Division of Undergraduate Education (DUE) “How to Write a Successful NSF Grant” NISTS September 21, 2010 Eun-Woo Chang, Program Director Division of Undergraduate

Division of Undergraduate Education (DUE)

“How to Write a Successful NSF Grant”

NISTS

September 21, 2010

Eun-Woo Chang, Program DirectorDivision of Undergraduate Education

National Science Foundation

http://www.nsf.gov/index.jsp


NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

DIVISION OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION (DUE)

www.nsf.gov


National Science Foundation (NSF)

The National Science Foundation (NSF) Act of 1950 (Public Law 81-507) sets for its mission:

To promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense.




NSF’s Annual Budget

- 21% of the total federal budget for basic research conducted at U.S. colleges and universities.

- This share increases to 61% when medical research supported by the National Institutes of Health is excluded.












“EHR’s Mission is to promote the development of a diverse

and well-prepared workforce of scientists, engineers,

mathematicians, educators, and technicians

and a well informed citizenry who have access to the ideas

and tools of science and engineering.”


NSF Budget

Education and Human Resources (EHR):FY 2009 (Actual) $845 MillionFY 2010 (Estimate) $873 MillionFY 2011 (Requested) $892 Million

Division of Undergraduate Education (DUE):FY 2009 (Actual) $283 MillionFY 2010 (Estimate) $292 MillionFY 2011 (Requested) $290 Million

*Note: Extra $75-100 Million from H-1B visa fees employers pay to obtain a visa for a foreign high-tech worker to fund the S-STEM program.




Selected Programs in DUE

FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 (Actual) (Estimate) (Requested)

ATE $52 $64 $64CCLI/TUES $66 $63 $61STEP $29 $30 $30S-STEM $75-100 /year from H1B visa feeNOYCE $115 $55 $55MSP $86 $58 $58

*(in Million)




Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics

Talent Expansion Program

(STEP)

PROGRAM SOLICITATION NSF 08-569




STEP - Basic Goals

Increase the number of students (US Citizens or permanent residents) in STEM

Increase associate’s / bachelor’s degrees- Established or emerging STEM fields

Community colleges get credit for transfers to 4-year STEM programs

Note: Increases in a particular field must not be at the expense of other fields!




STEP: Successful projects might provide

Bridge programs that enable additional preparation for students from HS or community colleges

Programs to improve the quality of student learning- Peer tutoring, learning communities, etc.- New pedagogical approaches (mastery learning,

active learning, etc.)

Programs to encourage undergraduate research

Student support mechanisms




STEP: Outcomes expected

Description of activities that will be institutionalized from the project

Plan for continuing efforts to increase number of STEM students & graduates

Formative assessment of progress towards goals

Dissemination of project results to broader community




STEPMaximum Support Levels – Enrollment based

$500 K for 5 years for 1- 5,000 undergrads $1.0 M for 5 years for 5,001-15,000 undergrads$2.0 M for 5 years for >15,000 undergrads

One proposal per institution (can be a partner on only one proposal)

STEP Budget$28-30 million expected for FY 201120-24 awards expected




STEP: Deadlines

Letter of Intent due August 17, 2010

Full Proposals due September 28, 2010




Scholarships in Science, Technology, Engineering,

and Mathematics

(S-STEM)

Program Solicitation NSF 09-567




S-STEM

Goal: Provides funds to institutions to provide scholarships to academically talented, but financially needy, students

Students can be pursuing associate, bachelor’s, or graduate degrees

Scholarships can be up to $10,000/yr - up to 4 yrs within the limits of students official level of need. (They can be less than $10K and less than 4 yrs)




S-STEM: Major features of program

Most STEM disciplines are eligible - except Social & Behavioral sciences

Grant size: max $600,000 (up to 5% of the scholarship request can be spent for administrative costs and up to 10% for student support services)

One proposal per constituent school or college that awards STEM degrees (e.g., school of engineering, college of arts & sciences)Estimated $50 to $70 million available in FY 2011




S-STEM: Special program features

PI must be member of STEM facultyScholarships to “natural” cohorts of students S-STEM students are full-time & are US Citizens, Residents, Nationals, or refugees Institution must provide some student support structures Optional enhancements: research opportunities, tutoring, internships, etc.




S-STEM: Deadlines

Optional Letter of Intent Deadline Date: July 13, 2011

(for the August 11, 2011 competition)

Proposal Deadline: August 11, 2011




Advanced Technological

Education

(ATE)

PROGRAM SOLICITATION NSF 10-539




ATE

Goal: Educate technicians for the high-tech fields that drive our nation’s economy

Sample activities:- Curriculum development- Faculty professional development- Building career pathways




ATE

ATE is in its 16th year of funding community colleges, having started with the Science and Advanced Technology Act of 1992 (SATA).

FY2010Preliminary Proposals April 22, 2010Formal Proposals October 21,

2010




ATE Institution Requirements

Focus is on two-year colleges

All proposals are expected to include one or more two-year colleges in leadership roles

A consortium of institutions may also apply




ATE Tracks

Projects- Small Grant

ATE Centers- National Centers of Excellence- Regional Centers of Excellence- Resource Centers

Targeted research on technician education




Small grants

Focus on community colleges that have little or no previous ATE grant experience

Designed to stimulate implementation, adaptation, and innovation in technological education




Typical ATE award sizes

Project Grants: Up to $300K/year for 3 years (45)Small Grants: Up to $200K (15)National Centers: $5M for 4 years (2)Regional Centers: $3M for 3 years (3)Planning Grants for Centers: $70KResource Centers: $1.6M for 4 years (4)Targeted Research: Up to $300K for 4 years (5-8)



Number of Awards per State in ATE’s 15 Year HistoryTotal number of Awards (865)

9

15COLORADO

3MONTANA

2WYOMING

2UTAH

2IDAHO

3NEVADA

25OREGON

3ALASKA

HAWAII

99CALIFORNIA

30WASHINGTON

21ARIZONA

5NORTH DAKOTA

4SOUTH DAKOTA

7NEBRASKA

16NEW MEXICO

53TEXAS

3KANSAS

7OKLAHOMA

18MINNESOTA

19WISCONSIN

23IOWA

6MISSOURI

4ARKANSAS

3 LOUISIANA

28ILLINOIS

8 INDIANA

18KENTUCKY

42OHIO

16 MICHIGAN

18TENNESSEE

12 MISS.

15ALABAMA

9 GEORGIA

32 FLA.

22S.C.

18NORTH CAROLINA

22 VIRGINIA

2 W.V.

16PENNSYLVANIA

47NEW YORK

6 MAINE

2 VT. 7

N.H. 62 MA.

14 CT.

1 R.I.

2 DEL. 26 MD.

20 D.C.

16 N.J.

3 PUERTO RICO

ATE Centers of Excellence (36)

AKHI

1

National Center

Regional Center

Resource Center


ATE Program Budget

$51 M

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

$40

$45

$50

$55

Millio

ns

of

Do

lla

rs



FY FY FY

96-06 2007 2008Biotechnology 47 5 8

Chemical Technology/Pulp & Paper/Environmental 58 3 1

Multidisciplinary/Institution Reform 43 4 2

Electronics/Microelectronics/Nanotech/Mechatronics/Lasers 23 7 8

Other Engineering Technology 75 7 10

Geospatial (GIS/GPS/Surveying) 28 3 4

Manufacturing 92 4 5

Math/Physics/Computational Science/Core 40 1 1

Computer/Information Systems/Cybersecurity/Telecommunications 139 8 8

Marine/Agriculture/Aquaculture/Natural Resources/Viticulture 20 2 2

Teacher Preparation 34 1 4

Multimedia 7 1 4

Energy Technology 6 3 9

Research/Evaluation 5 2 2

Recruitment/Retention 7 3 1

Totals 614 54 69

Foci of ATE Awards


Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Technology, Engineering and

Mathematics (TUES)

Course, Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement (CCLI)

Program Solicitation NSF 10-544




TUES

VisionExcellent STEM education for all undergraduate students

GoalStimulate, disseminate, and institutionalize innovative developments in STEM education through the production of knowledge and the improvement of practice.

* Our broadest, most innovative program




TUES: Over time, we have increased our emphasis on

Building on and contributing to the literature on effective STEM education

Building a community of scholars in STEM education reform

Identifying project-specific measurable outcomes *Project management and evaluation




TUES: Project Types

Type 1$200,000 duration: 2 to 3 years(+ $50,000 with community college partner)

Type 2$600,000 duration: 2 to 4 years

Type 3up to $5,000,000 duration: 3 to 5 yrs

Central Resource Projectsup to $3,000,000 duration: negotiable




TUES: Choice of Type Reflects

Scale of the ProjectNumber of institutions, students and faculty

Maturity of the Project (Stage)Type 1 may lead to Type 2, etc.But prior CCLI/TUES funding is not required

Scope of the ProjectDefined by the number of components, based on our view of the nature of educational innovation




TUES must focus on one or more of the following project components.

Creating Learning Materials and Strategies

Implementing New Instructional Strategies

Developing Faculty Expertise

Assessing and Evaluating Student Achievement

Conducting Research on Undergraduate STEM Education




TUES: For Example, Type 1 reflects

Scope and Scale:One or two program components Limited number of students & faculty at one or more institutions

Expected Results: Contribute to understanding of effective STEM education, typically by exploring new ideasCan serve as basis for Type 2 projectTransforms a lecture or laboratory course, a curriculum, or a department




TUES: Types of projects – that transform a course, a curriculum or a department.

Integrate new instrumentation or equipment into undergraduate laboratories or field work

Develop materials or add instrumentation that use a new instructional approach embodying current understanding of how students learn

Develop a tool to assess students’ knowledge or learning gains

Provide courses needed for efficient, seamless transfer from 2-yr to 4-yr colleges in partnership with other institutions

Explore or pilot-test internet-based approaches for faculty professional development




TUES: Deadlines

Deadline For Type 1- May 26 & 27, 2011 (check website for days)

Deadline For Type 2/3 and Central Resource Projects - January 14, 2011




Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program

PROGRAM SOLICITATION NSF NSF 10-514




NOYCE: Program tracksRobert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Track

Scholarships for undergraduate STEM majors preparing to become K-12 Teachers Internships for freshmen and sophomores Stipends for STEM professionals seeking to become K-12 teachers

NSF Teaching Fellowships & Master Teaching Fellowships (TF/MTF) TrackFellowships for STEM professionals receiving teacher certification through a master’s degree program Fellowships for science and math teachers preparing to become Master Teachers




NOYCE: Scholarship Track

At least $10K per student per year (but not to exceed the cost of education)

Max period: 2-3 years for UGs; 1 year for Post-bacc studentsPhase 1 awards: up to $1.2M up to 5 years. (additional $250K possible for collaborating with a community

college)Grants may ask up to 20% for program support costsNoyce scholars must serve 2 years in high-need school for each 1 year of support. Noyce scholars have up to 6 years to complete this obligation.




NOYCE: TF/MTF Track support features

- Teaching Fellows receive at least $10K (not to exceed cost of attendance) while enrolled in Master’s program- While teaching in a high-need school district the TF and MTF recipients receive an annual $10K salary supplement (4 years for TF and 5 years for MTF)- Grants may ask up to 20% for program costs- TF/MTF projects may request up to $3M for 5 to 6 years. (additional $250K possible for collaborating with a community college)




Due Date

Letters of Intent (optional): March ?, 2011

Full Proposal Deadline: April ?, 2011




Information about funded proposals

1. Go to the DUE Home website on NSF2. Find the Program of interest to you3. Go to the bottom of that page and click on

“Abstracts of Recent Awards Made Through This Program”

4. Write to the PI requesting a copy of her/his proposal.

* An example follows for the Noyce Program




“How to Write a Successful NSF Grant”(Part II)

NISTS

September 21, 2010





The Life Cycle of an NSF Proposal

Proposal Preparation Processing and NotificationProposal Review and Recommendation

90 Days 6 Months 30 Days

PI has an idea!

Proposal Receiptat NSF

NSF Admin.Review

Award/Decline?

DDConcur

Return Without Review

Award ?

Decline ?

Notification

DGA

Notification

Mail

Panel

Both

Proposal Review

The Life Cycle of an NSF Proposal

Proposal Preparation Processing and NotificationProposal Review and Recommendation

90 Days 6 Months 30 Days

Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA)

Target = Process 70% of proposals within 6 months of receipt at NSF


Return Without Review

The Proposal:

Does not address Intellectual Merits and Broader Impacts within the Project Summary

Has a budget line for a postdoctoral research associate but does not have a one page postdoctoral mentoring plan uploaded in the supporting information section

Does not meet an announced proposal deadline




Review Processes

Program directors - Sort by disciplines/college types/emphasis- Send to group of reviewers

Reviewers - Rate each proposal (E, V, G, F, and P)- Submit written reviews

- Describe the strengths and weaknesses in terms of the intellectual merit and broader impacts criteria




Review Processes

Review panel

- Meets and discusses proposal - Writes a summary of the discussion

- Highlight strengths and weaknesses - Referred to as the Panel Summary




The Proposal: Criteria for Evaluation

- Peer Reviewed

- Criteria for Evaluation - What is the intellectual merit of the

proposed activity?- What are the broader impacts of the

proposed activity?




Intellectual Merit

Addresses a major challengeSupported by capable faculty and othersImproved student learningRationale and vision clearly articulatedInformed by other projectsEffective evaluation and disseminationAdequate facilities, resources, and commitmentInstitutional and departmental commitment




Broader Impacts

Integrated into the institution’s academic programsContributes to knowledge base and useful to other institutionsWidely used products which can be disseminated through commercial and other channelsImproved content and pedagogy for faculty and teachersIncreased participation by women, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilitiesEnsures high quality STEM education for people pursuing careers in STEM fields or as teachers or technicians




WHAT MAKES A GOOD PROJECT?

- REALISTIC

- WORTHWHILE - WELL-PLANNED

- INNOVATIVE




Turning a Good Idea into a Competitive Proposal




Scenario: Origin of a TUES Proposal• Professor X has taught general chemistry at UNT for several

semesters.• She has an idea for greatly improving the course by adding

“new stuff”- “New stuff”

- Material (e. g., modules, web-based instruction)- Activities (e. g., laboratories, projects)

- Pedagogy (e. g., problem based learning)• She has done some preliminary evaluation• She decides to prepare a CCLI proposal

(Q) What should be stated in the proposal?




Scenario: Professor X’s Initial Proposal Outline

1. Goals: Develop “new stuff” to enhance student learning at UNT

2. Rationale: Observed shortcomings in educational experience of the students at UNT and felt that new stuff would improve the situation3. Project Description: Details of “new stuff“4. Evaluation: Use UNT’s course evaluation forms to show difference5. Dissemination: Describe “new stuff“ using conference papers, journal articles, and web site




Definition of Goals, Objectives, and Outcomes

Goal: Broad, overarching statement of intention or ambition - A goal typically leads to several objectives

Objective: Specific statement of intention- More focused and specific than goal

- A objective may lead to one or more outcomes

Outcome: Statement of expected result- Measurable with criteria for success

*NOTE: No consistent definition of these terms




PD’s Response to Proposal Strategies

Read the program solicitation Determine how your ideas match the solicitation and how you can improve the matchArticulate goals, objectives, and outcomes Outcomes should include improved student learningBuild on existing knowledge base Review the literaturePresent evidence that the “new stuff” is doable; will enhance learning; is the best approachExplore potential, meaningful collaborations





Use data to document existing shortcomings in student learningDescribe management planProvide tasks, team responsibilities, timelineProvide clear examples of the approachIntegrate the evaluation effort earlyBuild assessment tools around defined objectives and expected outcomesConnect with independent evaluation experts





Identify strategies for disseminationDefine a plan to contribute to knowledge baseAddress broader impactsCollaborate, form partnerships (build community)




Write Proposal to Answer Reviewers’ Questions

What are you trying to accomplish? What will be the outcomes?

Why do you believe that you have a good idea? Why is the problem important? Why is your approach promising?

How will you manage the project to ensure success? How will you know if you succeed?

How will others find out about your work? How will you interest them? How will you excite them?

} Goals etc.

}Rationale

}Evaluation

}Dissemination




Strengths & Weaknesses Identified by Reviewers

Pretend you analyzed a stack of panel summaries to identify the most commonly cited strengths and weaknesses

List what you think will be - The four most frequently cited strengths- The four most frequently cited weaknesses




Most Common StrengthsStrengths Cited in More Than 20 % of the Panel Summaries

Important, timely, or responsive

PI's strong

Collaboration details

Potential for involving W&M

Dissemination, contribution to KB

Large impact

Build on prior work or products

Evaluation plan

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Percent




Most Common Weaknesses

Weaknesses Cited in More Than 20 % of the Panel Summaries

Collaboration details

Large impact

Innovative or novel

Build on prior work or products

Potential for involving W&M

Dissemination & contribution to KB

Activities doable & related to outcomes

Evaluation plan

Sufficient detail and clear plans

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Percent




“How to Write a Successful NSF Grant”

NISTS

September 21, 2010





Documents

Division of Undergraduate Education (DUE) “How to Write a Successful NSF Grant” NISTS September 21, 2010 Eun-Woo Chang, Program Director Division of Undergraduate