Applying to the National Science
Foundation
OSP Awareness
Oct 2011
ospoff@syr.edu, osp.syr.edu
NSF’s Mission
To promote the progress of science;
to advance the national health, prosperity,
and welfare;
and to secure the national defense.
NSF organization..…
Supports all fields of fundamental science & engineering
(except medical (bioengineering okay))
A.
Directorates
Biosciences; Computer & Information Science &
Engineering; Education & Human Resources; Engineering;
Geosciences; Math & Physical Sciences; Social,
Behavioral & Economic Sciences
B.
Offices
Cyberinfrastructure; Integrative Activities; International
Science & Engineering; Polar Programs
Programs & Opportunities
Four Basic Categories Announcements and
Funding Opportunities:
Dear Colleague Letter
Program Description
Program Announcement
Program Solicitation
Dear Colleague Letter
• Provides general information to the research community
• Clarifies existing policy or document
• Inform NSF proposer community about upcoming
opportunities or special competitions for supplements
Program Description
• Broad general descriptions of programs or activities in NSF
Directorates, Offices, and Divisions to encourage proposal
submission in specific areas of interest to NSF
Program Announcement
• Refers to formal NSF publications announcing NSF program
• Primary mechanism to communicate research opportunities
• PA’s use generic eligibility and proposal guidelines specified
in the Grant Proposal Guide, incorporate NSF Merit Review
Criteria
Program Solicitation
• Encourage proposal submission in specific NSF program
areas of interest
• Generally more focused than Program Announcements
• Normally apply for a limited time period
• Typically include supplemental proposal preparation
guidance
• May contain specifically crafted review criteria
Program Solicitation (cont’d)
• Require Letter of Intent or Preliminary Proposal
• May limit number of proposals submitted by SU
• Typically require additional award conditions/reporting
requirements
Types of Submissions
- currently all thru FASTLANE Letter of Intent
Preliminary Proposal
Full Proposal
Variations on the theme:
– Grants for Rapid Response
Research (RAPID)
– EArly-concept Grants for
Exploratory Research
(EAGER)
– Facilitation awards for sci. &
eng /c disabilities
– Supplemental requests (REUs,
RETs)
– Collaborative proposals
– Equipment
– Conferences, Symposia &
Workshops
– International Travel
– Doctoral Dissertation
Types of Submissions (cont’d)
Letter of Intent
• Required in advance of full proposal submission
• Used by NSF staff to gauge size and range of interest in the
completion
• Avoid potential conflicts of interests by reviewers
Types of Submissions (cont’d)
Preliminary Proposal
• Reduce proposers’ unnecessary effort in proposal
preparation when likelihood of success small
• Increase overall quality at full submission
• Proposers will receive an “Invite/Not Invite” or
“Encourage/Discourage”
Submission “Deadlines”
Target Dates – “soft”
• Program Officer approval required for submission after
Target Date
Deadline Dates – “hard” (5:00 p.m. local)
Submission windows – time frame; end date
“hard” (5:00 p.m. local)
NSF Proposals Convey
1) the project’s objectives and significance to
science, engineering or education;
• It’s a great idea that’s important to NSF Project
Description, Summary
2) the suitability of the methods proposed;
• The approach used is the best path to take; work
is feasible and risks are reasonable relative to
benefits. Project Description
NSF Proposals Convey cont’d
3) The qualifications of the investigator, project
team and grantee organization to perform the
proposed work
Biosketches
• The investigator and the team possess the
necessary expertise to assure project success.
• Also used by PO to assess possible conflicts of
interest
NSF Proposals Convey cont’d
Facilities and Other Resources
• Are all necessary resources and facilities
available to assure project success
• Describe only those resources directly applicable
to the research
• Use a narrative format
• Do NOT include quantifiable financial information
NSF Proposals Convey cont’d
4) the impact of the activity on the infrastructure
of science, engineering and education; and
• Broader impacts may include enabling the
next generation of scientists, engineers &
educators. Project Description
5) the cost of the project.
• There’s value for the investment; the cost is
“in line” with similar projects. Budget &
Justification
Review Criteria
What is the intellectual merit of the proposed
activity?
What are the broader impacts of the proposed
activity?
Intellectual Merit
Significance & impact - Importance to advancing
knowledge and understanding within and across fields
Significance & innovation - Suggest and explore
creative & original concepts?
Approach – Conception & organization of the activity?
Qualifications – Qualifications of PI/team (prior work)
Capability - Access to resources?
Broader Impacts
Is discovery & understanding advanced while teaching, training,
and learning is promoted?
Broaden the participation of underrepresented groups
Enhance the infrastructure for research and education, e.g.,
facilities, instrumentation, networks and partnerships
Broad dissemination of results to enhance scientific and
technology understanding
How will society benefit?
• Examples illustrating activities likely to demonstrate broader impacts are
available at http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf.
In addition…
NSF staff consider…
Integration of research and education
• Efforts that infuse education with the excitement of
discovery and enrich research through the diversity
of learning perspectives.
Integrating diversity into NSF programs,
projects & activities
• Further NSF’s mission to broaden opportunities for &
enable participation of all men and women,
underrepresented minorities, and persons with
disabilities in science and engineering.
Types of Review
Panel, Mail Review, Combination
• Minimum 3 peer reviewers per proposal
• Panel review = jointly conducted by peer reviewers
with broad scientific knowledge
• Mail review (a.k.a. “ad hoc review”) = reviewers with
specific expertise in related fields; PO may use List
of Suggested Reviewers in the application
• Reviewers remain anonymous throughout
• 8% = ad hoc; 55% = panel; 32% = combination
panel/ad hoc
What’s new in 2011?
Data Management Plan
• What’s produced: the types of data, samples,
physical collections, software, curriculum materials,
and other materials;
• Standards to be used for data and metadata
format and content (where existing standards are
absent or deemed inadequate, this should be
documented along with any proposed solutions or
remedies);
What’s new in 2011? – DMP con’t
• Policies for access and sharing including
provisions for appropriate protection of privacy,
confidentiality, security, intellectual property, or other
rights or requirements;
• Policies and provisions for re-use, re-distribution,
and the production of derivatives; and
• Plans for archiving data, samples, and other
research products, and for preservation of access to
them.
Include costs for DMP in budget!
What’s new in 2011- DMP con’t
Visit the OSP website for more information about
NSF Directorate, Division, & Program Specific
Guidance and a data management plan
template:
http://osp.syr.edu/forms%20and%20pages/page
s/nsf---data-management-plan.html
What’s new in 2011? Cont’d
Voluntarily committed cost sharing is
prohibited
• No voluntary committed effort. PIs and key
personnel are expected to devote some measurable
effort on all sponsored projects.
• Organizational Resources necessary and available
for the project should be described in the Facilities,
Equipment and Other Resources section (II.C.2.i).
What’s new in 2011? Cont’d
• The description should be narrative in nature and
must not include any quantifiable financial
information financial information.
What’s continuing from 2010
Responsible Conduct of Research
• All undergraduate, graduate students and postdocs
compensated by NSF must complete training in the
Responsible Conduct of Research
What’s continuing from 2010 Cont’d
Who
What
When
Undergraduates who
receive hourly wages or
stipends from NSF award
(SU prime or subcontract)

CITI* – Undergraduate
in applicable discipline
Within 60 days
of start of
compensation
Graduate Students who
receive hourly wages,
salaries or stipends
1. CITI – GRADUATE in
applicable discipline
2. Face-to-face training or
approved alternate
Within 60 days
of start of
compensation
Postdoctoral researchers 1. CITI –
who receive salaries or
POSTDOCTORAL
stipends directly from NSF
RESEARCHER in
applicable discipline
2. Face-to-face training or
approved alternate
*Collaborative Institutional
Training Initiative
Within 60 days
of start of
compensation
What’s continuing from 2010 Cont’d
For more information on RCR visit
http://osp.syr.edu/AwardManagement/compliance---postaward1/responsible-conduct-of-research-rcr.pdf
Getting Started
Review Directorate/program’s web site
Review announcement or solicitation carefully
Review what’s been funded in the past
– http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/
Contact Program manager EARLY
– You want to do what… might they be interested?
Would there be other programs interested?
Writing…
Start early (2 weeks before the deadline not
recommended…)
Write for the reviewers
– Ask program manager how reviewed? Panel, mail,
both?
– Make proposal a delight to read!
– Use meaningful/informative headers
– Don’t use full justification
– White space helps!!
Writing ….
Have others review your narrative
–
–
–
–
Clear? Are review criteria addressed?
Any obvious holes to be filled?
Broader impacts meaningfully addressed?
Scientific experts and “generalist experts”.
Write project summary last.
– Two separate sections  Int. Merit & Broader Imp.
Project Description
Possible Outline (GPG)
NOTE: Program solicitations may specify organization and
content; these guidelines should be followed.
1. Introduction to project and its purpose (Introduce
objectives in first page or two)
2. Context in which project fits
a. State of Knowledge – what is known, what’s not
b. Preliminary/foundational data
c. Significance of Project… So what?
3. Project Objectives – brief list of what you will do &
their significance
Possible Outline cont’d
4. Approach/Experimental Design/Methods
a. What will you do, how will you analyze and interpret data
and results?
b. How do you know your methods work? (What does
“success look like? Controls? Evaluation process?)
c. What challenges might you encounter and how will you
work around them?
d. Dissemination plan (including Data Management Plan)
e. Time line/project management
5. Broader Impacts & integration of research & education
6. Prior NSF results
Fastlane and other issues
www.FASTLANE.nsf.gov
– Register (contact your OSP Research Administrator)
– OSP can reset passwords if you’ve forgotten yours.
Formatting – Must follow GPG unless solicitation says
otherwise…
– http://www.nsf.gov/pubsys/ods/getpub.cfm?gpg
– OSP does get proposals returned for non-compliance
• Biosketches, font too small, publications non-compliance, collaborators not
complete
• Project summary in first person, intellectual merit / broader impacts not
separately presented.
OSP resources…
**NSF proposal checklist (osp.syr.edu / forms)
Amy Deppa (e- apps) asdeppa@syr.edu
Amy Graves (CAS, FALK) ajgraves@syr.edu
Meghan MacBlane (iSchool) mtmacbla@syr.edu
Caroline McMullin (Maxwell, SoE)
cmcmulli@syr.edu
Stuart Taub (LCSmith) staub@syr.edu