The NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) *HAS* changed and the most recent GPG 14-1 is effective as of February 24, 2014. Unless otherwise noted by the specific solicitation or Program Official, proposals to the NSF should follow GPG 14-1. The hyperlinked version can be found at: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf14001/gpg_index.jsp Bookmark this page and refer to it as you prepare your proposals. You should have received the summary of changes (from 13-1 to 14-1) but since we have had recurring issues presenting themselves, please be mindful of the below to prevent your NSF proposals from being rejected (and to help expedite OSP review/submission).
NSF Proposals: Common Compliance Issues (that have been noted by the NSF directly by way of rejections and/or requests for updates)
· Biosketches
Ø Should not include personal information
Ø Should ONLY have the required sections (professional preparation, appointments, products, synergistic activities, and collaborators). Inclusion of information beyond that specified may result in the proposal being returned without review.
Ø Collaborators (last 4 years)/co-editors (last 2 years) should be in alphabetical order and should include current affiliation. Additionally, (1) Please include the full names of your graduate advisor(s) and principal postdoctoral sponsor(s), and their current organizational affiliations. If you have none, simply write ‘none’. (2) Please include the names of all the PhD students supervised to date, their current organizational affiliations, and the total number of PhD students supervised. If you have none, simply write ‘none’. (3) Please include the names of all the postdoctoral scholars sponsored during the last five years, their current organizational affiliations, and the total number of postdoctoral scholars sponsored during the past five years. If you have none, simply write ‘none’. (***NOTE*** that for items 2 and 3, beyond the list of names with current affiliation, they are also looking for the total number).
Ø Products: you are limited to 5 closely related to the proposal and 5 other significant. Going over this number can result in a proposal being rejected without review. It’s advisable to separate into the two categories, so that it does not appear that you are attempting to circumvent the 5 each limit.
Ø Synergistic Activities: again, you are limited to 5 and going over this can result in your proposal being rejected without review. If you have these listed in paragraph form, it’s advisable to separate by semi-colon or otherwise to make it readily apparent that you are not including more than 5. Bulleted and numbered lists accomplish this well, however.
· Proposals should not be a duplicate of or substantially similar to a proposal that is already under consideration by the NSF form the same investigators. Also, if the proposal was previously reviewed and declined, it should be substantially revised before resubmission.
· Broader Impacts should be addressed in a separate section in BOTH the Project Summary *and* the Project Description.
· Results from Prior (within the last 5 years) NSF Support: this should be included for ALL investigators (PI and Co-PIs) that have received funding in the last 5 years from the NSF. If you have received more than one, you can include the one that is most related to the proposal. However, even if it’s unrelated, if you’ve received funding in the last 5 years, this should be included. For each award listed, be sure to include:
Ø NSF award number, title, period, and amount
Ø a summary of the results of the completed work, including accomplishments, described in two separate sections with two distinct headings, related to the Intellectual Merit and Broader Impact activities supported by the award
publications resulting from the NSF award
Ø evidence of research products and their availability, including, but not limited to: data, publications, samples, physical collections, software, and models, as described in any Data Management Plan
Ø if the proposal is for renewed support, a description of the relation of the completed work to the proposed work
· References (this also goes for publications in the biosketches) should have all authors’ full names (do not use et al).
· Current and Pending: should be included for all senior personnel. Failure to include for the proper personnel can result in the proposal being rejected without review. Also note that this form should include the current proposal as ‘pending’. Also be sure to check for recently submitted proposals which should also be included.
· Supplementary Documentation: Inclusion of letters of support/recommendation. Brief letters confirming significant commitment of unfunded collaborators in terms of what collaborators will do for the proposed project (in a few sentences) are allowed; a more detailed description, if needed, should be in the Project Description section. Such letters should not include remarks about PI/Co-PI’s past or planned activities.
· Budgetary Limitations: be sure to double-check the specific solicitation for any budgetary restrictions/limitations.
· Solicitation Specific Guidelines: Also be sure to check for additional information/requirements per specific limitations. If not otherwise noted, proposals should follow the guidelines provided by the GPG. However, there are cases when extra guidelines and requirements are listed in the solicitation and failure to include can result in your proposal being rejected.
· Cost-sharing (unless otherwise noted) is strictly prohibited by the NSF and any inclusion of cost-share is against policy. Be mindful of wording in your project description, budget justification, and letters of collaboration that indicates cost-sharing as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment