Event Calendar
2026
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
2027
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
November 2010
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
31
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Submission Deadline for "Botany" Issue of Science Scope
Submission Deadline for "Botany" Issue of Science ScopeEvent Date:Submission information available at www.nsta.org/publications/call-scope.aspx?lid=ms. More
NSF PRIME Program Webcast
NSF PRIME Program WebcastEvent Date: toYou are invited to participate in a webcast on the NSF's new program, Promoting Research and Innovation in Methodologies for Evaluation (PRIME). PRIME Program Officers will share information on the new solicitation and answer questions posed by the audience. An archived version will also be available from the same website. The webcast will be closed-captioned. We have two informational webcasts. PRIME Webcast 1: November 1, 2010, from 1:00 to 3:00 pm Eastern. You may register by going to the following URL: http://event.on24.com/r.htm?e=257312&s=1&k=DB8313339EBF285F6C1051016C142B93
PRIME Webcast 2: November 10, 2010, from 10:00 am to 12:00 pm Eastern. The registration URL for that event has not yet been completed. We will post this link as soon as it becomes available. More |
|
2010 NABT Professional Development Conference
2010 NABT Professional Development ConferenceEvent Date: toYou are not just a biology teacher in a classroom, but an inspiration to your students. You appreciate the value of sharing and learning with your colleagues. You know what it takes to be a leader in life science education. So do we. The NABT Professional Development Conference is designed to provide the resources and tools you need to excel in your profession. Featuring four days of renowned speakers, hands-on workshops, informative sessions and special events, the NABT Conference addresses teaching biology and life science in the 21st century. Join us as we lead the way in life science education, one biology teacher at a time. For more information about the conference, or to register, visit: http://www.nabt2010.org/websites/conf2010/index.php?p=556 More |
2010 NABT Professional Development Conference
2010 NABT Professional Development ConferenceEvent Date: toYou are not just a biology teacher in a classroom, but an inspiration to your students. You appreciate the value of sharing and learning with your colleagues. You know what it takes to be a leader in life science education. So do we. The NABT Professional Development Conference is designed to provide the resources and tools you need to excel in your profession. Featuring four days of renowned speakers, hands-on workshops, informative sessions and special events, the NABT Conference addresses teaching biology and life science in the 21st century. Join us as we lead the way in life science education, one biology teacher at a time. For more information about the conference, or to register, visit: http://www.nabt2010.org/websites/conf2010/index.php?p=556 More |
2010 NABT Professional Development Conference
2010 NABT Professional Development ConferenceEvent Date: toYou are not just a biology teacher in a classroom, but an inspiration to your students. You appreciate the value of sharing and learning with your colleagues. You know what it takes to be a leader in life science education. So do we. The NABT Professional Development Conference is designed to provide the resources and tools you need to excel in your profession. Featuring four days of renowned speakers, hands-on workshops, informative sessions and special events, the NABT Conference addresses teaching biology and life science in the 21st century. Join us as we lead the way in life science education, one biology teacher at a time. For more information about the conference, or to register, visit: http://www.nabt2010.org/websites/conf2010/index.php?p=556 More |
2010 NABT Professional Development Conference
2010 NABT Professional Development ConferenceEvent Date: toYou are not just a biology teacher in a classroom, but an inspiration to your students. You appreciate the value of sharing and learning with your colleagues. You know what it takes to be a leader in life science education. So do we. The NABT Professional Development Conference is designed to provide the resources and tools you need to excel in your profession. Featuring four days of renowned speakers, hands-on workshops, informative sessions and special events, the NABT Conference addresses teaching biology and life science in the 21st century. Join us as we lead the way in life science education, one biology teacher at a time. For more information about the conference, or to register, visit: http://www.nabt2010.org/websites/conf2010/index.php?p=556 More |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
NARST Early Career Research Award Nominations Due
NARST Early Career Research Award Nominations DueEvent Date:NARST Early Career Research Award: Submission Reminder The NARST Early Career Research Award acknowledges contributions to science education through research by individuals during the five years immediately following receipt of the doctoral degree. To qualify for the award this year, the nominee must have received the doctoral degree on or after January 1, 2005. All NARST members are encouraged to consider nominating an eligible and deserving early career member. Nominations for the award must be accompanied by the following supporting material: a) A letter of nomination which discusses the nominee’s impact on the field; b) The nominee’s vita; c) A two-page summary of the nominee’s research interests, prepared by the nominee; d) Three of the nominee’s best papers; and e) Two additional letters of support to be sent separately. The supporting letters need to discuss the context and significance of the nominee's scholarship so that the accomplishments shown on the nominee's vita may be better understood. Nomination materials should be received by the Committee Co-Chair, Anita Roychoudhury (aroychou@purdue.edu) no later than November 15, 2010. All nomination packages and materials should be sent electronically in PDF format. More
REESE full proposal deadline
REESE full proposal deadlineEvent Date:
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND REVISION NOTESThe REESE program has removed the labels "Contextual Research" and "Emerging Topics" used in the previous solicitation to distinguish the strands of research supported. As a result, text (and sometimes content) in all the strands has been revised. REESE has added a new strand on Implementation Research. The REESE program has changed the name of Knowledge Diffusion awards to Synthesis awards. Large Empirical proposals do not require collaborations of multiple institutions and are no longer permitted to include a supplemental coordination plan. Investigators are no longer required to include the research strand or project type in the proposal title. Investigators are still requested to include the research strand and project type in the first sentence of the Project Summary. In Part V, under Proposal Preparation Instructions, the solicitation provides additional detail on expectations for research design and methodology for all proposals. Investigators requesting financial support for postdoctoral fellows should be aware that the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) specifies that each proposal that requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers must include a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals. This mentoring plan, if required, should be included in the Supplementary Documents (not part of the 15-page Project Description). Proposals that do not comply with this requirement will be returned without review (see the PAPPG; Part I: Grant Proposal Guide, Chapter II for further information about this requirement). SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTSGeneral InformationProgram Title:
Synopsis of Program: The Research and Evaluation on Education in Science and Engineering (REESE) program seeks to advance research at the frontiers of STEM learning, education, and evaluation, and to provide the foundational knowledge necessary to improve STEM teaching and learning at all educational levels and in all settings. This solicitation calls for four types of proposals—Pathways, Synthesis, Empirical Research, and Large Empirical Research. Cognizant Program Officer(s):
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
Award InformationAnticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant Estimated Number of Awards: 23 to 40
Between 23 - 40 awards for the competition in FY 2011, pending availability of funds. Approximately 5-10 Pathways, 5-10 Synthesis, 10-15 Empirical, and 3-5 Large Empirical awards will be funded, depending upon availability of funds.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $29,000,000
$29,000,000 for awards in FY 2011, pending availability of funds. The maximum award for Pathways projects is $250,000 with duration of up to two years. The maximum award for Synthesis projects is $250,000 with duration of up to two years. The maximum award for Empirical Research projects is $1,500,000 with duration of up to three years. The maximum award for Large Empirical Research projects is $2,500,000 with duration of up to five years.
Eligibility Information
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:
None Specified
Proposal Preparation and Submission InstructionsA. Proposal Preparation Instructions
B. Budgetary Information
C. Due Dates
Proposal Review Information CriteriaMerit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria apply. Award Administration InformationAward Conditions: Standard NSF award conditions apply. Reporting Requirements: Additional reporting requirements apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information. TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTIONAbout 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 part of this mission, the Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR) has primary responsibility for providing national and research-based leadership in STEM education. EHR emphasizes six themes in fulfilling this responsibility:
To address these themes, the Directorate sponsors programs in the Divisions of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings (DRL), Undergraduate Education (DUE), Graduate Education (DGE), and Human Resource Development (HRD). The REESE program is managed in DRL. About the Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings DRL invests in projects to enhance STEM learning for people of all ages in both formal and informal learning settings. Its mission includes promoting innovative and transformative research and development, and evaluation of learning and teaching in all STEM disciplines. New and emerging areas of STEM must play prominent roles in efforts to improve STEM education. The integration of cutting-edge STEM content and the engagement of STEM researchers are encouraged in all DRL initiatives. DRL's role is to be a catalyst for change by advancing theory, method, measurement, development, evaluation, and application in STEM education. The Division seeks to support both development of promising new ideas and large-scale implementation of proven educational innovations. The Division's programs offer a set of complementary approaches for advancing research, development, and field-based improvements.
Each of these programs is intended to improve their field's capacity for STEM teaching and learning. They are central to NSF's strategic goals of Learning and Discovery, helping to cultivate a world-class and broadly inclusive STEM workforce, expanding the scientific literacy of all citizens, and promoting research that advances the frontiers of knowledge. The REESE program solicitation focuses on research on learning across all ages and settings. Other DRL solicitations may have overlap with REESE on particular settings or ages. Potential investigators are encouraged to study all DRL solicitations for their applicability to the topic of study. DRL and Innovation All research and development activities within DRL aim at generating knowledge and transforming practice in STEM education. DRL's programs are designed to complement each other within a cycle of research and development that forms the conceptual framework for its programs (adapted from RAND, 2003; American Statistical Association, 2007; NSF, 2005). All DRL programs are concerned with all five components of the cycle (see Figure 1) to varying degrees. Work in each part of the cycle forms a foundation for transition to the next part of the cycle. Projects funded by DRL are providing the ideas, resources, and human capacity to advance STEM education and learning in the 21st Century:
The major distinction between the DR K-12 and REESE programs is that DR K-12 projects focus on development and study of specific resources, models and technologies designed to improve STEM education in PreK-12 schools, while REESE projects focus primarily on building theory and knowledge about STEM education across learning contexts and ages. The outcomes of DR K-12 projects will be STEM education innovations and design principles that are informed by research and tested in practice. The primary outcomes of REESE projects will be research findings, methods, and theoretical perspectives about STEM education. Proposers who are in doubt about the appropriate program for funding of their work should consult an NSF Program Officer with either program. II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONThe goals of the REESE program are: (1) to catalyze discovery and innovation at the frontiers of STEM learning, education, and evaluation; (2) to stimulate the field to produce high quality and robust research results through the progress of theory, method, analysis, and human resources; and (3) to coordinate and transform advances in research and evaluation on learning and education. REESE supports research that seeks transformative and novel answers to foundational questions about what STEM concepts can be learned by whom, when, how, and where. The initial benefits of REESE proposals are primarily up-stream. They ought to have the potential to advance the relevant research and evaluation literatures. REESE pursues its mission by developing a research portfolio focusing on core scientific questions of STEM learning and education. REESE-supported research is often multi- and inter-disciplinary, drawing on the expertise of STEM content experts, STEM education researchers and evaluators, cognitive and social scientists, and experts from other areas of practice and scholarship. REESE projects may focus on any age range and any setting, including schools, homes, museums, and science centers. REESE studies should employ research designs and methodologies that are appropriate to the goals of the research. Proposals should have a strong connection to a STEM content area. Proposals should indicate who the direct audiences are for the results,whether other communities of researchers, materials developers, teacher-educators, policy analysts, or policymakers-and who may eventually benefit from the research and how, even if the potential impact is long-term and indirect (e.g., as would be the case with some cognitive or neuroscientific studies). The REESE program challenges scholarly communities to put forward groundbreaking ideas, concepts, theories, and measurement and methodological approaches that focus on one or more of the following topical strands. These strands do not constitute an exhaustive or mutually exclusive set of priorities or possibilities.
III. AWARD INFORMATIONEstimated 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 23 to 40 for the competition in FY 2011, pending availability of funds. It is anticipated that about 5-10 Pathways, 5-10 Knowledge Diffusion, 10-15 Empirical, and 3-5 Large Empirical awards will be made. The anticipated funding amount is $29,000,000 for the FY 2011 competition, pending availability of funds. The maximum award for Pathways projects is $250,000 with duration of up to two years. The maximum award for Synthesis projects is $250,000 with duration of up to two years. The maximum award for Empirical research projects is $1,500,000 with duration of up to three years. The maximum award for Large Empirical research projects is $2,500,000 with duration of up to five years. IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATIONThe categories of proposers eligible to submit proposals to the National Science Foundation are identified in the Grant Proposal Guide, Chapter I, Section E.
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:
None Specified V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONSA. Proposal Preparation InstructionsFull Proposal Instructions: 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: 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. The REESE program has five additional preparation requirements that each proposal must address: (1) letters of agreement to participate, (2) research design and methodology, (3) project personnel and management, (4) dissemination, and (5) project evaluation. Letters of agreement to participate: As appropriate, there are two types of letters that may be included in the supplementary documents section of the proposal. First, proposals are expected to include letters of agreement to participate from all appropriate organizations that provide the context for data collection and/or play a substantial role in ensuring access to required resources. Second, proposals are expected to contain letters of agreement to participate from members of advisory committees. Research design and methodology: REESE expects investigators to propose appropriate and rigorous research methods, whether quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method. Investigators are expected to conduct their research so that relevant models, frameworks, data, literature, and measures are well-documented, usable, and replicable by other research teams wishing to work on similar problems from other vantage points or by using other research designs. The proposed methods should be well-justified, consonant with theory, and suited to the stated research questions or hypotheses. Each supported project must meet the following basic requirements:
Project personnel and management: The research and management roles of each of the senior personnel on the project must be described in brief within the project description. Collaborative teams representing multiple disciplines are typical in REESE projects. In addition, at least one of the senior personnel must be designated as the methodology and/or measurement leader of the project. In single-investigator projects, this person will necessarily be the principal investigator. In multi-investigator projects, this person must be listed among senior personnel if the individual is not the principal or a co-investigator. Where projects request time for students and other trainees, the project description should be clear on their roles and responsibilities. Investigators are reminded that all proposals requesting funds to support postdoctoral researchers are required by NSF to submit a one-page mentoring plan within the supplementary documents section or the proposal will be returned without review. REESE encourages the inclusion of women, persons with disabilities, underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, and diverse viewpoints. REESE encourages minority serving institutions (MSIs) to apply. Additionally, institutions are encouraged to partner with MSIs, their faculty, and their students as appropriate. Dissemination: All REESE projects are expected to accumulate and communicate knowledge to relevant research, policy, practitioner, and other communities. As part of DRL's strong and unwavering commitment to the broader impacts of funded research, reports from successful REESE projects must be published in peer-reviewed professional or scholarly journals, and findings (positive or negative) must be disseminated through appropriate means to audiences relevant to the goals of the project. Projects are expected to impact appropriate audiences across disciplinary boundaries. Furthermore, projects are encouraged to identify innovative ways to communicate their findings to researchers, practitioners, policymakers, and the public. Projects will also be expected to share research designs, findings, and overall project information with the REESE Diffusion and Evaluation Network, the Center for Advancing Research and Communication (ARC) at the University of Chicago (http://arc.uchicago.edu/reese/). Awarded projects must report annually to ARC using an online data system. Project Evaluation: All projects must have an evaluation plan that is appropriate to the goals of the project and explicitly describes the approach that the project team intends to use in assessing its successes and failures and meeting its milestones and objectives. Project evaluations should be sufficiently distant from the project to be objective but should be designed to be of most help to the project team pursuant to its responsibilities to the field. All projects must have a substantive external expert review mechanism (e.g., advisory committee) that provides regular feedback on the project's research methods and progress, analysis procedures, interpretation of data into findings, and dissemination activities. In some cases, this may be all that is necessary. In other cases, it may not be sufficient given the nature of the project. Finally, proposals should describe how evaluation input will be used to shape the project. Additional Information B. Budgetary InformationCost Sharing: Cost sharing is not required under this solicitation. Budget Preparation Instructions: A careful and realistic budget in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG), consistent with the proposed activities, and including a request for funds to cover the cost of attendance of the PI at each year's annual awardee meeting in the Washington, DC area should be submitted with the proposal. C. Due Dates
D. FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements
VI. NSF PROPOSAL PROCESSING AND REVIEW PROCEDURESProposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program where they will be reviewed if they meet NSF proposal preparation requirements. 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 who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with the 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. A. NSF Merit Review CriteriaAll NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board (NSB)-approved merit review criteria: intellectual merit and the broader impacts of the proposed effort. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities. The two NSB-approved merit review criteria are listed below. 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 the reviewer is qualified to make judgements.
Examples illustrating activities likely to demonstrate broader impacts are available electronically on the NSF website at: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/gpg/broaderimpacts.pdf. Mentoring activities provided to postdoctoral researchers supported on the project, as described in a one-page supplementary document, will be evaluated under the Broader Impacts criterion. NSF staff also will give careful consideration to the following in making funding decisions:
B. Review and Selection ProcessProposals 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 INFORMATIONA. Notification of the AwardNotification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.) B. Award ConditionsAn NSF award consists of: (1) the award 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 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 C. Reporting RequirementsFor all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer at least 90 days before the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require more frequent project reports). Within 90 days after 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 that PI. 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. Such reports provide information on activities and findings, project participants (individual and organizational) 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. Submission of the report via FastLane constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report 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.
The REESE program has awarded a dissemination and evaluation network project as a cooperative agreement. The resource network is responsible for synthesizing findings across the REESE portfolio, providing technical assistance to REESE projects, promoting national awareness of research contributions from the REESE portfolio, and building the REESE community through PI and special interest meetings. All REESE projects are expected to share their proposals and findings with the resource network, to participate in annual PI meetings, and other meetings of interest and to be responsive to requests for information from the resource network. VIII. AGENCY CONTACTSGeneral inquiries regarding this program should be made to:
For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:
For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:
REESE Program Officers: James Dietz (jdietz@nsf.gov) Janice Earle (jearle@nsf.gov) Gavin Fulmer (gfulmer@nsf.gov) Elmima Johnson (ejohnson@nsf.gov) Celeste Pea (cpea@nsf.gov) Kusum Singh (kusingh@nsf.gov) Gregg Solomon (gesolomo@nsf.gov) Larry Suter (lsuter@nsf.gov) IX. OTHER INFORMATIONThe NSF Website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this Website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, National Science Foundation Update is a free e-mail subscription service 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 Regional Grants Conferences. Subscribers are informed through e-mail when new publications are issued that match their identified interests. Users can subscribe to this service by clicking the "Get NSF Updates by Email" link on the NSF web site. 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 FOUNDATIONThe National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering." NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research. NSF receives approximately 40,000 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 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.
PRIVACY ACT AND PUBLIC BURDEN STATEMENTSThe information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports submitted by awardees will be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies or other entities needing information regarding applicants or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency, court, or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See 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
More |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|