Conferences, Workshops, and Related Events (DMS)

Conferences, Workshops, and Related Events (DMS) is sponsored by U.S. National Science Foundation. This opportunity supports mission-aligned projects and measurable outcomes.

NSF 16-550: Conferences and Workshops in the Mathematical Sciences | NSF - U.S. National Science Foundation Archived funding opportunity This solicitation is archived. Important information for proposers and award recipients All proposals must be submitted in accordance with the requirements specified in the funding opportunity and in the Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) and its supplements .

All NSF grants and cooperative agreements are subject to the applicable set of NSF award terms and conditions . NSF has updated its research security policies for NSF funded projects. NSF 16-550: Conferences and Workshops in the Mathematical Sciences Download the solicitation (PDF, 0.

9mb) National Science Foundation Directorate for Mathematical & Physical Sciences Division of Mathematical Sciences Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p. m. submitter's local time): Proposals Accepted Anytime However, proposals must be submitted with sufficient lead time, in accordance with the guidance provided by the disciplinary program to which the proposal is submitted.

Important Information And Revision Notes Proposals must be submitted to the appropriate DMS disciplinary program subject to the lead-time requirements specified by that program. For more information about the required lead time, refer to the particular disciplinary program web page listed on the DMS home page . This revision clarifies the expectations for DMS support of international group travel.

Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the revised NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) ( NSF 20-1 ), which is effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after June 1, 2020.

Summary Of Program Requirements Conferences and Workshops in the Mathematical Sciences Conferences, workshops, and related events (including seasonal schools and international travel by groups) support research and training activities of the mathematical sciences community. Proposals for conferences, workshops, or conference-like activities may request funding of any amount and for durations of up to three years.

Proposals under this solicitation must be submitted to the appropriate DMS programs in accordance with the lead-time requirements specified on the program web page. Cognizant Program Officer(s): Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

Joanna Kania-Bartoszynska, Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): --- Mathematical and Physical Sciences Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant Estimated Number of Awards: 10 to 100 Number of awards depends on funding available to disciplinary programs. Anticipated Funding Amount: $200,000 to $4,000,000 Up to $4,000,000 per year, pending availability of funds.

Who May Submit Proposals: Proposals may only be submitted by the following: Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members.

Special Instructions for International Branch Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal includes funding to be provided to an international branch campus of a US institution of higher education (including through use of subawards and consultant arrangements), the proposer must explain the benefit(s) to the project of performance at the international branch campus, and justify why the project activities cannot be performed at the US campus.

Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Independent museums, observatories, research labs, professional societies and similar organizations in the U.S. associated with educational or research activities. There are no restrictions or limits. Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: There are no restrictions or limits. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions A. Proposal Preparation Instructions Letters of Intent: Not required Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required Full Proposals submitted via FastLane: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) guidelines apply.

The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www. nsf. gov/publications/pub_summ.

jsp? ods_key=pappg . Full Proposals submitted via Research.

gov: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) guidelines apply. The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www. nsf.

gov/publications/pub_summ. jsp? ods_key=pappg .

Full Proposals submitted via Grants. gov: NSF Grants. gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.

gov guidelines apply (Note: The NSF Grants. gov Application Guide is available on the Grants. gov website and on the NSF website at: https://www.

nsf. gov/publications/pub_summ. jsp?

ods_key=grantsgovguide ). Cost Sharing Requirements: Cost Sharing is not required under this solicitation. Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Other Budgetary Limitations: Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.

m. submitter's local time): Proposals Accepted Anytime However, proposals must be submitted with sufficient lead time, in accordance with the guidance provided by the disciplinary program to which the proposal is submitted. Proposal Review Information Criteria National Science Board approved criteria.

Additional merit review criteria apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information. Award Administration Information Standard NSF award conditions apply.

Additional reporting requirements apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information. The Division of Mathematical Sciences (DMS) has long supported conferences, workshops, and related activities.

Examples of related activities include longer-term or larger-scale events such as multi-institutional regional meetings, summer or winter schools, and international travel by groups of mathematical scientists. Proposals for conferences normally request funding in the range of $5,000 to $25,000, though awards of up to $50,000 have been made on occasion.

Proposals for other kinds of conference-like activities may request funding of any amount and for durations of up to three years; in past years, some such awards have fallen in the range of $50,000 to $150,000 per year. Proposals must be submitted to the appropriate DMS disciplinary program in accordance with the lead-time requirements specified on the program web page.

For more information about the required lead time, refer to the particular disciplinary program web page listed on the DMS home page . The National Science Foundation is committed to strengthening and enriching the science personnel base of our nation. DMS expects organizers of conferences and meetings to assist its efforts to broaden participation in the mathematical sciences by members of under-represented groups.

How these human resource issues are addressed in the proposed project description is one of the factors used in reaching a recommendation on the proposed project. In addition, NSF requires that conferences or meetings and the facilities in which they are held must be accessible to participants with disabilities if the events are funded in whole or in part with NSF funds.

Conferences, workshops, and related activities provide opportunities to disseminate scholarly work widely, to reveal and plan new directions for research, and to engage and encourage students and junior scientists early in their careers, all of which help deepen connections among the mathematical sciences community.

DMS particularly welcomes proposals for activities that can increase the number of mathematical scientists who participate in NSF-supported activities.

DMS priorities for the support of conferences, workshops, and related activities include: Breadth and diversity of participation, in order to help more mathematical scientists stay abreast of developments in the discipline; Involvement of students and junior investigators and of individuals from groups under-represented in the mathematical sciences, in order to contribute to the development of the nation's science personnel base; Connection to frontiers in the mathematical sciences, to NSF research priorities, and to federal initiatives and strategic areas, in order to advance the mathematical sciences and to strengthen the interchanges between the mathematical sciences and other science and engineering disciplines; Overall impact on the US mathematical sciences community.

Diversity and breadth of participation should be understood as applying to institutions as well as to individuals. In particular, it includes those institutions and individuals lacking other federal support.

For conference, workshop, and similar proposals, most funds are expected to be devoted to the support of participants who have no other federal support and participants who are students, post-doctoral scholars, or members of groups that are under-represented in the mathematical sciences. International Conferences and Workshops In general, funding to support participation in conferences held abroad is very limited.

Requests for international travel by groups of US-based mathematical scientists, which ordinarily originate with US educational institutions or professional scientific societies, will be considered. Support for such group travel is intended only to facilitate US participation in a foreign-based conference or workshop that would run as a high quality event even without DMS-supported participants.

DMS will not support a significant portion of the main speakers or participants at an event held abroad; conferences in which the majority of participants are US-based are eligible for DMS support only if held at a US location that allows for an activity with reasonable cost. Shared support for group travel by several federal agencies, states, or private organizations is permissible and encouraged.

Other opportunities for cooperation between US mathematical scientists and those of other countries are provided by the Office of International Science and Engineering (OISE) at NSF. For additional detailed information, consult the OISE home page . DMS supports individual requests for international travel as part of regular research proposals but will not consider separate proposals for support of an individual's travel.

Anticipated Type of Award: Continuing Grant or Standard Grant Estimated Number of Awards: 10 to 100 depending on funding available to disciplinary programs. Anticipated Funding Amount: Up to $4,000,000 per year, pending availability of funds. IV.

Eligibility Information Who May Submit Proposals: Proposals may only be submitted by the following: Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members.

Special Instructions for International Branch Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal includes funding to be provided to an international branch campus of a US institution of higher education (including through use of subawards and consultant arrangements), the proposer must explain the benefit(s) to the project of performance at the international branch campus, and justify why the project activities cannot be performed at the US campus.

Non-profit, non-academic organizations: Independent museums, observatories, research labs, professional societies and similar organizations in the U.S. associated with educational or research activities. There are no restrictions or limits. Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: There are no restrictions or limits.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: There are no restrictions or limits. V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Instructions A.

Proposal Preparation Instructions Full Proposal Preparation Instructions : Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via FastLane, Research. gov, or Grants.

gov. Full proposals submitted via FastLane: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG). The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www. nsf.

gov/publications/pub_summ. jsp? ods_key=pappg .

Paper copies of the PAPPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf. gov . Proposers are reminded to identify this program solicitation number in the program solicitation block on the NSF Cover Sheet For Proposal to the National Science Foundation.

Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing. Full Proposals submitted via Research.

gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG). The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www. nsf.

gov/publications/pub_summ. jsp? ods_key=pappg .

Paper copies of the PAPPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf. gov . The Prepare New Proposal setup will prompt you for the program solicitation number.

Full proposals submitted via Grants. gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via Grants. gov should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.

gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants. gov . The complete text of the NSF Grants.

gov Application Guide is available on the Grants. gov website and on the NSF website at: ( https://www. nsf.

gov/publications/pub_summ. jsp? ods_key=grantsgovguide ).

To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants. gov site, then click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Application Instructions link and enter the funding opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of the Grants.

gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from nsfpubs@nsf. gov . 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 FastLane or Research. gov. PAPPG Chapter II. D.

3 provides additional information on collaborative proposals. See PAPPG Chapter II. C.

2 for guidance on the required sections of a full research proposal submitted to NSF. Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the PAPPG instructions. This solicitation contains information that supplements the standard PAPPG or NSF Grants.

gov Application Guide proposal preparation guidelines. Investigators are directed to pay particular attention to the contents of DMS Priorities in Section II and the Additional Review Criteria in Section VI. A.

Proposals that do not provide the necessary information will be returned without review.

All proposals for conferences, workshops, or related activities must Offer a strong scientific reason for the proposed activity; Distinguish the planned project from other conferences and activities, particularly from recent or similar activities; Justify, if appropriate, how well any prior NSF support was used in preliminary or precursor activities; Devote substantial funds to support participation by individuals who do not have other federal support, or who are students, post-doctoral scholars, or from under-represented groups; Describe plans to recruit and involve a diversity of participants, both individuals and institutions; Describe plans for disseminating results of the activity.

Note that these criteria permit a conference to coincide with a personal or community anniversary or an occasion honoring an individual's contributions, but such a coincidence is not a scientific reason and thus will not satisfy this requirement. Also note that dissemination plans may include proceedings, web sites, special articles in various publications, special issues of journals, or special talks/presentations to students.

Such steps broaden the impact of the activity. If funding for a "year n+1" NSF-funded conference is being requested, proposals should document how effective the previous "n" years of support were used and justify the impact of another year of funding. This required information should be detailed enough to answer the following questions: What is the purpose of this activity?

How is it different from others? What is the scientific focus? Why is this topic timely and important?

How will the activity or conference be structured? Be specific. Who will be involved?

If there is an organizing committee, who are its members? If there is a management team, who are its members? If multiple institutions are involved, what is the overall management plan?

Who are the planned senior participants (e.g., invited speakers, session directors)? How will participants be recruited and chosen? If appropriate, how will the activity be widely advertised, so that broad participation can be achieved?

What steps will be taken to ensure diversity (women, minorities, persons with disabilities; institutional; geographical; and other aspects of diversity)? Where and when will the activity be held? What facilities will be used?

What steps will be taken to disseminate the results of the activity? Cost sharing is not required under this solicitation. Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.

m. submitter's local time): Proposals Accepted Anytime However, proposals must be submitted with sufficient lead time, in accordance with the guidance provided by the disciplinary program to which the proposal is submitted. D.

FastLane/Research. gov/Grants. gov Requirements For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane or Research.

gov: To prepare and submit a proposal via FastLane, see detailed technical instructions available at: https://www. fastlane. nsf.

gov/a1/newstan. htm . To prepare and submit a proposal via Research.

gov, see detailed technical instructions available at: https://www. research. gov/research-portal/appmanager/base/desktop?

_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=research_node_display&_nodePath=/researchGov/Service/Desktop/ProposalPreparationandSubmission. html . For FastLane or Research.

gov user support, call the FastLane and Research. gov Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail fastlane@nsf. gov or rgov@nsf.

gov . The FastLane and Research. gov Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the FastLane and Research.

gov systems. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity. For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.

gov: Before using Grants. gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.

gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants. gov is available on the Grants.

gov Applicant Resources webpage: https://www. grants. gov/web/grants/applicants.

html . In addition, the NSF Grants. gov Application Guide (see link in Section V.

A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants. gov. For Grants. gov user support, contact the Grants.

gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: support@grants. gov . The Grants.

gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants. gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation. Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.

gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants. gov. The completed application will be transferred to the NSF FastLane system for further processing.

Proposers that submitted via FastLane or Research. gov may use Research. gov to verify the status of their submission to NSF.

For proposers that submitted via Grants. gov, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on Grants. gov. After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research.

gov should be used to check the status of an application. VI. NSF Proposal Processing And Review Procedures Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review.

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 either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with 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. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards.

A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1. A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://www. nsf.

gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/ . One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U.S. technology-based economy.

NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation's most creative scientists and engineers. NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.

NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports. A.

Merit Review Principles and Criteria The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education.

To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes."

NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects. 1. Merit Review Principles These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards.

Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply: All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge. NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals.

These "Broader Impacts" may be accomplished through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. The project activities may be based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must be well justified.

Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is not likely to be meaningful.

Thus, assessing the effectiveness of these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated, level than the individual project. With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project.

Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities. These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.

All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities. The two merit review criteria are listed below.

Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (PAPPG Chapter II.

C. 2. d(i).

contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including PAPPG Chapter II. C.

2. d(i), prior to the review of a proposal. When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful.

These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions.

To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria: Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge; and Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria: What is the potential for the proposed activity to Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)? To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?

Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success? How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?

Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities? Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project.

NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes.

Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as appropriate. Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria In decisions about proposals submitted for this solicitation, DMS program officers will consider carefully how well proposals meet the DMS Priorities described in Section II.

These are Diversity and breadth of participation by individuals and institutions; Involvement of participants from under-represented groups and of students and junior investigators; Connection to frontiers of mathematical sciences and between mathematical sciences and other science and engineering disciplines; Overall impact on the US mathematical sciences community.

Recall from the Proposal Preparation Instructions that all proposals for conferences, workshops, or related activities must Offer a strong scientific reason for the proposed activity; Distinguish the planned project from other conferences and activities, particularly from recent or similar activities; Justify, if appropriate, how well any prior NSF support was used in preliminary or precursor activities; Devote substantial funds to support participation by individuals who do not have other federal support, or who are students, post-doctoral scholars, or from under-represented groups; Describe plans to recruit and involve a diversity of participants, both individuals and institutions; Describe plans for disseminating results of the activity.

Note that these criteria permit a conference to coincide with a personal or community anniversary or an occasion honoring an individual's contributions, but such a coincidence is not a scientific reason and thus will not satisfy this requirement. Also note that dissemination plans may include proceedings, web sites, special articles in various publications, special issues of journals, or special talks/presentations to students.

Such steps broaden the impact of the activity. If funding for a "year n+1" NSF-funded conference is being requested, proposals should document how effective the previous "n" years of support were used and justify the impact of another year of funding. This required information should be detailed enough to answer the following questions: What is the purpose of this activity?

How is it different from others? What is the scientific focus? Why is this topic timely and important?

How will the activity or conference be structured? Be specific. Who will be involved?

If there is an organizing committee, who are its members? If there is a management team, who are its members? If multiple institutions are involved, what is the overall management plan?

Who are the planned senior participants (e.g., invited speakers, session directors)? How will participants be recruited and chosen? If appropriate, how will the activity be widely advertised, so that broad participation can be achieved?

What steps will be taken to ensure diversity (women, minorities, persons with disabilities; institutional; geographical; and other aspects of diversity)? Where and when will the activity be held? What facilities will be used?

What steps will be taken to disseminate the results of the activity? B. Review and Selection Process Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review, or Internal NSF Review.

See the Additional Review Criteria section for further information. Reviewers will be asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will generally be completed and submitted by each reviewer and/or panel.

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 strives to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new awardees may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later.

The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation. 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