pursuing the idea, evaluating the findings, making them evaluating the findings, making them known to all who need to know, and known to all who need to know, and indicating the broader impacts of the indicating the broader impacts of the activity.activity.
Proposal DevelopmentProposal Development
Key Questions for Prospective Key Questions for Prospective InvestigatorInvestigator
1. What do you intend to do?1. What do you intend to do?2. Why is the work important?2. Why is the work important?3. What has already been done?3. What has already been done?4. How are you going to do the work?4. How are you going to do the work?
Proposal Development Strategies – Proposal Development Strategies – Individual InvestigatorIndividual Investigator
Determine your long-term research/education Determine your long-term research/education goals or plangoals or plan
Develop your bright ideaDevelop your bright idea Survey the literatureSurvey the literature Contact Investigators working on topicContact Investigators working on topic Prepare a brief concept paperPrepare a brief concept paper Discuss with colleagues/mentorsDiscuss with colleagues/mentors
Proposal Development Strategies - Proposal Development Strategies - Individual Investigator (cont’d)Individual Investigator (cont’d)
Prepare to do the projectPrepare to do the project Determine available resourcesDetermine available resources Realistically assess needsRealistically assess needs Develop preliminary dataDevelop preliminary data Present to colleagues/mentors/studentsPresent to colleagues/mentors/students
Determine possible funding sourcesDetermine possible funding sources
Understand the ground rulesUnderstand the ground rules
Proposal Development Strategies - Proposal Development Strategies - Individual Investigator (cont’d)Individual Investigator (cont’d)
Ascertain overall scope and missionAscertain overall scope and mission Read carefully solicitation instructionsRead carefully solicitation instructions Determine where your project fitsDetermine where your project fits Ascertain evaluation procedures and criteriaAscertain evaluation procedures and criteria
Talk with NSF Program Officer:Talk with NSF Program Officer: Your proposed projectYour proposed project Specific program requirements/limitationsSpecific program requirements/limitations Current program patternsCurrent program patterns
Coordinate with your organization’s Coordinate with your organization’s sponsored projects officesponsored projects office
Budgetary GuidelinesBudgetary Guidelines AmountsAmounts
Reasonable for work - RealisticReasonable for work - Realistic Well Justified - Need establishedWell Justified - Need established In-line with program guidelinesIn-line with program guidelines
Eligible costsEligible costs PersonnelPersonnel EquipmentEquipment TravelTravel Participant SupportParticipant Support Other Direct Costs (including subawards, consultant Other Direct Costs (including subawards, consultant
services, computer services, publication costs)services, computer services, publication costs)
Budgetary Guidelines Budgetary Guidelines (cont’d)(cont’d)
General Suggestions General Suggestions
All funding sources noted in Current All funding sources noted in Current and Pending Supportand Pending Support
Help from Sponsored Projects OfficeHelp from Sponsored Projects Office
Getting Support in Proposal Getting Support in Proposal WritingWriting
NSF PublicationsNSF Publications Program Announcements/Program Announcements/
SolicitationsSolicitations
Grant Proposal GuideGrant Proposal Guide
Web PagesWeb Pages
Funded Project AbstractsFunded Project Abstracts
Reports, Special PublicationsReports, Special Publications
Targeted WorkshopsTargeted Workshops
Program OfficersProgram Officers IncumbentIncumbent Former “Rotators”Former “Rotators”
Mentors on CampusMentors on Campus
Previous PanelistsPrevious Panelists
Serve As ReviewerServe As Reviewer
Sponsored Projects OfficeSponsored Projects Office
Successful ProposalsSuccessful Proposals
The Proposal:The Proposal:
does not separately address both merit review criterion does not separately address both merit review criterion in the Project Summary;in the Project Summary;
is inappropriate for funding by the National Science is inappropriate for funding by the National Science FoundationFoundation
is submitted with insufficient lead-time before the is submitted with insufficient lead-time before the activity is scheduled to begin;activity is scheduled to begin;
is a full proposal that was submitted by a proposer that is a full proposal that was submitted by a proposer that has received a "not invited" response to the submission has received a "not invited" response to the submission of a preliminary proposal;of a preliminary proposal;
is a duplicate of, or substantially similar to, a proposal is a duplicate of, or substantially similar to, a proposal already under consideration by NSF from the same already under consideration by NSF from the same submitter;submitter;
Return Without ReviewReturn Without Review
Return Without ReviewReturn Without ReviewThe Proposal: The Proposal:
Does not meet NSF proposal preparation Does not meet NSF proposal preparation requirements, such as page limitations, requirements, such as page limitations, formatting instructions, and electronic formatting instructions, and electronic submission, as specified in the Grant Proposal submission, as specified in the Grant Proposal Guide or program solicitation;)Guide or program solicitation;)
is not responsive to the GPG or program is not responsive to the GPG or program announcement/solicitation; announcement/solicitation;
does not meet an announced proposal deadline does not meet an announced proposal deadline date (and time, where specified); or date (and time, where specified); or
was previously reviewed and declined and has was previously reviewed and declined and has not been substantially revised. not been substantially revised.
NSF Merit Review NSF Merit Review ProcessProcess
Hosted by:Hosted by:
Research & Education Communities
Proposal Preparation Time
Org. submitsviaFastLane or Grants.gov
NSF
NSFProgramOfficer
ProgramOfficer
Analysis&
Recom..
DivisionDirectorConcur
ViaDGA
Organization
Minimum 3
ReviewsRequired
DGA Review & Processingof Award
Proposal Receipt to DivisionDirector Concurrence of Program Officer Recommendation
GPGProg. DescriptionAnnouncement
Solicitation
NSF AnnouncesOpportunity
Returned Without Review/Withdrawn
Panel
Both
Award
NSF Proposal & Award Process & Timeline
Decline
90 Days 6 Months 30 Days
Proposal Receiptat NSF
DD Concur Award
Proposal Review CriteriaProposal Review Criteria
National Science Board Approved Merit Review National Science Board Approved Merit Review Criteria:Criteria:
What is the What is the intellectual meritintellectual merit of the of the proposed activity? proposed activity?
What are the What are the broader impactsbroader impacts of the of the proposed activity?proposed activity?
Program specific criteria as stated in the Program specific criteria as stated in the program solicitation.program solicitation.
Intellectual MeritIntellectual Merit Potential considerations include:Potential considerations include:
How important is the proposed activity to advancing How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields? different fields?
How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of prior work.)comment on the quality of prior work.)
To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative and original concepts? explore creative and original concepts?
How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity? How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity?
Is there sufficient access to resources?Is there sufficient access to resources?
Broader ImpactsBroader Impacts Potential considerations include:Potential considerations include:
How well does the activity advance discovery and How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training and learning?understanding while promoting teaching, training and learning?
How well does the activity broaden the participation of How well does the activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? geographic, etc.)?
To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks and partnerships?and partnerships?
Broader Impacts (cont’d)Broader Impacts (cont’d) Potential considerations include:Potential considerations include:
Will the results be disseminated broadly to Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological enhance scientific and technological understanding? understanding?
What may be the benefits of the proposed What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society? activity to society?
Examples of Broader ImpactsExamples of Broader Impacts http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf
Examples of Broader ImpactsExamples of Broader Impacts Advance Discovery and Understanding While Advance Discovery and Understanding While
Promoting Teaching, Training and LearningPromoting Teaching, Training and Learning Integrate research activities into the teaching of science, Integrate research activities into the teaching of science,
math and engineering at all educational levels (e.g., K-12, math and engineering at all educational levels (e.g., K-12, undergraduate science majors, non-science majors, and undergraduate science majors, non-science majors, and graduate students).graduate students).
Include students (e.g., K-12, undergraduate science Include students (e.g., K-12, undergraduate science majors, non-science majors, and /or graduate students) as majors, non-science majors, and /or graduate students) as participants in the proposed activities as appropriate.participants in the proposed activities as appropriate.
Participate in the recruitment, training, and/or professional Participate in the recruitment, training, and/or professional development of K-12 science and math teachers.development of K-12 science and math teachers.
Further examples at: Further examples at: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf
Examples of Broader ImpactsExamples of Broader Impacts Broaden Participation of Underrepresented GroupsBroaden Participation of Underrepresented Groups
Establish research and education collaborations with Establish research and education collaborations with students and/or faculty who are members of students and/or faculty who are members of underrepresented groups.underrepresented groups.
Include students from underrepresented groups as Include students from underrepresented groups as participants in the proposed research and education participants in the proposed research and education activities.activities.
Establish research and education collaborations with Establish research and education collaborations with students and faculty from non-Ph.D.-granting institutions students and faculty from non-Ph.D.-granting institutions and those serving underrepresented groups.and those serving underrepresented groups.
Make campus visits and presentations at institutions that Make campus visits and presentations at institutions that serve underrepresented groups.serve underrepresented groups.
Further examples at: Further examples at: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf
Examples of Broader ImpactsExamples of Broader Impacts Enhance Infrastructure for Research and EducationEnhance Infrastructure for Research and Education
Identify and establish collaborations between disciplines Identify and establish collaborations between disciplines and institutions, among the U.S. academic institutions, and institutions, among the U.S. academic institutions, industry and government and with international partners.industry and government and with international partners.
Stimulate and support the development and dissemination Stimulate and support the development and dissemination of next-generation instrumentation, multi-user facilities, of next-generation instrumentation, multi-user facilities, and other shared research and education platforms.and other shared research and education platforms.
Maintain, operate and modernize shared research and Maintain, operate and modernize shared research and education infrastructure, including facilities and science education infrastructure, including facilities and science and technology centers and engineering research centers.and technology centers and engineering research centers.
Further examples at: Further examples at: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf
Examples of Broader ImpactsExamples of Broader Impacts Broad Dissemination to Enhance Scientific and Broad Dissemination to Enhance Scientific and
Technological UnderstandingTechnological Understanding Partner with museums, nature centers, science centers, Partner with museums, nature centers, science centers,
and similar institutions to develop exhibits in science, and similar institutions to develop exhibits in science, math, and engineering.math, and engineering.
Involve the public or industry, where possible, in research Involve the public or industry, where possible, in research and education activities.and education activities.
Give science and engineering presentations to the broader Give science and engineering presentations to the broader community (e.g., at museums and libraries, on radio community (e.g., at museums and libraries, on radio shows, and in other such venues.).shows, and in other such venues.).
Make data available in a timely manner by means of Make data available in a timely manner by means of databases, digital libraries, orother venues such as CD-databases, digital libraries, orother venues such as CD-ROMs.ROMs.
Further examples at: Further examples at: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf
Examples of Broader ImpactsExamples of Broader Impacts Benefits to SocietyBenefits to Society
Demonstrate the linkage between discovery and societal Demonstrate the linkage between discovery and societal benefit by providing specific examples and explanations benefit by providing specific examples and explanations regarding the potential application of research and regarding the potential application of research and education results.education results.
Partner with academic scientists, staff at federal agencies Partner with academic scientists, staff at federal agencies and with the private sector on both technological and and with the private sector on both technological and scientific projects to integrate research into broader scientific projects to integrate research into broader programs and activities of national interest.programs and activities of national interest.
Analyze, interpret, and synthesize research and education Analyze, interpret, and synthesize research and education results in formats understandable and useful for non-results in formats understandable and useful for non-scientists.scientists.
Provide information for policy formulation by Federal, State Provide information for policy formulation by Federal, State or local agencies.or local agencies.
Reviewer SelectionReviewer Selection Types of reviewers recruited:Types of reviewers recruited:
Reviewers with specific content expertiseReviewers with specific content expertise Reviewers with general science or education expertiseReviewers with general science or education expertise
Sources of reviewers:Sources of reviewers: Program Officer’s knowledge of the research areaProgram Officer’s knowledge of the research area References listed in proposalReferences listed in proposal Recent professional society programsRecent professional society programs Computer searches of S&E journal articles related to the Computer searches of S&E journal articles related to the
proposalproposal Reviewer recommendations included in proposal or sent by Reviewer recommendations included in proposal or sent by
email - proposers are invited to either: email - proposers are invited to either: Suggest persons they believe are especially well qualified to Suggest persons they believe are especially well qualified to
review the proposal.review the proposal. Identify persons they would prefer not review the proposal.Identify persons they would prefer not review the proposal.
Role of the Peer ReviewerRole of the Peer Reviewer Review all proposal materials and consider:Review all proposal materials and consider:
The two NSF merit review criteria and any The two NSF merit review criteria and any program specific criteria.program specific criteria.
The adequacy of the proposed project plan The adequacy of the proposed project plan including the budget, resources, & timeline.including the budget, resources, & timeline.
The priorities of the NSF program & in the field.The priorities of the NSF program & in the field. The potential risks and benefits of the project.The potential risks and benefits of the project.
Make independent written comments on the quality Make independent written comments on the quality of the proposal content.of the proposal content.
Each proposal gets Each proposal gets at leastat least three individual peer three individual peer reviews.reviews.
Role of the Peer Review PanelRole of the Peer Review Panel Discuss the merits of the proposal with other Discuss the merits of the proposal with other
panelists who reviewed the proposal.panelists who reviewed the proposal. Write a summary proposal review based on Write a summary proposal review based on
discussion.discussion. Make a panel Make a panel recommendationrecommendation to NSF on to NSF on
whether the proposal should be funded.whether the proposal should be funded.
*Some panels may be supplemented with ad *Some panels may be supplemented with ad hoc reviewers if additional expertise is hoc reviewers if additional expertise is needed.needed.
Types of ReviewsTypes of Reviews
Outside Reviewers plus Panel ReviewOutside Reviewers plus Panel Review Panel ReviewPanel Review Internal Review Only (e.g. SGERs)Internal Review Only (e.g. SGERs)
Panels of Program OfficersPanels of Program Officers Less Formally Assembled Sets of Less Formally Assembled Sets of
Program OfficersProgram Officers Individual Program OfficersIndividual Program Officers
Choosing Mail or “Ad Hoc” Choosing Mail or “Ad Hoc” ReviewersReviewers
Program Officer’s knowledgeProgram Officer’s knowledge References in proposalReferences in proposal Citation Searches; Google ScholarCitation Searches; Google Scholar Reviewer recommendationsReviewer recommendations Investigator’s suggestionsInvestigator’s suggestions
Reviewer Conflicts ProceduresReviewer Conflicts Procedures
Primary purpose is to remove or limit Primary purpose is to remove or limit the influence of ties to an applicant the influence of ties to an applicant institution or investigator that could institution or investigator that could affect reviewer adviceaffect reviewer advice
Second purpose is to preserve the trust Second purpose is to preserve the trust of the scientific community, Congress, of the scientific community, Congress, and the general public in the integrity, and the general public in the integrity, effectiveness, and evenhandedness of effectiveness, and evenhandedness of NSF’s peer review process NSF’s peer review process
Funding DecisionsFunding Decisions The peer review panel summary provides:The peer review panel summary provides:
Review of the proposal and a Review of the proposal and a recommendation on fundingrecommendation on funding
Feedback (strengths and weaknesses) Feedback (strengths and weaknesses) to the proposersto the proposers
NSF Program Officers make funding NSF Program Officers make funding recommendations guided by program recommendations guided by program goals and portfolio considerations.goals and portfolio considerations.
NSF Division Directors either concur or NSF Division Directors either concur or reject the program officer’s funding reject the program officer’s funding recommendations.recommendations.
Funding Decisions (cont’d)Funding Decisions (cont’d)
NSF’s grants and agreements officers NSF’s grants and agreements officers make the official award - as longs as:make the official award - as longs as: The institution has an adequate grant The institution has an adequate grant
management capacity.management capacity. The institution/PI do not have overdue The institution/PI do not have overdue
annual or final reports.annual or final reports. There are no other outstanding issues There are no other outstanding issues
with the institution or PI.with the institution or PI.
Reasons for DeclinesReasons for Declines The proposal was not considered competitive by the The proposal was not considered competitive by the
peer review panel and the program office concurred.peer review panel and the program office concurred. The proposal had flaws or issues identified by the The proposal had flaws or issues identified by the
program office.program office. The program funds were not adequate to fund all The program funds were not adequate to fund all
competitive proposals.competitive proposals. Peer reviews, panel summaries, and program officer Peer reviews, panel summaries, and program officer
comments are available via FastLane once funding comments are available via FastLane once funding decisions are final for proposers to review.decisions are final for proposers to review.
Use all of this information to improve your proposal Use all of this information to improve your proposal competitiveness.competitiveness.
Feedback to PIFeedback to PIDocumentation from Merit Documentation from Merit
ReviewReview Verbatim copies of individual reviews, Verbatim copies of individual reviews,
excluding reviewer identities (in most excluding reviewer identities (in most cases, at least three reviews)cases, at least three reviews)
Panel Summary (if panel reviewed)Panel Summary (if panel reviewed) Context StatementContext Statement PO to PI Comments (written or verbal) PO to PI Comments (written or verbal)
as necessary to explain a declinationas necessary to explain a declination
Feedback to PIFeedback to PIInformation from Merit ReviewInformation from Merit Review
Reviewer ratings (E, VG, G, F, P)Reviewer ratings (E, VG, G, F, P) Analysis of how well proposal addresses Analysis of how well proposal addresses
both review criteria: Intellectual Merit and both review criteria: Intellectual Merit and Broader ImpactsBroader Impacts
Proposal strengths and weaknessesProposal strengths and weaknesses Reasons for a declinationReasons for a declination
If questions, contact the cognizant program If questions, contact the cognizant program officer.officer.
If my proposal is declined, If my proposal is declined, should I revise and resubmit?should I revise and resubmit?
Do the reviewers and NSF program officer Do the reviewers and NSF program officer identify significant strengths of your identify significant strengths of your proposal?proposal?
Can you address the weaknesses that Can you address the weaknesses that reviewers and program officer identified?reviewers and program officer identified?
Are there other ways you or colleagues think Are there other ways you or colleagues think you can strengthen a resubmission?you can strengthen a resubmission?
If questions, contact the cognizant program officer.If questions, contact the cognizant program officer.
Reasons For Funding a Reasons For Funding a Competitive ProposalCompetitive Proposal
Likely high impactLikely high impact
PI Career Point PI Career Point (tenured?/“established”/(tenured?/“established”/“young”) “young”)
Place in Program Place in Program PortfolioPortfolio
Other Support for PIOther Support for PI
Impact on Impact on Institution/StateInstitution/State
Special Programmatic Special Programmatic Considerations Considerations (CAREER/RUI/EPSCoR)(CAREER/RUI/EPSCoR)
Diversity IssuesDiversity Issues
Educational ImpactEducational Impact
““Launching” versus Launching” versus “Maintaining”“Maintaining”
NSF Reconsideration ProcessNSF Reconsideration Process
Explanation from Program OfficerExplanation from Program Officer
Written request for reconsideration to Written request for reconsideration to Assistant Director within 90 days of Assistant Director within 90 days of declinedecline
Request from organization to Deputy Request from organization to Deputy DirectorDirector
